Entrance to Bryce Canyon NP. © Charles Rotter 2019

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #532

The Week That Was: 2022-12-10 (December 10, 2022)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” – Richard Feynman

Number of the Week: +0.13 C/decade


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

Scope: The following items will be discussed. The SEPP board unanimously accepted the recommendation of the Frederick Seitz Awards Committee headed by Will Happer and gave the 2022 award for integrity in science to Professor of Mathematics Christopher Essex. The formal presentation will be at the 15th International Conference on Climate Change organized by The Heartland Institute from February 23 to February 25 in Orlando Florida. SEPP will be a co-sponsor of the event.

Francis Menton sought an official US policy on electricity storage is needed if the US is to go to Net Zero carbon dioxide emissions. He found a report by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) that has many words and little substance.

Meteorologist Cliff Mass provides a thoughtful answer to the question: How can we predict the climate 50 years from now if we can’t forecast the weather next week? The approach he states, boundary values, is embodied in the work of Professor van Wijngaarden and Happer on the influence of the major greenhouse gases on earth’s temperature. The approach was used by the Right Climate Stuff Team and was employed in designing the Apollo Lunar Lander which made six lunar landings with humans from 1969 to 1972 – over 50 years ago.

A frequent writer in Judith Curry’s Climate Etc., Frank Bosse discusses a recent post by Gavin Schmidt of NASA-GISS about the observed Transient Climate Response (TCR) for 1979- 2022 (without long term feedbacks or adjustments). Schmidt’s post uses the latest global climate models of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) used in the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6, 2021) and NASA-GISS surface temperature data. The modeling indicates a modest increase in temperatures from a doubling of carbon dioxide, not a drastic climate emergency.

AMO physicist Howard Hayden cautioned TWTW that IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4, 2007) has a graph showing an atmospheric window, where heat energy from the earth’s surface (infrared energy) escapes directly to space without being impeded by greenhouse gases. This is discussed further in light of the work by van Wijngaarden and Happer.

Economist Ross McKitirick wrote that the Canadian Parliamentary Budget Officer produced a report that debunks the claims of a climate emergency or crisis. Is the bloom on the fad of Net Zero wilting when subject to detailed analysis?


An Independent Mind: Recently retired from the University of Western Ontario, also called Western University, a Canadian public research university, Emeritus Professor of Mathematics and Physics Christopher Essex has demonstrated the independent thinking that is required for science to advance — and which makes bureaucrats cringe. He has long criticized climate models for their unrealistic treatment of the atmosphere: the models cannot compute that the atmosphere cools as well as they compute it warms. As meteorologist Joe Bastardi states, the models can’t see cooling. Essex begins a post on Donna Laframboise’s website: [boldface added]

“It is well known that daytime winter temperatures on Earth can fall well below -4°F (-20℃) in some places, even in midlatitudes, despite warming worries. Sometimes the surface can even drop below -40°F (-40℃), which is comparable to the surface of Mars. What is not so well known is that such cold winter days are colder than they would be with no atmosphere at all!

“How can that be if the atmosphere is like a blanket, according to the standard greenhouse analogy? If the greenhouse analogy fails, what is climate?

“Climate computer models in the 1960s could not account for this non-greenhouse-like picture. However modern computer models are better than those old models, but the climate implications of an atmosphere that cools as well as warms has not been embraced. Will computer models be able to predict climate after it is? The meteorological program for climate has been underway for more than 40 years. How did it do?

“Feynman, Experiment and Climate Models

‘Model’ is used in a peculiar manner in the climate field. In other fields, models are usually formulated so that they can be found false in the face of evidence. From fundamental physics (the Standard Model) to star formation, a model is meant to be put to the test, no matter how meritorious.

“Climate models do not have this character. No observation from Nature can cause them to be replaced by some new form of model. Instead, climate models are seen by some as the implementation of perfect established classical physics expressed on oracular computers, and as such must be regarded as fully understood and beyond falsification. In terms of normal science, this is fantasy.

“Modern critics of climate models cite a famous remark of the physicist Richard Feynman: ‘It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.’ Those critics imagine models as theory, and observations as experiment. No knowledgeable model builder believes that climate models capture all features of the system well. As such they disagree with observations. However, they do not violate Feynman’s edict because climate models are no theory for climate, and observations of an uncontrolled system are no experiment. Feynman was speaking in the context of controlled physical experiments, which cannot be done for climate.

If a climate model disagrees with data, in principle the sub-grid-scale (more below) of ad hoc climate models can be adjusted to make it agree. Fortunately, good model builders resist the temptation to overdo such tuning. However, they may do things inadvertently like tune models to be more like each other than like the atmosphere and oceans.

“Extreme Computing in Search of Climate

“Extreme conditions can compromise any computer calculation, despite popular faith otherwise. Sharp transitions on boundaries, extreme gradients, and extremes in density are examples. There are also extremes that are often overlooked, e.g., an extreme of time. Direct computation of the meteorological physics for long timescales is an extreme in time. Integrations of classical physics on computers for climatological timescales are unique and unprecedented. Like other forms of extreme computation, there are consequences.”

“Numerical analysis on computers contends with the finite representation (i.e., a finite number of numbers) of all computers. There are three types of errors that result,

  1. Round off error: the computer must chop off (truncate) numbers because of space limitations.
  2. Truncation error: To put an equation onto a computer you must usually chop off (truncate) parts of the physical equations you aim to compute.
  3. Symmetry Error: How you chop up the equations affects the symmetry (Lie symmetry) of the equations you plan to integrate. This is realized in the violation of conservation laws, which are uniquely important for extreme climate timescales.”

The post gives a good example of the independent thinking that Essex contributes to understanding science. It was the limiting the criticisms of the models to experiment that compelled TWTW to search further into the writings of Feynman and find that Feynman considered nature to be the ultimate judge of physical sciences, based on observations as well as experiments. Modelers claiming that experiments count, but not observations, is an excuse for failure to properly test their models against nature. See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy and the following for information on the Heartland Conference: https://www.heartland.org/events/events/iccc-15


No Problem Here: Last week’s TWTW discussed a report by Francis Menton that no government promoting “Net Zero” carbon dioxide emissions has produced a demonstration project showing how it can be achieved and what the costs would be. Following up on it, Menton searched for an official US government report on the Energy Storage Problem. He writes: [boldface added]

“So, I thought to look around for the closest thing I could find to the Official Party Line on how the U.S. is supposedly going to get to Net Zero emissions from the electricity sector by some early date. The most authoritative thing I have found is a big Report out in August 2022 from something called the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, titled ‘Examining Supply-Side Options to Achieve 100% Clean Electricity by 2035.’ An accompanying press release with a date of August 30 has the headline ‘NREL Study Identifies the Opportunities and Challenges of Achieving the U.S. Transformational Goal of 100% Clean Electricity by 2035.’

