Nobel Laureate (Physics 2022) Dr. John Clauser was to present a seminar on climate models to the IMF on Thursday and now his talk has been summarily canceled. According to an email he received last evening, the Director of the Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund, Pablo Moreno, had read the flyer for John’s July 25 zoom talk and summarily and immediately canceled the talk. Technically, it was “postponed.”
By: Admin – Climate Depot
https://co2coalition.org/news/nobel-laureate-silenced/
Nobel Laureate (Physics 2022) Dr. John Clauser was to present a seminar on climate models to the IMF on Thursday and now his talk has been summarily cancelled. According to an email he received last evening, the Director of the Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund, Pablo Moreno, had read the flyer for John’s July 25 zoom talk and summarily and immediately canceled the talk. Technically, it was “postponed.”
Dr. Clauser had previously criticized the awarding of the 2021 Nobel Prize for work in the development of computer models predicting global warming and told President Biden that he disagreed with his climate policies. Dr. Clauser has developed a climate model that adds a new significant dominant process to existing models. The process involves the visible light reflected by cumulus clouds that cover, on average, half of the Earth. Existing models greatly underestimate this cloud feedback, which provides a very powerful, dominant thermostatic control of the Earth’s temperature.
More recently, he addressed the Korea Quantum Conference where he stated, “I don’t believe there is a climate crisis” and expressed his belief that “key processes are exaggerated and misunderstood by approximately 200 times.” Dr. Clauser, who is recognized as a climate change skeptic, also became a member of the board of directors of the CO2 Coalition last month, an organization that argues that carbon dioxide emissions are beneficial to life on Earth.
#
May 5, 2023 via CO2 Coalition: Dr. John F. Clauser, recipient of the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics…received the Nobel Prize, along with two others, for work done in the 1970s that showed “quantum entanglement” allowed particles such as photons, effectively, to interact at great distances, seemingly to require communication exceeding the speed of light. …
According to Dr. Clauser, “The popular narrative about climate change reflects a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people. Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists. In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis. There is, however, a very real problem with providing a decent standard of living to the world’s large population and an associated energy crisis. The latter is being unnecessarily exacerbated by what, in my opinion, is incorrect climate science.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It seems that Dr Clauser had better make clear that he is not depressed and doesn’t possess any dirt on Hillary Clinton. Maybe throw in that he rejects suicide as a viable alternative under any circumstances.
Maybe look for a more decent, reputable organisation to give his talk to – the IMF is neither
But it’s something the IMF really needs to hear.
You don’t understand. The IMF is not interested in science if it runs contrary to their agenda.
They only follows economics of the *Austrian* kind also
To cancel is to deny. Yet they call those they deny “deniers”. What a sick joke it all is. At this point to be canceled by those boobs is a medal of honor.
https://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2023/07/23/the-rot-thickens/
Er well, there are other likely places like the World Bank or the UN.
And of course each country has it’s own version of the US EPA.
Why the list of eager audiences is almost endless!
Well, if a physics Nobel Laureate doesn’t know what he’s talking about, who does? None of those who’ve cancelled him, clearly!
Hey! The great Nobel Laureate Michael E. Mann (aka Alfred E. Newman) says there most definitely is a climate crisis.
Dr. Mann only pretended to be a Nobel Laureate, kind of like doing his Nature trick.
I don’t think “Mike’s nature trick” was a reference to something that Mann did.
I think the reference was to another Mike.
Mann just glommed someone else’s efforts, as he had / has a habit of doing repeatedly.
?
Pretty sure it was Mann.
Yes it was.
My bad, shouldn’t rely on old memory only.
The ugly truth –
https://climateaudit.org/2009/11/20/mike%E2%80%99s-nature-trick/
Phil Jones of CRU infamy coined the phrase “Mike’s nature trick” when augmented Mickey Mann’s graphical fraud,where he had truncated Briffa’s inconvenient tree ring proxy data and blended it with part of the thermometer record.
Jones went one step further in creating the world famous hockey stick cover graphic for the 2000 WMO climate report.
He actually grafted the two datasets together ,with smoothing, and used the same line type and colour for his bastard proxy line. That was out and out scientific fraud.
As well a world wide coverage, the fraudulent graphic was posted to every single home in Canada.
If Michael Mann is a Nobel Laureate, I’m Superman.
griff just performed an Amazon search for kryptonite!
Based on the if/then logic in your statement, I predict you will be immune to kryptonite.
He’s not, so don’t go trying to leap over tall buildings.
