The Kim Iversen Show LIVE | March 31, 2023
Judith Curry President and Founder of Climate Forecast Applications Network and Professor Emerita, Georgia Institute of Technology joins us to discuss the alarmism surrounding the ‘Climate Emergency’ narrative.
Find her book “Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking Our Response”
Get your free info kit on how to start investing in gold and securing your future by visiting https://www.BirchGold.com/Kim
Become a member of my LOCALS community where you will gain access to exclusive content, behind-the-scenes videos, valuable information, and even connect with me personally and others as well. It’s a great way to support my independent media channel while receiving more content. Click the button to join! You can become a FREE member or a paid subscriber.
Sign up for my FREE email newsletter here to get notifications of livestreams and segments: http://KimIversenemailsignup.com (I will never spam you or sell your info)
It is all POLITICS since they want to increase their power over you using lies and propaganda.
There is no Climate Emergency at all as Willis Eschenbach made clear two years ago right here in this same blog:
Where is the Climate Emergency?
The fact that you even ask the question shows how far they have come
I’ve seen no end of videos etc from good people like Curry, Lindzen, Happer etc etc etc All well worth consideration – compared to the alarmist narrative.
But the painful truth is until the capture of the media, education and academia is at least in part reversed there is no chance of getting the message out. And we are stuck
It’s more complicated than what we are seeing IMO.
In addition to the disinformation coming from the msm, education ect, I suspect there
might be a bit of geo-engineering taking place. The final step is an eco-fascism
power control. I say this due to the leak coming from the pentagon that is quite
concerning on top of the policies such as off shore wind with dead whales, blown up
deep sea gas lines ect..
Tools that can be used to fight “dis-information” are also very useable to fight “good-information”…
And much of what they are trying to “protect” by silencing others IS THE DISINFORMATION.
You should see a doctor about that.
Your comment about doctor/ECT and the below reference
to a K Kesey character reminds me of the 70’s when hitchhikers
had signs that said “We’re Vegetarians”
And, we see the same climate catastrophe BS being posted by every half-wit on any climate blog. The half-wits are 120% convinced of the veracity of their consensus boiler plate postings. There’s no turning that level of stupid.
Sorry man, Climate Hysteria is baked in to the media narrative. No going back on that. Us thinking people need to prepare for the catastrophic consequences of a rush to net zero.. These bozos pushing this nonsense won’t get a reality check until they find themselves stranded in their Tesla’s on a hot summer day when they turn on their Air Conditioner. By then. the fools will have destroyed the supply chain for gas and oil. However, the Federal Govt will bust the budget by issuing massive credits to buy electric vehicles for the masses. OPPS, they forgot about the grid and lack of charging stations but they are building bike paths everywhere so people will just have to adapt.
Not only is there no climate emergency, there’s not even a small climate problem. The warming effect of gases like CO2 and CH4 is eliminated by boundary layer effects. Nothing will change until these effects start getting traction. Climate alarmists need to be hit over the head constantly for not considering boundary layer effects. Put them on the defensive. Unfortunately, it’s not only alarmists who don’t understand these effects, it is also the vast majority of climate skeptics.
The simple view is, when a well mixed GHG increases in concentration it causes increases in boundary layer downward IR toward the surface. This leads to an increase in evaporative cooling. This cooling counters the additional energy absorbed. The net effect is more precipitation, not warming.
Because there is no net warming, all of the claimed feedbacks disappear.
You are right Richard, I’ve got a 4 year degree in Physics and still struggle with all the real science around climate. One thing I remember seeing is some imagery from NASA (I believe) that showed concentrations of CO2 not well mixed in the atmosphere. The image showed a bunch of hot dog shaped regions that were claimed to represent CO2 concentrations. Do you have any insight into this or perhaps I’m confusing graphics from 10 years back?
Well mixed is something that occurs over time. It does vary over short time periods, but the long term values should average out. We’d probably also see similar variations in oxygen if measured to the same precision. I don’t see that as important from a global climate perspective.
Here is a view from 2008:
Here’s a nearly complete set of snapshots from what was the OCO gallery… before they trashed it into an unreadable mess of fast-moving GIFs
Then lied and lied and lied, especially about how OCO Sputnik was/is unable to see the large forests “because they were always soooo very cloudy” and stopped showing any data for those parts of the world
Look thro the images and lot of the time you’ll see a lot of CO2 above the forests – exactly where it Should Not Be.
The lies there are manifold:
NASA are lying directly and by ommision – they and this entire thing stink to high heaven
?? What about the danger to garden parties?
Like I am fond of saying, good luck trying to control the “greenhouse effect” by reducing the PITTANCE of CO2 emitted by human activities when more than 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by OCEANS of WATER and the main greenhouse gas is…
The left wants people to be poor and dependent on their handouts. It’s about control.