“What is NREL? The Report identifies it as a private lab ‘operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract. In other words, it’s an explicit advocacy group for ‘renewable’ energy that gets infinite oodles of taxpayer money to put out advocacy pieces making it seem like the organization’s preferred schemes will work.

“Make no mistake, this Report is a big piece of work. The Report identifies some 5 ‘lead authors,’ 6 ‘contributing authors,’ and 56 editors, contributors, commenters, and others. Undoubtedly millions of your taxpayer dollars were spent producing the Report and the underlying models … The end product is an excellent illustration of why central planning does not work and can never work.

“So now that our President has supposedly committed the country to this ‘100% clean electricity’ thing by 2035, surely these geniuses are going to tell us exactly how that is going to be done and how much it will cost. Good luck finding that in here. From the press release:

The study . . . is an initial exploration of the transition to a 100% clean electricity power system by 2035—and helps to advance understanding of both the opportunities and challenges of achieving the ambitious goal. Overall, NREL finds multiple pathways to 100% clean electricity by 2035 that would produce significant benefits, but the exact technology mix and costs will be determined by research and development (R&D), manufacturing, and infrastructure investment decisions over the next decade.

“It’s an ‘initial exploration.’ With the country already supposedly committed to this multi-trillion-dollar project on which all of our lives depend, they’re just starting to think about how to do it. ‘The exact technology mix and costs’ — in other words, everything important — ‘will be determined by research and development’ — in other words, remain to be invented. But don’t worry, that will all be done over the next ten years, with plenty of time then remaining to get everything deployed at scale in the three years from then to 2035.

After further discussion, Menton writes:

“In other words, they have no clue. They’re wildly tossing out ideas of things that have never been tried or demonstrated, let alone costed — and supposedly we’re going to have our whole energy system transitioned to this in 13 years. No surprise that the best idea they have is hydrogen — which, as I describe thoroughly in my report, is a terrible idea. And all that infrastructure they talk about for the hydrogen — none of that currently exists, or is under construction, or is even in a planning stage.”

Menton concludes:

“The Report has a big section on cost/benefit analysis, where it is confidently concluded that the benefits far outweigh the costs under any of many scenarios. This is without the storage problem being solved or a solution demonstrated, or costs remotely known.

“If you have the time and inclination, you can find the full Report at the link above.[not included here] I would not really recommend wasting your valuable time on this, but readers who want to add further critiques have the opportunity to do so.

“Your taxpayer dollars at work.”

TWTW did some further examination into NREL, the links given in the press releases, and found:

“NREL is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of five executives each from MRIGlobal and Battelle, [not-for-profit consulting groups] and one each from the following five universities: the University of Colorado, Colorado State University, Colorado School of Mines, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Stanford University.”

Government responsibility? See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Identifying the Problem: In answering the question “How can we predict the climate 50 years from now if we can’t forecast the weather next week?” Meteorologist Cliff Mass writes that weather forecasts and climate prediction are different problems. He writes:

“Weather forecasting: an initial value problem

“Weather prediction, an initial-value problem, starts with a comprehensive, 3-D description of the atmosphere called the initialization. Then large supercomputers are used to solve the equations describing atmospheric physics to forecast the exact state of the atmosphere in the future at specific times.

“Forecast accuracy declines with time and by roughly two weeks nearly all predictability is lost, something described theoretically by Professor Edward Lorenz of MIT. [Chaos theory]

“Forecast skill drops rapidly between 5 and 10 days.”

“Climate forecasting: a boundary value problem

“Forecast skill for specific weather features is lost after roughly 2 weeks because the atmosphere essentially loses memory of the initial observed state of the atmosphere.

“In climate forecasts for extended periods of time, the key constraint is not the initial conditions, but the amount of radiation coming into and out of the atmosphere. If we know how much radiation is coming into and out of the top of the atmosphere, the climate models can produce a realistic average climate for those conditions.

“The amount of radiation emitted and absorbed by the atmosphere is greatly controlled by the composition of the atmosphere which we have to assume (e.g., how much CO2, methane, and particles in the atmosphere).

“Such projections are only as good as our estimate of the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere in 50 or 100 years. Big uncertainty! But we do the best we can.”

Apparently, Mass is unaware of the work of van Wijngaarden and Happer. Using the HITRAN database they have calculated the temperature effects of a doubling of CO2 with clear skies (cloudless). Since clouds reflect sunlight into space, and, in general, have cooling effect; the clear skies calculations are an upper bound for global warming with a doubling of CO2. Of course, the other issue is that the global climate models do not even approximate the atmosphere. See link under Defending the Orthodoxy.


Backing Down? A post by Frank Bosse on Judith Curry’s Climate Etc. links to a February 2, 2022, post by Gavin Schmidt on the IPCC CMIP6 models (the latest version). (Schmidt previously wrote that CO2 was the control knob of the earth’s temperatures.) Again, these models use surface temperature to “capture” the greenhouse effect and ignore atmospheric temperature trends, where the greenhouse effect occurs. Consequently, the data capture human alteration of the Earth’s surface that cause warming such as urbanization and draining wetlands.

The concept used is Transient Climate Response (TCR). According to the IPCC,

In particular, the global mean temperature change which occurs at the time of CO2 doubling for the specific case of a 1%/yr. increase of CO2 is termed the transient climate response (TCR) of the system. This temperature change, indicated in Figure 9.1, [not shown here] integrates all processes operating in the system, including the strength of the feedbacks and the rate of heat storage in the ocean, to give a straightforward measure of model response to a change in forcing.


“Equilibrium climate sensitivity

The equilibrium climate sensitivity (IPCC 1990, 1996) is defined as the change in global mean temperature, T2x, that results when the climate system, or a climate model, attains a new equilibrium with the forcing change F2x resulting from a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration.

In short, according to the IPCC, TCR is temperature change when the amount of CO2 doubles, not temperature change (Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity) when equilibrium is achieved. Bosse concludes his presentation with:

Considering this fact, the observations point to a TCR of 1.6/1.21= 1.3 K/doubling of CO2 as the best estimate. The 17 to 83 % likely range from the regression is 1.22 to 1.38.

These TCR values are very similar to the estimate of Lewis/Curry (2018).

The TCR of 1.3, confirmed by the latest data, gives a warming in 2100 of 1.75 vs. pre-industrial times, when considering the 4.5 W/m² forcing scenario. We would remain within the ‘2°C goal’ even with a forcing of 5W/m² to 2100, we would produce 1.9 K of warming.