The IPCC was awarded the “Prize”. The head of the IPCC (Pachauri) then sent out a letter of thanks to the hundreds of people who made contributions (including my tennis mate who previously worked at the NASA Asheville facility.)
When the IPCC and the Nobel committee both went on record denying Mikey was a “prize winner” he still used that “honor”; e.g. in his litigation with Mark Steyn.
Well M E Mann is a clueless twit and he got a Nobel Prize Sarc
No he didn’t. He is a clueless twit and a lair !!
Cannot have non-expert IMFers who fund green stuff and not third world coal fired power plants hear climate ‘truth’ from an expert. Nope. Not allowed.
Not allowed by the Director of the “Independent” Evaluation Office of the IMF, Pablo Moreno. I’m sure Mr. Moreno has much more expertise in climate modeling than does that nobody physicist Dr. John Clauser.
Black and brown people must die, they are too numerous. Don’t get in the way of the global reduction agenda. If we let them have coal power they will breed like rabbits. I’ll need all that money for vaccine research . (Bill Gates)
“Shock journalism pseudoscience” is a bit less dated than Cargo Cult Science.
I am aware of no scientific expertise resident in the IMF that qualifies them to pass judgement on the scientific opinions of a Nobel laureate (a real one) in Physics. That means we now live in an era where major economic decisions involving important scientific concepts are made with no basis in scientific principles.
Now what could go wrong with that?
IMF decisions (like all decisions from Leftist organizations) are based on their truth, not facts. [Thank AOC for that one!] We are seeing the results of that sort of decisionmaking all around us.
Yes, we have now arrived at a point where those in responsible positions sincerely believe that it is appropriate to stifle anything that is inconsistent with their OWN opinions. AOC is certainly and example but so is the Congresswoman who this week declared that “not all speech is Free Speech”.
I have it on good authority (alarmists) that it is only the left that respects and believes science — or at least what they think science is.
“I am aware of no scientific expertise resident in the IMF that qualifies them to pass judgement on the scientific opinions of a Nobel laureate (a real one) in Physics.”
Which is why it is a completely inappropriate place to present a talk about a new non-peer reviewed climate model.
Too bad there is no such thing as a peer reviewed climate model.
The ones we hand can’t even replicate known historical climates. Even with the help of hundreds of tune-able variables.
In fact, the climate models are all doing well. The CMIP3 multi-model average, which now has quite a bit of age about it, is pretty much spot-on.
BS.. the people with the models control the FAKE surface data.
You really are a naive little mind, aren’t you. !
The use of 6 Chimps has made the models much much worse.
Any idea how many runs they do to get a “pretty spot on” result.
I mean, as with advanced qualification exams, candidates get one submission of their work, and that stands as the measure of their required knowledge, and a pass / fail judgement.
(“Hey, Harry – this looks a bit on the hot side, mate. Try turning those clouds up to 11 will ya.”)
Also, I haven’t seen the practice performed anywhere where submissions can be “pooled”, and the middle-level score of knowledge gets accredited to all the candidates.
The climate models cannot even agree on the actual average temperature of the earth. If they can’t agree on that, then they cannot agree on the temperature anomaly, until of course they are “tuned” (SWAGged) to “agree.”
Only if you define “spot on” as being barely within the confidence interval.
The models which are “tweaked” so they reproduce the past, you mean?
He was going to give a seminar on everything wrong with “climate” models..
They probably didn’t want to sit through a 2 day presentation. !
Realising their whole monetary policy was based on a massive scam…
… that wouldn’t have been “safe” for them to hear, either… Might hurt their feelings!
I think that sums it up nicely. 🙂
Izaac, that depends on who is making decisions on what is ‘appropriate’. If the IMF is making economic decisions based on concepts of climate change, I conclude that the IMF certainly should listen to the opinions of a Nobel laureate in Physics; physics has a fundamental contribution to all climate science. Your interpretation may differ; my own science background leads me to conclude that the IMF is wrong in this decision, and can justifiably be accused of bias not based on science as they seem to be deliberately avoiding hearing an important opinion.
The issue is about a recognized physicist’s views on a subject, not the presentation of a paper or publication of a report, so peer review is irrelevant in this case. Peer review has also unfortunately been shown to have been politicized in recent years to the extent that I no longer consider it a reliable evaluative standard. Again, your opinion may differ.
Len,
physics is sufficiently broad that even having a nobel prize in physics does not mean that you are an expert in climate change. Knowing about entanglement in quantum mechanics doesn’t translate into being equally knowable about other areas of physics. Roger Penrose for example has a nobel prize in physics but still talks nonsense about consciousness.