The swindlers that run this planet want all of the wealth, power and resources for themselves leaving scraps for everyone else. Progressives are goose stepping in support of corporate fascism.
Helping the poor by making them no longer poor is not the goal of fighting poverty. The goal is to keep them poor, uneducated, indoctrinated and dependent. And angry, as well, because angry people are motivated and disinclined to listen to reason.
So yeah, what if fighting climate change hurts the poor. That’s a bonus.
Just ask Nick Stokes! He is all for hurting the poor.
… and eliminating the independent thinking middle class. The more poor, the better.
Sorry, wrong thread
That suit and freedom of information requests along with the Twitter files have revealed just how low the radicals in government will go. All of this as well as endless persecution/ prosecution of conservatives makes it very clear that the authors of the US constitution had it right ;they just did nt go far enough with the “checks” in the checks and balances.
I would propose that maybe a working group could be organized to create a site with all the primary references, documents, evidence reports and testimonies on all these critical subjects and issues. It has to be
primary sources- ie not referenced or linked through WATTSUP Climate depot, Heritage foundation etc for obvious reasons because of the MSM biased labeling etc. The facts and the “ truth” -sociological, historical and economic, philosophical/political are on our side. We just need a better clearing house for the info so we can support our grass roots level last ditch effort to save our nations.
Check out the new Substack Notes system.
Could be a useful collaboration tool.
Substack is great but is still just people, just another platform that can be used for good or evil.
How would that escape the MSM biased labeling issue? It’s just another site that will be ignored by the MSM and search engines.
I just want references for interpersonal debate not trying to get the attention of MSM media obviously that’s hopeless. I’m talking about when you are debating a individual on line or in person. that is what I mean by “grass roots “ I guess I was not clear enough. The only way we are going to change minds is one person at a time with incontrovertible primary sourced evidence. like one does in a court of law.
Example: The actual transcript of say the Michael Mann legal case and the the testimony of witnesses etc. Not just say an article summary from Wattup, climate depot etc. Your opponents will just go online look up said site which will say “ caters to climate skeptics” But the transcript of the case is going to be much more difficult to refute. Primary sources/ other examples would be the critical parts of congressional record testimony not just an article in a website about the testimony. It’s alot of work ferreting through all the primary evidence. Thats why it would be nice to locate, zero in on an catalog the most critical parts. Primary Evidence.
To capture the attention of agw acolytes John, you’d have to present everything as cartoons on YouTube.
They only read click-bait headlines after all.
John, my experience in such matters has been that they either simply dismiss or ignore such evidence. It’s like the hosts in Westworld: “Don’t look like nothin’ to me”. They can’t see it when it’s right in front of them.
If Mark Twain were alive today, he’d say, “There are lies, damned lies, and statistics, and then there is climate change impacts, which is a class of its own.”
Judith is wrong on the where we are headed. Missing the obvious signs of the termination of the current interglacial.
We are already witnessing the termination of the current interglacial. Earth’s orbit is in the same stage that terminated the last four interglacials. Peak solar intensity is increasing in the NH causing the oceans to warm up leading to more atmospheric water in August/September just as the land begins to cool.
Snow extent is increasing in the NH. Greenland will have 100% ice cover by the end of the current century and is gaining in elevation at 17mm per year. Iceland also has increasing permanent ice cover. Snowfall records are frequent occurrences. Snow removal budgets are going up because there is more snow as well as higher fuel costs,
Cooling during glaciation only occurs once the snow starts accumulating and the average land ice elevation gains altitude over falling sea level. The lapse rate causes the cooling as well as the highly reflective snow cover.
I am disappointed when I hear scientists and commentators adopt the default position that “everyone knows the climate is warming”, without questioning the veracity of the claim. For instance, the Cook et al view that “97% of scientists agree” was convincingly rebutted and does not deserve resurrection (See: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/12/the-cook-97-consensus-paper-exposed-by-new-book-for-the-fraud-that-it-really-is/ and also https://cliscep.com/2023/01/20/reichsfuehrers-of-the-climate-con-job/).
Indeed, driving what should have been the final nail into Cook et al. Legates et al. (2013; https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9647-9) made the point that the truthfulness of science cannot be judged by measuring a consensus amongst experts, when partisan presentations of a ‘manufactured’ consensus can (and is) used to stifle discussion, debate, and critical thinking.
I’m no professor, but I understand the role of the water cycle in moderating maximum temperature measured at individual weather stations.
I have recently been publishing a series of reports on homogenisation of Australian temperature datasets at http://www.bomwatch.com.au and for 30 years, since 1993, under the guise of data homogenisation, scientists at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology have been fabricating data to find warming, that on a site by site basis does not exist.
Dr. Bill Johnston