All available serious literature excludes a catastrophic outcome of the global warming, if we remain within the 2K limit. It seems very likely that we will do so. No doom and no need for glue on streets and paintings. Somebody should inform the scared people who are doing such strange things in the name of ‘The Science’.

Science tells it otherwise, giving much hope that mankind will avoid the ‘catastrophic climate endgame’.

It is useful to remember Le Chatelier’s Principle: “A change in one of the variables that describe a system at equilibrium produces a shift in the position of the equilibrium that counteracts the effect of this change.” Though it initially applied to chemical solutions, it has been shown to apply to the physical world in general. Any exception, such as positive warming impacts from increasing water vapor from tropospheric warming need to be demonstrated, such as the “tropical hot spot”) None have.

See link under Questioning the Orthodoxy and https://archive.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/345.htm


Atmospheric Window: AMO physicist Howard Hayden cautioned TWTW that a drawing in IPCC (AR4, 2007) showed an atmospheric window with about 40 watts per square meter passing through without any blocking from greenhouse gases. That’s about one-tenth of the infrared radiation (IR) emitted by the surface and about one-sixth of the IR that goes to space.

One of the disturbing characteristics of the drawing is that it gives no information of how the influence of greenhouse gases may change with altitude. For example, in “Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases” Figure 1, we see that the concentration of water vapor diminishes rapidly from the surface to the tropopause, where most water vapor freezes out. The decline is similar to the lapse rate. Water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, but its influence declines significantly with altitude. This is not shown on the IPCC drawing. See https://wvanwijngaarden.info.yorku.ca/files/2020/12/WThermal-Radiationf.pdf?x45936


Costs of Action: In discussing “Global greenhouse gas emissions and Canadian GDP” by the Canadian Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), Ross McKitrick writes:

“One of the annoying bits of jargon that goes around climate policy circles is the phrase ‘the cost of inaction.’ As in, ‘we have to do something, doing nothing is not an option, the cost of inaction is too large.’ The cost of inaction is the foregone benefit of the action, and according to the PBO, it’s not large at all. In fact, it’s tiny.”

“And we have to ask: what if the policies cost more than 0.8 per cent of GDP? [The PBO’s estimated cost of no action on greenhouse gases]. We can be absolutely certain that they will.”

So doing something may be far more costly to society than doing nothing. This was true with World War I. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.


Number of the Week: +0.13 C/decade: In reporting the global temperatures trends for November 2022, Roy Spencer writes:

“The linear warming trend since January 1979 now stands at +0.13 C/decade (+0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).”

The changes are erratic and not linear. They include the changing greenhouse effect, volcanic aerosols in the atmosphere at the beginning of the record, and increased atmospheric water vapor from submerged volcanoes that create ocean hot spots, unrelated to the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO). These are causing a warming of the Arctic. So, the trend due to increasing human-caused greenhouse gases is less than what the numbers indicate. See links under Measurement Issues – Atmosphere.



Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2013

Summary: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/CCR/CCR-II/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2014


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

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels

By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019


Download with no charge:


Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Nov 23, 2015


Download with no charge:


Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate

S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008


Global Sea-Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data

By Craig D. Idso, David Legates, and S. Fred Singer, Heartland Policy Brief, May 20, 2019

Challenging the Orthodoxy

Can Computer Models Predict Climate?

Guest post by Christopher Essex, Emeritus Professor of Mathematics and Physics, University of Western Ontario, Big Picture News, Apr 13, 2022

Looking For The Official Party Line On Energy Storage

By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Dec 8, 2022


Link to: “Examining Supply-Side Options to Achieve 100% Clean Electricity by 2035.”

By Denholm, Paul, et al., NREL, August 2022

Press Release: NREL Study Identifies the Opportunities and Challenges of Achieving the U.S. Transformational Goal of 100% Clean Electricity by 2035

By Staff, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, Aug 30, 2022


Opinion: The Parliamentary Budget Officer just debunked climate alarmism

This is the opposite of an ’emergency’ or ‘crisis’

By Ross McKitrick, Financial Post (Canada), Dec 7, 2022


Link to report: Global greenhouse gas emissions and Canadian GDP

By Philip Bagnoli, et al, The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), Nov 8, 2022


World’s Northern Hemisphere Tropical Storm Accumulated Cyclone Energy Plunges 33% in 2022

By Larry Hamlin, WUWT, Dec 6, 2022

RPC8.5: still a scam

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

‘Reasonable’ Concessions To Climate Hysteria Lack Reason

By Gregory Wrightstone, Daily Caller, Dec 3, 2022 [H/t ICECAP]


“Dr. William Happer, professor emeritus in the Department of Physics at Princeton University, has coauthored a paper that shows that the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide is limited to a narrow band of the electromagnetic spectrum and cannot cause dangerous heating of the planet.

“’Carbon dioxide is completely natural,’ he says. ‘Plants need it to grow. We all breathe out about two pounds of it every day. When people say that we need to remove carbon dioxide from the air, I can’t imagine what they are thinking because today there is not enough carbon dioxide compared to what plants would prefer. We are living in a time of a carbon dioxide famine in the context of geological history. We need more of it not less.’”

Gross zero

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

Link to Report: Integrity Matters: Net Zero Commitments by Businesses, Financial Institutions, Cities and Regions

By Catherine McKenna, chair, et al. United Nations’ High‑Level Expert Group on the Net Zero Emissions Commitments of Non-State Entities,

From the report: “We are at a critical moment for humanity. The window to limit dangerous global warming and ensure a sustainable future is quickly closing. This is the stark but unequivocal finding of recent climate change reports.”

[SEPP Comment: Does the UN understand what scientific integrity is?]

Defending the Orthodoxy

How can we predict the climate 50 years from now if we can’t forecast the weather next week?

By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Dec 5, 2022


Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science

It’s not April 1st but…

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

[SEPP Comment: Exposing a foolish effort to criticize the work of David Young, presented in last week’s TWTW.]

International Energy Agency: Renewables will surpass coal by 2025

By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Dec 6, 2022

Link to report: Renewables 2022: Analysis and forecast to 2027

By Staff, International Energy Agency, December 2022

From the press release: “The global energy crisis has triggered unprecedented momentum behind renewables, with the world set to add as much renewable power in the next 5 years as it did in the past 20.”

“The invasion of Ukraine is set to be a particular accelerant for the transition in Europe. The capacity added in European nations from 2022 to 2027 will be double that of the expansion in the previous five years, according to the IEA.”