The IMF should certainly hear a wide range of opinions but there should be some evidence of expertise before inviting someone to speak.
“evidence of expertise”
You know, like maybe a Nobel Laurent in physics.
The very foundation of atmospheric science.
Like Greta Thunberg?!?
Would this be evidence of expertise?
“Dr. Clauser has developed a climate model that adds a new significant dominant process to existing models.”
I would consider myself disrespectful if I picked one field in which you have worked and excelled, Izaak, and stated that you were therefore ignorant in all others. Like many of us, it is reasonable to conclude that you have expertise in more than one field.
To judge John Clauser as you have is analogous to claiming that Richard Feynman should never have been asked to help analyze the Challenger explosion because he gained his fame in atomic physics, what could he know about evaluation of o-rings? Or claiming that Elon Musk can have no expertise in rocket science because he designed a very successful on-line payment platform. Check Clauser’s cv; he has worked in many different fields of physics since his quantum entanglement research for which he won the Nobel prize.
I would go a long way to hear the opinions of someone with that much knowledge of physics on the existence, or not, of a climate crisis. I am dismayed that the IMF instead presented the optics of clamping their hands over their ears with a ‘I don’t want to hear it!’ attitude, when they had the chance of hearing his opinions and why he holds them.
They will now be making decisions with less knowledge, not more, than they would have had if they’d heard him out. This simply cannot be ‘a better way’, and cannot be a choice based on open-minded rational logic.
Just another step towards sacrificing children to placate Moloch.
Joe Biden is already sacrificing children on the southern border, but I’m not sure who he is trying to placate. Probably one of his paymasters.
Endorsed by a once-liberal Supreme Court, the U.S. has already been conducting sanctioned child sacrifice for 50 years! About 60 million so far since 1973, about equal to the number of deaths directly caused by WWII, the deadliest military conflict in history. Per 100,000 women, the rate for blacks is roughly 4x that of non-Hispanic whites. Regressive leftist social policy caused this. So who are the racists? Yes, I’m talking to you, Planned Parenthood.
Since medical practice has now succumbed to this as well as to the mutilation of children, and a number of states now have so-called “death with dignity” laws, I continue to refuse to sign a living will (also called a physician’s directive or advanced healthcare directive) or a DNR. I don’t trust no stinking post-modern physician or hospital to make a terminal decision for me.
Just two months ago, I was at a state-of-the-art university medical school facility (part of the university system for which I work) and observed a handwritten sign pointing to the “NON-BINARY” restroom. If a medical school and their students can’t tell the difference between a male and a female, we are in deep trouble!
Stay away from that plug, Martha; the Dr. says its just a broken leg!
The side that stifles descent is the side that is wrong.
Will all the climate NutZero alarmists then be stuck on their mountaintops?
Bingo and amen to that Brock.
The behavior of those in the climate alarmist camp by itself tells us that there is monkey business going on. The blocking of Twitter accounts that we see with individuals like Mickey Mann is telling as is the IPCC’s omission of science that debunks the CAGW narrative.
Even as a non-scientist with only amateur interest in it myself, it is all I need to know. If all of this is the result of political pressure and the promise of lots of $$$$ from the govts of the world (including the U.S. and U.K.), it only serves to prove that science is corruptible by those govts. In my mind, that is totally inconsistent with the principles of what are supposed to be democratic governments. It is in fact Orwellian.
They’re all for descent into a stone age economy. It’s dissent that they stifle.
Spellcheck’s a biotch ain’t it?
Yes, let’s hope that Spellcheck is not ground zero for what we’re in for with ubiquitous A.I. rollout.
Wasn’t that a popular book? “The Descent of Man”
I thought it was “The Dissent of Mann”.
When you control the media, government, and various institutions you make (up) the rules. It’s time we extend boycotts to all of them. It’s the only tool we have considering the courts support an ideology instead of the laws. Anyone that believes is OK to censor because it doesn’t fit your opinion needs to be taught a lesson.
Stop voting for political parties and you strike a blow to government and media and a blow for democracy and freedom at the same time.
The only tool we have is science.
There are a lot of tools in science.
And there are also a lot of TOOLS in “the science”.
Too bad that when it comes to climate, the alarmist refuse to use that tool.
Instead they rely on unvalidated models that can’t even replicate the past.
And the UN IPCC’s own studies show that the models that come the closest to reality are the ones with the lowest ECSs. Then IPCC rejects those to get an estimate of 2.5 to 4℃ for their ECS range. Marxist liars.
“The only tool we have is science.”