[SEPP Comment: Another unrealistic report by the IEA that is built on promises not facts. Some European countries are discovering how fragile electrical systems become with increasing unreliable renewables. No utility scale demonstration of the promise of hydrogen.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Transient Climate Response from observations 1979-2022

By Frank Bosse, Climate Etc. Dec 7, 2022

Four Weeks Left For Fossil Fuels

By Tony Heller, His Blog, Dec 5, 2022

https://realclimatescience.com/2022/12/four-weeks-left-for-fossil-fuels/ [Video]

[SEPP Comment: In 1901, Knut Angstrom demonstrated that CO2 has little effect beyond a minimum concentration and that the calculations of Svante Arrhenius were wrong, Arrhenius subsequently withdrew his calculations. Yet the EPA uses the original Arrhenius calculations!]

Now that I’m in power laws matter

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

“True. From a man who had all the answers to a man who has no answers and is still determined to implement them.

“Our view is somewhat less insider. We say people didn’t buy the message 20 years ago and they still don’t because they look out the window and see winter in November.”

The Climate Alarmists Are Deeply Disturbed People

I & I Editorial Board, Dec 9, 2022

“We’re not saying the climate alarmists are insane. But we feel it is our duty to point out that they do say the same things over and over and expect that this time they’ll get it right.”

Energy and Environmental Review: December 5, 2022

By John Droz, Jr., Master Resource, Dec 5, 2022

After Paris!

How Much Will Loss & Damage Cost?–Foreign Office Have No Idea

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 8, 2022

“Following COP27 and the tentative agreement to set up a “loss and damage” fund, I thought I would ask the Foreign Office a few questions about the cost to the UK.”

“I knew they would have no answers to my questions. But who in their right mind would agree to something when they have no idea of the cost or how they would pay for it?”

Climate Change Weekly #455: COP 27 Will End Up as FLOP 27

By H. Sterling Burnett, Environment & Climate News, Dec 8, 2022

Problems in the Orthodoxy

When Is ‘China Carbon Time’ for Your State?

By Jon Sanders, John Locke Foundation, Nov 30, 2022

“The U.S. is leading the world in cutting CO2 emissions even as China keeps increasing theirs, but environmental activists, politicians, and renewable energy producers are pushing the states to adopt enormously expensive emissions-reduction goals

“This brief asks how much of China’s increase in emissions could states conceivably offset, and it uses a metric of minutes in the day to help illustrate the problem.”

Seeking a Common Ground

JC navigates the new media

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Dec 9, 2022

Climate Reparations Are Latest Indication of Urgent Need for Robust Debate on Climate and Energy Policy

By Jennifer Schubert-Akin, Real Clear Energy, Dec 06, 2022


Science, Policy, and Evidence

Emerging U.S. Industrial Security Policy Must Tap America’s Core Strengths

By George David Banks, Real Clear Energy, Dec 06, 2022


Models v. Observations

A Forecast Failure and the Next Snow Event

By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Dec 3, 2022


Measurement Issues — Atmosphere

UAH Global Temperature Update for November 2022: +0.17 deg. C

By Roy Spencer, His Blog, Dec 6, 2022

Global Temperature Report, November 2022

By Staff, Earth System Science Center, UAH

Map: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2022/november2022/202211_Map.png

Graph: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2022/november2022/202211_Bar.png

Report: https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2022/november2022/202211_Bar.png

Changing Weather

Australia Sees Coldest And Wettest Spring In Decades Amid Third La Niña In A Row

By Die kalte Sonne, (Translated/edited by P. Gosselin), No Tricks Zone, Dec 6, 2022

Atlantic Hurricane Season 2022

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 9, 2022

“Total for both all hurricanes and major hurricanes are close to the lowest on record.”

Who let it snow let it snow let it snow?

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

“Now if you ask people what the weather will be like in a couple of months, rather than in 2100, they don’t know.”

Why November Was So Mild

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 5, 2022

Snowpack Status for the Northwest

By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Dec 7, 2022


Untampered Japan Meteorological Agency Data Show Tokyo Autumn Hasn’t Warmed In Decades

By P Gosselin, Charts by Kirye, Dec 3, 2022

New Study: Observational Data Affirm 95% Of Post-1970s Warming Is Not Linked To CO2 Increases

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Dec 8, 2022

Link to paper: Causes and Course of Climate Change and Its Hydrological Consequences in the Greater Poland Region in 1951–2020

By Andrzej A. Marsz, et al., Quaestiones Geographicae, Sep 3, 2022


Oimjakon, Siberia Sees “Extremely Low Temperatures” As Mercury Plummets To 65 Below! [F]

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Dec 4, 2022


UK Autumn 2022–Mild and Wet, But Certainly Not “Extreme”

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 3, 2022

Simulations of seasonal snow in the Upper Colorado River Basin

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

“From the CO2Science Archive:”

Changing Climate

Record breaking DNA shows Mastodons roaming a hot North Greenland 2 million years ago

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Dec 10, 2022

Link to paper: A 2-million-year-old ecosystem in Greenland uncovered by environmental DNA

By Kurt H. Kjæ, et al, Nature, Dec 7, 2022


[SEPP Comment: Estimates of continental drift place Greenland in the Arctic for over 50 million years. The opening of the abstract may explain why this got by in Nature: “Late Pliocene and Early Pleistocene epochs 3.6 to 0.8 million years ago had climates resembling those forecasted under future warming. Palaeoclimatic records show strong polar amplification with mean annual temperatures of 11–19 °C above contemporary values.” It is the forecasts of climate models that counts, not understanding of the greenhouse effect. Boldface added.]

Changing Seas

Change the government, or the reef gets it!

By Graham Young, Spectator, Australia, Dec 3, 2022

Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice

Everybody knows: polar bears are dying due to climate change

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

“So the bears seem to like having less sea ice, even if melting ice causes climate alarmists to melt down as well.”

The Reindeer On Wrangel Island [High Arctic Russia] Have Experienced Mass Die-Offs Due To 21st Century Icing Events

By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Dec 5, 2022


Link to paper: First evidence of a brown bear on Wrangel Island, Russia

By Babiy, Ulyana V., et al. BioOne, 2022

From paper: “After several winters with icecrust formation and rain-on-snow events, the population of reindeer decreased from 8,500 in 2002 to 450–500 in2007 (Gruzdev and Sipko 2007b, Kazmin and Kholod 2014). Following this die-off, wolves and wolverines recolonized the island. By 2016 the number of reindeer had stabilized at approximately 200–300 individuals, with predation considered the main factor preventing population increase (Mizin et al. 2018).”

Agriculture Issues & Fear of Famine

Cultivated Meat, Not Plant-Based Meat, is the Future of Environmentally Conscience Food

By Micah Safsten, Real Clear Energy, Dec 8, 2022


[SEPP Comment: One can only imagine some of the names the greens who oppose genetically modified vegetables and grains will have for cultivated meat!]

Lowering Standards

Clean Energy Promotion

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Dec 6, 2022

Climate Forecasting

By Tony Heller, His Blog, Dec 9, 2022


[SEPP Comment: As predicted. Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) changed its difference between observations and model predictions by eliminating the error range!]

BBC Hurricane Complaint–Stage 2

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 5, 2022

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

To End Climate Lunacy, Stop Treating Warming & C02 Hysterically

By David Simon, Real Clear Markets, Dec 6, 2022 [H/t Ron Clutz]


Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

“now accepted as a reality”

By Tony Heller, His Blog, Dec 9, 2022

Video: https://realclimatescience.com/2022/12/now-accepted-as-a-reality-2/

Text: https://realclimatescience.com/2022/12/now-accepted-as-a-reality/

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,”

The Mirror Makes Ludicrous Claim That Large Parts of England Will Be Under Water By 2100

By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptics, Dec 6, 2022

“The current annual rate of sea level rise is estimated by the U.S. weather service NOAA’s Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry to be 3.1 mm, with a 13% margin of error.”

[SEPP Comment: When its estimates are compared with tidal gauges in stable locations, the NOAA estimates are far too high, and margin of error is far too small.]

This Year’s Puffin Scare Story

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 9, 2022

[SEPP Comment: “…stormy weather caused by climate change.” It has never been stormy in the North Atlantic before?]

Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll?

What goes around…

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

“…’according to a 2021 United Nations Development Programme’s global poll that covered 50 countries and had 1.2 million respondents, a majority of people believe climate change is an emergency and support mitigation policies.’”

Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.

Steven Koonin: Guilty as Charged (DeSmog’s Hall of Fame)

By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Dec 7, 2022

“There are some low blows such as implying that John Christy, Judith Curry, and Richard Lindzen are not ‘climate experts.‘ (DeSmog: want to host a debate with any of these persons present?)”

Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda

Climate activists “waging war on the mind”

Press Release, Net Zero Watch, Dec 8, 2022

Link to: The Climate Change Cult and the War on the Mind

By Stephen McMurray, Net Zero Watch, 2022

The U.S. wants to slash carbon emissions from power plants. Natural gas is in the way

By Michael Copley, NPR, Dec 5, 2022


“Under President Joe Biden, the United States aims to cut all carbon pollution by 2035 from the power plants that run American homes and businesses. It’s a first step toward the broader goal of zeroing out greenhouse gas emissions across the entire economy by midcentury to rein in climate change.”

[SEPP Comment: According to NPR, the power industry that says it can’t be done is evil?]

Communicating Better to the Public – Protest

Anti-Oil, Anti-Gas: “The Plan Was to Do Something Illegal”

By William Allison, Energy in Depth, Dec 7, 2022


Expanding the Orthodoxy

Extinction Hype and Dubious Biodiversity COP15 in Montreal

By Ron Clutz, Science Matters, Dec 7, 2022

21st Century Robber Barons: the WEF

By Brian Parsons, American Thinker, Dec 9, 2022


Climate lockdowns coming? You will be tracked in your suburb and happy about it.

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Dec 3, 2022

Link to the WEF “plan”: The surprising stickiness of the “15-minute city

By WEF Staff, Mar 15, 2022


‘Common Ground’ on ESG? Only Bad Wins

By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Dec 6, 2022

[SEPP Comment: Cannot make deals with fanatics?]

ESG is the Psychotic Bully of the Investment World

By Linnea Lueken and H. Sterling Burnett, WUWT, Dec 8, 2022

The Climate Money Monster Cabal may be starting to unravel… Vanguard flees GFANZ

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Dec 8, 2022

[SEPP Comment: GFANZ is the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero.]

Questioning European Green

Blackouts will trigger a people’s revolt against the new eco-tyranny

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 8, 2022

Europe’s climate obsession could prove deadly

By Liz Peek, The Hill, Dec 5, 2022

Plunging Towards Darkness: Germany Sees Week-Long Wind, Sun Lull As Energy Supply Dwindles

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Dec 7, 2022

“Blackout News summarizes the results of Germany’s energy strategy for November:

“‘Germany emitted more CO2 per kilowatt hour in electricity generation than India, China and South Africa, and landed in 127th place out of 147 countries in the ranking.’”

Questioning Green Elsewhere

Green Raw Deal: Climate Fanatism Has Put Us Full Throttle On The Highway To Hell

By Fred Mueller, Via P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Dec 9, 2022

[SEPP Comment: The charts presented show the energy crisis hit before the invasion of Ukraine.]

The exploitation of ‘green energy’

Wealthy nations abuse poorer nations’ workforces and environment

By Rick Amato and Ronald Stein, Washington Times, Nov 30, 2022 [H/t Paul Homewood]


Green Jobs

Is the Renewable Energy Industry Nothing More Than a Jobs Program?

By Julius Sanks, WUWT, Dec 9, 2022

[SEPP Comment: The graph showing US Energy Production Per Employee is telling.]

Funding Issues

Today’s economic challenges exacerbated by Ponzi schemes

By Ronald Stein, CFACT, Dec 7, 2022


The Political Games Continue

Climate Money Is Pouring Into Washington — Watch Out For The RINOs

By Derrick Morgan and Mike McKenna, Daily Caller, Dec 2, 2022


Litigation Issues

How an Early Oil Industry Study Became Key in Climate Lawsuits

For decades, 1960s research for the American Petroleum Institute warning of the risks of burning fossil fuels had been forgotten. But two papers discovered in libraries are now playing a key role in lawsuits aimed at holding oil companies accountable for climate change.

By Beth Gardiner, Yale 360, Nov 30, 2022


[SEPP Comment: A report in 1968 when a new ice age was the fear of the day?]

EPA and other Regulators on the March

Energy Department rule would cut government building emissions 90 percent

By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Dec 7, 2022

“A new proposed rule from the Biden administration would cut emissions from new federal buildings 90 percent from 2003 levels in the next two years.”

[SEPP Comment: What is the 2003 emission level of a building that does not exist? Why wait? Think of the great stimulus created by cutting CO2 emissions of all federal buildings right now?]