And you are empty handed.
You have been asked many times for “the science”…
….. nada, nothing, an empty mindless abyss. !
Wow! Do you have blinders on! This is not at all about science. Corrupted pseudo-science is a tool. I regularly see this in higher education where I work every day.
What would you know?
If you´re not part of the “98%”, you will be excluded from the good company. Just took a quick stroll past Wikipedia 11 edits have been made to him today.
For my own part, I have just been deleted from a debate here in Denmark for showing the model Fritz Vahrenholt uses in his 2035 predictions, Maybe it was because I asked the question, what if the Paris Agreement was made in 2016 and not 2015, would they have set their fictitious goal at 1.6 instead of 1.5 …
All that “97% consensus” says to me is that 96.9% of “climate scientists” surveyed don’t have any conclusions themselves about AGW, and just so just defer to the 0.1% who loudly proclaim doomsday weather 100 years from now.
Science is not about consensus. It is all about doubt.
In other words, this coming from Pablo Moreno:
“Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind’s already made up.”
I think that should be, “Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind’s already been made up for me.”
I recall my pop using that line about his in-laws back in the ’60s
I said this was inevitable after Dr Clauser spoke out following his Nobel prize award
It is sad and sickening, yet what we have come to expect from the Marxist blob in these dystopian times
What the blob doesn’t realise, is that each time they martyr a great scientist to their deceitful climate emergency false god, they actually coalesce the realists, the fence sitters, the open minded more solidly together, in greater solidarity, the exact opposite of what they aim to achieve by demonising those who dare speak truths and facts
I personally have never felt more disgusted and ashamed of my so called fellow scientists and Engineers who actively seek to destroy peoples lives and good names, all in the name of the unscientific, unproven climate emergency
Nulla est enim maior turpitudo, quam ea quae fiunt nomine avaritiae et doli
Or, pehaps, in the name of “continued employment”!
OK I bite –
For there is no greater shame than that which is done in the name of avarice and deceit
?
Another Streisand effect in the making.
The ClimateCult™ members are slow learners.
So far, the censors are winning.
What happens when somebody reports censorship? The media censors the report.
Remember when we believed the internet would increase knowledge? Remember information wants to be free? Those ideas are deader than Ludwig von Mises.
The Internet has gone through a predictable lifecycle. Early on, it was a novelty, and the frauds and scammers hadn’t caught onto it yet. It and social media have now become rampantly corrupt.
Now, it is hard to shop for almost anything on the Internet, especially if a price seems really good. You have to consult the scam-checker sites, Better Business Bureau, and research the “About us” pages of the on-line retailer. I even go to Google Maps Streetview to see if the business is physically real. Amazon can’t be trusted, because they don’t seriously vet the sellers and let all sorts of garbage be sold through them.
As for social media, I have deleted all accounts.
Unfortunately, children are being handed phones and tablets at ever-younger ages, and most never take a course in Internet and social media scams and frauds, or how to block indecent or dangerous content, and how to evade/ignore destructive “pop” culture. Many parents and practically all public schools fail to protect children from these.
Too bad he didn’t wait until his climate talk to express his criticism of the climate models.
I expect the BBC, CNN and the grauniad are apoplectic with rage that Dr. Clauser has been silenced, and look forward to their coverage of this injustice.
They’ll just wheel out Attenborough to challenge the good docter!
He’s about as qualified as Clauser to talk about climate science, so take your pick.
He’s way more qualified, as he’s actually a scientist who has studied the subject. Whereas Attenborough just repeats what he is paid to say.
Attenborough is a AGW cult zealot presenter, scientific knowledge basically NIL..
Clausen is a Nobel Laureate in physics.
So many magnitudes more qualified that the comparison cannot really be made.
We know you think “climate science” is all about zealot cult mantra…
… but it should actually about science and physics.
… of which you have proven to be totally empty.
Attenborough is on record from a decade ago as saying his views on global warming catastrophe (or whatever it was called back then) were learned and from one of his camera operators.
Much more credible than a Nobel Laureate?
Geoff S
What qualifies one to talk about climate science? A scientist of Clauser quality can’t weigh in on climate science?
What official title designates a real climate scientist?
Standard operating procedure for those who don’t like the message: Attack the messenger.
That’s good to know you think like this. No doubt had Professor Clauser come out and said the computer models were accurate and the World was going to overheat you would have dismissed his opinion as worthless.
I’ve taken to regularly selecting an Attenborough doco for late-night playing.
I click on “watch now”, get it running, then turn off the vision, just have the sound on, and voila – insomnia overcome in about 4 minutes flat.
I’ve been able to flush all my sleeping tablets down the sink.
Dr. Clauser:
DO YOUR TALKS ANYWAY. Via videos posted on sites such as this one and CO2 Coalition’s and Jo Nova’s and Paul Homewood’s and Pierre Gosselin’s and CFACT’s and many others.
All of us then sharing them (creating, thus, the “Streisand Effect” mentioned by Mr. Hultquist — heh, heh) will GET THE TRUTH OUT.
Long live data-driven science!
Here is one forum that would be worthy of your talk, I believe:
https://www.youtube.com/@DDPmeetings
I think it worth noting that a growing number of very serious physicists like Koonin, Clauser, and Dyson have looked at ‘climate science’ and concluded publicly that its ‘alarming’ conclusions are a crock.
Mann, on the other hand, started out to earn a Ph.D in physics and couldn’t cut it.
Could that explain why Mikey is so aggro towards more highly-qualified, experienced and well-regarded people?
Mann, Dessler and Hayhoe among others are desperately insecure. They never left their troubled adolescence.
Yeah, but they are not climate scientists according to at least one person commenting here, so according to him, they can’t know what they are talking about because they are not climate scientists. Just being an expert in physics is not good enough for him.
I really like the sound of Dr. Clauser. he sounds almost normal, even for an American!
From the article: “2022 Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. John Clauser declares his climate dissent: ‘There is no real climate crisis’ – Warns ‘climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience’”
There is no way the climate alarmists are going to let someone like Dr. Clauser speak his mind. They and their climate change narrative can’t handle the truth.
I think the tide is slowly turning, despite all the censorship.
Yep, just read the comments on YouTube videos about Climate Change: people are beginning to deride the Alarmists. Finally, I think we are seeing the end of the scam.
The IMF clearly have their own society controlling agenda, and the climate change narrative is simply one of their manipulative levers.
They certainly have zero interest in discussing the accuracy of climate models.
The most important feature of atmospheric physics is the formation of the level of free convection that enables the heat engine producing cumulus clouds during convective instability then the persistence of the high altitude cirrus clouds after the cumulus cloud disperses.
No ocean surface can sustain a temperature above 30C.
Upon pointing out to the CSIRO that their ACCESS climate model has open ocean surface sustaining well above 30C they provided a reference to the GISS model that has 20 vertical atmospheric layers on the basis of it being an impressive resolution. However such low resolution would not have the capability to form a meaningful LFC even if the process was incorporated because each layer will span 5C or more over a tropical ocean.
The corruption of science runs deep. I would like to see Clauser’s proposed presentation. A balanced press would be all over this. What has got the IMF so concerned.
Manabe knows climate models are rubbish but he still accepted the 2021 Nobel Prize. He would do the world a great service to renounce his award and unite with Clauser on the side of science. Has Manabe got the moral fibre to take a stand!
If the CAGW alarmists are so confident in their work they would welcome skeptics to their talks. Alarmists should be able to crush any skeptic because the science is settled. Since the alarmists run away from skeptics it proves alarmists are not only liars and cheats but also cowards.
Exactly.
Does the IMF not understand or appreciate how this will backfire on them? It’s so blatantly obvious why they’ve ‘postponed’ the talk that they’re just making themselves look like complete idiots, which of course they are.
People are going to ask why this has happened and it will take them very little time to work it out. Talk about the IMF shooting themselves in the foot. Both feet, in fact.
Pablo Moreno joined the Independent Evaluation Office as Director in May 2023. A fast work!
He holds a PhD and a BA in economics from Complutense University of Madrid, and an M.A. in public administration from George Mason University on a Fulbright scholarship. Undoubtedly highly qualified for an Independent Evaluation.
I wonder if he has the authority to cancel anything. If not, he shows a proper initiative.
Why is George Mason University implicated in so many controversies about communication of science, particularly with blocking dissent about the present Establishment scenario?
Does anyone have a handy link to a GM statement of purpose type of document? One that helps explain their motivation in this? Is it more than money? Geoff S
You can censor reality but you can’t avoid the consequences of censoring reality. The consequences including wasting resources by curtailing the use of fossil fuels instead of devising means to efficiently manage fresh water.
Well, so much for real science, and freedom of speech.
It’s pretty sad that almost all international agencies funded primarily by the US are actively working to weaken or destroy our country. It’s time for the next GOP admin to completely remove funding. No incrementalism. Zero for IMF, UN, etc. World governance is their only goal, the thin vail of altruism is basically transparent now.