EPA decision could spell doom for Ohio’s biggest coal plant

By Patrick Cooley, The Columbus Dispatch, Nov 29, 2022


Energy Issues – Non-US

Rishi Sunak’s incoherent energy policy will poison Britain’s future

By Staff, Net Zero Watch, Dec 7, 2022

“To continue intellectually bankrupt and counterproductive policies in the middle of an energy crisis of unprecedented magnitude suggests that the machinery of government in Westminster has ceased to work, and that rational analysis can no longer effect a change of course. The outlook for the consumer and the country as whole is very bleak.” – NZW energy director John Constable

UK Energy Reforms Could Stifle Growth

By City A.M, Oil Price.com, Dec 05, 2022


“Ofgem has pushed through a flurry of reforms in the UK’s energy sector.

“The energy watchdog has faced heavy criticism over its handling of the energy crisis.

“One of the country’s energy suppliers says the regulator is ‘overcompensating’ for its failures in its attempts to handle the crisis.”

Labour Target Net Zero Electricity By 2030

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 7, 2022

“Our energy security, and all that goes with it, are being put at risk by politicians who don’t understand how the grid works and reliant on advice from wide-eyed kids playing around with their X-Boxes.”

A yellow and blue Christmas

By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

“Thinking is of course hard work. And thus it turns out that in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s largest state, both economically and demographically, the emergency measure is to lift the debt ceiling so they can borrow even more money to subsidize people’s energy bills. It is not, repeat not, to develop more sources of energy.”

Energy Issues — US

For Energy, America’s Best Foreign Policy Is a Good Domestic Policy

By Brigham McCown, Real Clear Energy, Dec 7, 2022


North Carolina attack underscores vulnerability of power grid

By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Dec 7, 2022

“’A single cyberattack can shut down hundreds if not thousands of substations at once,’ said Rajit Gadh, director of UCLA’s Smart Grid Energy Research Center.”

Virginia air pollution board votes to leave regional carbon-credit program

By Zack Budryk, The Hill, Dec 8, 2022

“The state Air Pollution Control Board voted 4-1 to continue the exit from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), with two abstentions, an official confirmed.”

The False Assumptions Behind Climate Regulations in Pennsylvania

By Kevin Mooney, Real Clear Energy, Dec 6, 2022


Washington’s Control of Energy

Supporting Alaska’s Willow Project Supports Our Unions

By Joey Merrick, Real Clear Energy, Dec 8, 2022


[SEPP Comment: Developing oil resources on the North Slope in Alaska is opposed by those in Washington dedicated to strangling the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS).]

U.S. To Bail Out Britain By Doubling Natural Gas Exports

By City A.M, Oil Price.com Dec 08, 2022


“The UK is grappling with sky-high energy prices.

“The Biden administration has agreed to double U.S. natural gas exports to Britain.

“The initiative has an ‘immediate goal’ of stabilizing energy markets and reducing demand.”

[SEPP Comment: Time for oil and gas workers to go on strike and tell the administration to manufacture the gas from government subsidized solar and wind?]

Return of King Coal?

King Coal: Reports Of My Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated (apologies to Mark Twain)

By Tilak Doshi, Forbes, Dec 1, 2022


Cumbria Coal Mine Gets Go-Ahead

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, Dec 8, 2022

“A victory for common sense!”

Nuclear Energy and Fears

South Australia Pushes for Zero Carbon Civilian Nuclear Power

By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Dec 5, 2022

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind

Mega Wind farm approved that can’t operate half the year

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Dec 9, 2022

[SEPP Comment: According to the US EIA: “The average capacity factor of U.S. wind generators (35% in 2021) is lower than the average capacity factor of nuclear generators (93% in 2021), which are designed to run at or near full output, which they typically do.”]


Solar’s Lofty Ambitions Are Consuming Ever-Larger Expanses of Land Down Below

By John Murawski, Real Clear Investigations, Dec 7, 2022


“State and federal officials see in solar energy the potential to counteract global warming with an infinite natural resource.”

“The momentum behind solar energy could make sunshine the nation’s dominant source of electricity, supplying up to 45% of the nation’s electricity by mid-century, from a meager 2.8% of U.S. electricity generation now, according to a Department of Energy forecast.”

[SEPP Comment: According to NREL maps, the average annual solar potential for most of Virginia is 4.25 to 4.50 kWh/m2/Day. The greatest is greater than 5.75 from California to Texas. From October to February all of Virginia is less than 4.00 kWh/m2/Day (24 hours) with none coming at night, and very little coming when the sun is low in the sky). Who needs heat in the winter? Or light at night?]

(Global Horizontal Irradiance, https://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar-resource-maps.html )

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Other

My Energy Storage Report: Hydrogen As An Alternative To Batteries

By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Dec 4, 2022


“It’s no wonder that green hydrogen is all talk.  Nobody is willing to actually try to build out a demonstration project.  The so-called ‘hydrogen economy’ is highly unlikely ever to happen.”

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles

The Mirage of Electric Vehicles

By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, Dec 6, 2022

California Dreaming

DRIED UP: In California, desalination offers only partial solution to growing drought

By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Dec 5, 2022

“The American West is experiencing its driest period in human history, a megadrought that threatens health, agriculture and entire ways of life. DRIED UP is examining the dire effects of the drought on the states most affected — as well as the solutions Americans are embracing.”

[SEPP Comments: A false statement given that the west has been inhabited for 10,000 to 12,000 years or more.]

New blood, Big Oil: California Legislature starts special session

By Alexei Koseff and Sameea Kamal, Cal Matters, Dec 6, 2022


Newsom proposes penalizing oil companies amid high fuel prices

By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, Dec 6, 2022

“’Big Oil has been lying and gouging Californians to line their own pockets long enough,’ Newsom said. ‘I look forward to the work ahead with our partners in the legislature to get this done.’”

[SEPP Comment: California’s anti-carbon dioxide energy policy has nothing to do with increasing cost?]

Other Scientific News

Apollo 17: 50th Anniversary of the Most Successful Manned Space Mission… So Far

By David Middleton, WUWT, Dec 7, 2022


US gas prices lower than they were a year ago

By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Dec 8, 2022

Link to press release: Like Snowflakes, Gas Prices Keep Falling As Demand Remains Low

Press Release, AAA, Dec 8, 2022


[SEPP Comment: Deceptive article. According to the EIA, in November 2020 average gas prices were $2.11, 2021 3.39, in November 2022 $3.68.]


Claim: Indoor Farms can Solve Climate Crisis Weather Disruption

By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Dec 7, 2022

[SEPP Comment: Imagine the corn fields of the Midwest indoors!]

French President: Stop Scaremongering About Green Electricity Blackouts

By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Dec 8, 2022

[SEPP Comment: What about scaremongering about CO2?]

In an “Emergency Heatwave”, wait for it, ABC Nanny tells Australians to “use air conditioning”

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Dec 6, 2022

“The real issue here is not the Heatwave Emergency Warnings, but that the ABC acts as a propaganda unit. They should be mocking the BoM instead for treating us like babies and filling our airwaves with meaningless warnings.

“When we were kids we’d turn on the garden sprinklers and run through them on hot days, and we didn’t wait for the ABC to suggest it.”

Progressives push back on effort to put Manchin permitting deal in NDAA

By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Dec 5, 2022

“Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) tweeted that they would vote against the annual bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), if it contained what they described as ‘giveaways to the fossil fuel industry.’”

[SEPP Comment: Legal permits are “giveaways” and subsidies are ???]

The End Is Near

By Tony Heller, His Blog, Dec 6, 2022

“David Attenborough says the end of the world is near due to a one part per thousand increase in atmospheric CO2 over the past century.”

Video: The current CO2 levels not seen in millions of years. “We are now perilously close to tipping points, where once passed will send temperatures spirally catastrophically higher.” We will see the collapse of everything. Climate change is the biggest threat to security that modern humans have ever faced.

[SEPP Comment: Very Sad! This once significant man has no concept of the greenhouse effect or climate history.]


1. SEC Rule Aims to Make Every Company a Climate Company

What happened to informing investors about relevant financial risks?

By James Freeman, WSJ, Dec. 9, 2022


TWTW Summary: The journalist writes:

“Securities and Exchange Commissioner Hester Peirce is sounding the alarm on the destructive climate proposal that SEC Chairman Gary Gensler is still trying to jam through on a partisan vote.

“This week Commissioner Peirce explained that beyond requiring public companies to demand data on climate risks from even small businesses and farmers in their supply chains, the rule could also force changes in how companies operate and even who runs them. In a speech at the American Enterprise Institute Ms. Peirce noted:

“… the climate proposal mandates disclosure about board oversight of climate-related risks, including identifying board members or board committees responsible for overseeing climate-related risks; detailing board member climate expertise; describing the processes and frequency of discussions about climate-related risks; explaining how the board is informed about, and how often it thinks about, climate-related risks and whether it considers climate-related risks as part of its business strategy, risk management, and financial oversight; and describing whether and how the board sets climate-related targets or goals and how it oversees progress in achieving them. The proposal also includes a corresponding set of disclosures related to management: who is responsible for managing climate-related risks, what their climate expertise is, how they get informed about those risks, and how often the managers responsible for climate-related risks report to the board…

“One comment letter objected that the ‘disclosures usurp the decision-making authority of corporate boards and executive management, authority specifically granted to them by state corporate law.’

“Washington would essentially be forcing every public company, regardless of industry, to focus on climate, while also pressuring them to hire leaders who share this obsession. But even the most climate-obsessed ought to recognize that such change requires a new law, not unelected financial regulators suddenly deciding to appoint themselves ministers of global warming.”

“One also has to wonder why Mr. Gensler—running an agency with no particular expertise in the science of climate—feels compelled to impose this system on businesses that are already facing enormous pressure to adopt the climate agendas of institutional financiers.”

The essay concludes that there may be a political battle over this expansion of SEC power.


2. Biden Starts a Climate Trade War

The Inflation Reduction Act’s subsidies are angering U.S. allies.

By The Editorial Board, WSJ, Dec. 5, 2022


TWTW Summary: The editorial begins:

“Wasn’t President Biden going to end Donald Trump’s destructive trade wars against allies? Apparently not. His ‘super aggressive’ climate protectionism—to quote French President Emmanuel Macron—is infuriating U.S. friends and may set off a subsidy and tariff war.

“U.S. allies are upset about the Inflation Reduction Act’s generous subsidies for domestically manufactured green technologies. In his trip to Washington last week, Mr. Macron said the U.S. subsidies may ‘perhaps fix your issue but you will increase my problem.’ They’re really a problem for everybody.

“The dispute involves tax credits for electric-vehicle and battery production. The IRA’s $7,500 consumer tax credit are restricted to EVs assembled in North America. Most foreign auto makers make EVs abroad and export them because the global and U.S. markets are still small. They can’t tap the consumer tax credit unless they invest in American production. But making EVs in the U.S.—or Canada or Mexico—may be more costly and could render their cars less competitive in other export markets.

“Half of the U.S. $7,500 tax credit is also contingent on an increasing share of the vehicle’s battery minerals being extracted or processed in the U.S. or a country in which the U.S. has a free-trade agreement—starting at 40% in 2023 and increasing to 80% in 2027. The other half will be available only to EVs whose battery components are mostly made in North America, starting at 50% in 2023 and reaching 100% by 2029.

“No auto maker is expected to qualify for the full $7,500 tax credit next year, but Tesla and GM may be eligible for half. Foreign auto makers will become less competitive in the U.S. and struggle to meet stringent fuel-economy mandates. The upshot? They will have to buy regulatory credits from Tesla and GM.”

After discussing additional privileges granted to special corporations by the law, the editorial concludes with:

“European leaders are threatening to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization if the Biden Administration doesn’t rewrite the IRA to extend subsidies to foreign EVs and green technologies. But the latter would compound the policy felony by forcing U.S. taxpayers to subsidize foreign-made cars. Europe could also impose subsidies for domestic manufacturers or tariffs against U.S.-made EVs.

“The West’s climate policies are already harming consumers and slowing economic growth by raising energy prices and distorting investment. Now they are threatening a trade war that will cause more harm. The new climate protectionism won’t end well.”

5 2 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 12, 2022 3:13 am

“If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”

And that’s where modelling comes in. Models are never wrong – well, at least not until bitter experience (eg BSE, Covid etc) proves otherwise.

“From the transforming discovery of penicillin to the theories of relativity and quantum mechanics, science progressed with mind-boggling speed even before there were computers. Much of this is down to the robustness of the scientific method: scientific results are validated by being replicated and extended by other scientists.

But the way we do science is changing – we now rely increasingly on complex computer models to understand nature.”


Did I mention the tsunami of propaganda that models drive?

Peta of Newark
Reply to  strativarius
December 12, 2022 6:05 am

Following on from yours and it now makes me cringe to think that this was = My School

Have you ever read such garbage:”Tropical weather processes are very different to those of Western Europe; our tried and tested forecasting models simply don’t work for those parts of the world. “Weather is affected by two main factors: the sun and the earth’s rotation. It’s the latter that has the biggest impact in the UK, and we’re now pretty good at predicting the big rotating systems of high and low pressure.”


Reply to  Peta of Newark
December 12, 2022 6:54 am

The phrase ‘no sh#t Sherlock’ did spring to mind.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  strativarius
December 12, 2022 6:51 am

“If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”

It’s also possible that the experiment was poorly designed and/or implemented.

“scientific results are validated by being replicated and extended by other scientists”

Well, sort of– the validation might also be only partially correct until a larger theory is developed. Newton’s theory of gravity was validated until seen in a larger scale by Einstein. So science is always a work in progress. I suppose that’s what’s meant by “extended” but it still implies the validation proved a theory definitively.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
December 12, 2022 7:08 am

So, Newton was right, Joseph? He didn’t have a Cray to hand, either.

The beauty of it is or was, knowledge can always be invalidated by the discovery of something new. No model does that, does it?

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  strativarius
December 12, 2022 11:26 am

I don’t think he was saying that models do.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
December 12, 2022 11:25 am

It’s also possible that the experiment was poorly designed and/or implemented.”

I point this out every time I see the quote by Feynman. I would say it’s more correct to say “observations” instead of experiment.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
December 13, 2022 3:48 am

Yes, in particular when discussing climate, since there is no meaningful way ro “experiment” to determine the effect of something on the “climate.”

Alan Welch
December 12, 2022 4:03 am

I hate to disagree with one of my heroes, Richard Feynman, but for an experiment to invalidate a theory the experiment must be correct.
In my previous life in the 60’s and 70’s I worked on the analysis of many of the UK Nuclear Power Containment Structures, including Hartlepool and Heysham 1. We developed methods of analysis and applied these to physical models in the laboratory and to the actual structures. These were wired up with strain gauges in the vertical and horizontal directions.
When the laboratory models were tested, they showed no correlation with analysis predictions. I pointed out that if the 2 sets of results were swapped over then theory and experiment agreed. This was not accepted so, the model being made of araldite, was cut up and the strain gauge wiring seen to be wrong. One – Nil to theory.
Before going into operation, the full structures were subjected to an overload test and again strain gauges were used but this time they were encased in concrete so not accessible. On one of the 4 almost identical structures there was a discrepancy between theory and test results with the figures pointing to a miss wiring of strain gauges. Also, if results were swapped there was an agreement of results. This time it was impossible to check the gauges and wiring but as the test procedure involved incremental steps in pressure and the test results were linear with pressure, the test was  considered acceptable and the test certificate signed. Two – Nil to theory although I may lose two – twenty in extra time!!
The structure has now worked for about 38 years and will cease production in 2024.
When it is finally decommissioned and dismantled in about 100 to 200 years time the wiring will become visible and I might be finally vindicated!!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Alan Welch
December 12, 2022 11:31 am

I hate to disagree with one of my heroes, Richard Feynman, but for an experiment to invalidate a theory the experiment must be correct.”

Yes, as I mentioned elsewhere. The quote makes a lot of assumptions.

Peta of Newark
December 12, 2022 6:00 am

Here’s some ‘news’ from Auntie B being her usual self= guilt inducing, finger-wagging and desperate to save money by telling us what and what not to do in the shower.

I simply can not get their figures to reconcile, it’s garbage whichever way I try to work it.
But never mind me, getting old and stupid, see what you can make of it.

The thing that’s missing is whether they’re using gas or electric to heat the water but as they’re talking kWh all the time , I assumed UK current price of £0.33 per kWh for electric.
But the numbers make even less sense using gas at current UK price of £0.103 per kWh :-/
Unless possibly they’re talking a household of five people and each one taking 2 showers per day?
I’d venture to ask: “wtf are they doing in there” but I’d wish I hadn’t

Quote:3. Installing a water-efficient showerhead or having showers in four minutes could save you about £90
There are a couple of ways to save money when you shower.
Firstly, shorter showers could save you about £84 a year.
This is based on cutting the length of an average shower from about seven minutes to four.
Secondly, you could consider buying a water-efficient showerhead – which will cost from about £10. (Check they are compatible with your shower before buying one).
They work by restricting the amount of water coming through the head. This means you use less hot water for the same length of shower. This could mean a saving of about £98 a year if you don’t have shorter showers.
How this saving is worked out: CAR assumes that each household takes two showers a day, that an average shower lasts seven minutes, uses eight litres a minute and has a temperature of 41C. It says four-minute showers would save an average of 24 litres of hot water, resulting in an energy saving of 1.1 kWh per shower, or around 800 kWh per year for a household. CAR also estimated that a low-flow shower head would save an average of 28 litres of hot water, resulting an energy saving of 1.3 kWh per shower, or around 950 kWh per year for a household.

From here

Reply to  Peta of Newark
December 12, 2022 6:55 am

showers in four minutes”

Better get a diver’s watch….

Last edited 1 month ago by strativarius
December 12, 2022 6:36 am

It’s never enough for the doomsday cult Minister-
The moral to the story is don’t feed wild animals.

December 12, 2022 8:29 am

Offshore Wind – Not Maine Lobstering – Threatening Endangered Right Whales: Bloomberg
The documents, obtained by Bloomberg via Freedom of Information Act request, will provide ammunition to lobstermen and elected officials as they fight burdensome federal regulations on Maine’s most prized fishery.
Sean Hayes, the chief of the protected species branch at NOAA’s National Northeast Fisheries Science Center, explained the threat wind turbine construction and operation presents to the endangered mammals in a May 13 letter to to officials with the federal Interior Department.
“Additional noise, vessel traffic and habitat modifications due to offshore wind development will likely cause added stress that could result in additional population consequences to a species that is already experiencing rapid decline,” Hayes said in his letter, according to Bloomberg.
The documents show that federal regulators — and outside activist groups like Seafood Watch the Marine Stewardship Council — have been focusing on Maine’s lobstering industry while the much-ballyhooed wind industry may pose the more severe threat.

December 12, 2022 12:44 pm

Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science
It’s not April 1st but…
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, Dec 7, 2022

It’s not April 1st but…

[SEPP Comment: Exposing a foolish effort to criticize the work of David Young, presented in last week’s TWTW.]”

This reminded me of a quote from November Physics Today (p10)
Quoting mathematicians Edward Kastner and James Newman…”the testament of science is so continuously in flux that the heresy of yesterday is the gospel of today and the fundamentalism of tomorrow” The courage to say no to scientific authority, to contradict widely accepted knowledge, to question and disrupt the status quo is essential to science’s ability to move forward”

I just wish the AIP would apply that wisdom to the dogma of climate change.

December 12, 2022 2:06 pm

In other news … the WSJ reports, “Vanguard Defects From the Climate Club”

Emperors of finance may finally be discovering that climate virtue-signaling isn’t without costs. Credit to Vanguard last week for pulling out of the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) pledge to purge fossil fuels and CO2-emitting companies from its funds.

Their concern is that managers of the funds that Vanguard includes in its portfolios are not focused on returns as much as they are in “Net Zero” investments.


%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights