The IPCC is just a big consensus manufacturing exercise.
National Association of Scholars
Why do we have a “climate emergency”? Is it real? Or is it a fantasy?
Judith A. Curry, one of our nation’s most prominent climate scientists, takes a sober look at the risks posed by a changing climate, how we assess the risks, the uncertainties, and the likely damage from the determined push to make “climate” a “climate emergency.”
Join the National Association of Scholars on Friday, August 25, at 3 pm ET to discuss “Restoring the Sciences: Rethinking Climate Risk.”
This event will feature Judith A. Curry, Professor Emerita of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, author of Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking our Response, and President of the Climate Forecast Applications Network. Joining us as co-host for the webinar will be Kathryn Kelly, President of Delta Toxicology, Inc., and co-chair of the National Association of Scholars’ Nevada Chapter.
Consensus and hubris often go hand in hand, and in this case they certainly do.
“Friday, August 25”. Do you mean 2023?
Streamed live on Aug 25, 2023 Restoring the Sciences Webinar Series
Why do we have a “climate emergency”? Is it real? Or is it a fantasy?
Judith A. Curry, one of our nation’s most prominent climate scientists, takes a sober look at the risks posed by a changing climate, how we assess the risks, the uncertainties, and the likely damage from the determined push to make “climate” a “climate emergency.”
Join the National Association of Scholars on Friday, August 25, at 3 pm ET to discuss “Restoring the Sciences: Rethinking Climate Risk.”
This event will feature Judith A. Curry, Professor Emerita of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, author of Climate Uncertainty and Risk: Rethinking our Response, and President of the Climate Forecast Applications Network. Joining us as co-host for the webinar will be Kathryn Kelly, President of Delta Toxicology, Inc., and co-chair of the National Association of Scholars’ Nevada Chapter.Featured playlist
Along with a certain amount of paycheck protecting. No reason to hire a climate scientist if there’s no climate scare.
Ha!
There Is No Climate Crisis
Tips And Suggestions
Tracking Climate Fraud
USHCN Code
Who Is Tony Heller?
← Protecting Prairie Dogs
Scientific Priorities
Posted on January 1, 2024 by Tony Heller
The climate of Boulder, Colorado hasn’t changed for at least 70 years, but the University of Colorado was awarded almost one million dollars to study the effects of climate change on prairie dogs.
https://realclimatescience.com/2024/01/scientific-priorities/#gsc.tab=0
No doubt the prairie dog “scientists” wrote a funding request suggesting climate change will drive that species into extinction- so this million dollar research was urgent!
I’ll see your study on Prairie Dogs and up you…
Biden Administration Sends Taxpayer Dollars to Fund Ballroom Dance Program in Peru to “Uplift” Trans Youth
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/biden-administration-sends-taxpayer-dollars-fund-ballroom-dance/
10 yard penalty for that photo
Forfeit the whole darn game !! GROSS !!
Admit it, you are crazy about the the one on the left.
Is that yo’ mama?
No, it’s your dad !
Karl Marx must be smiling.
Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide, no escape from reality?
Open your eyes, look up to the skies and see.
Almost prophetic, that. Keep up the good work and happy new year.
+100. I was thinking something similar after the first couple of lines of the article.
My favorite cover version
of Bohemian Rhapsody
is a ballad by a young, pretty girl
This is not better than Freddie Mercury
but is a change of pace.
Connie Talbert
Bohemian Rhapsody – Queen (Cover) Connie Talbot (youtube.com)
If you don’t like that try listening to this
other pretty girl
jazz version (2007)
Blanket — Jeff Beck with Imogen Heap
Jeff Beck featuring Imogen Heap – Blanket – HD 1080p (youtube.com)
jazz / rap version (1998)
Blanket — Urban Species and Imogene eap
Urban Species – Blanket (feat Imogen Heap) Live at Nulle Part Ailleurs) (youtube.com)
Coronavirus Rhapsody was a brilliant adaptation of the Queen lyrics.
I was thinking more along the lines of the Beatles “I’m the taxman”…
I’ll tax the air you breathe.
What we have are a few scientific voices in the [media] wilderness. I think it’s important to remember that the political elites use science as a fig leaf of respectability and authority.And the media does the rest.
How this can be broken is key. It could save a lot of riot and ruin.
It all comes back to integrity or rather the lack there of.
off topic- sorry, but yuh gotta see this- warning- it’s painful to watch
a Tony Heller video
America’s New Fighting Force
once again, it’s not showing what it should show- this happened a few days ago- then it fixed itself- it should be showing Heller’s latest video- by the time you look at it, it’ll probably be OK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj5g5djBmPM
They tried that during the Gulf War, installing women on the front line.
It all seemed to work fairly well as a ‘Jolly Fun Time to a Sunny Foreign Land‘ until, the shooting actually started and the girls were nowhere to be seen.
That’s a lie, they were queuing up outside the doctor’s office waiting for a pregnancy test.
And if it came back ‘negative’, they were seen there a month later having done everything in their power to make sure the next test was ‘positive’
Then, they would be sent home.
Question, addressed esp to the creature in the video: Why didn’t the boys think of that?
I would guess that they “didn’t feel safe coming to work” then?
For those of us who enjoyed M*A*S*H in its time – they called it “going for a Section Eight” and it didn’t work. At least that’s how Hollywood portrayed it.
Today, if a television writer proposed having fun with the concept of a dude in a dress, he or she would be Section Oned straight into Blackball, California, population You.
That thing is not a WOMAN, it is a MALE in a DRESS who was just promoted to full Colonel in the U.S. Space Command.
Which just raises the question: Was this man appointed for his abilities, or was he promoted because he ticked a box on the radical Left’s list?
Appointments like this do not inspire confidence in the people appointed. It looks purely political and ideological.
Madness. There is nothing, no thing, no part of you that isn’t your body. So talking about trans minds in whatever body is just bollocks. You are your body. Sadly this person, like many others, seems to not have gotten the memo.
You don’t have a soul.
You are a soul.
You have a body:
No, I am my body. There is no part of me that is independent of my body. There is no evidence for any notion of there being a soul. There is not even a coherent theory of how that could possibly work.
Have you ever heard of Shanti Devy?
Her story is worth looking into.
That should be Shanti Devi. (no edit button)
Well, to be technically correct, there are THREE parts to you:
Force or Farce?
Is THIS how we will take on the Chinese Communists and the Muslim Terrorists?
The Democrats are not interested in taking on the Chicoms or the Islamic terrorists.
Biden gets funding from the Chicoms, and gives funding to the Islamic terrorists.
It’s almost as if Joe Biden is trying to destroy the United States.
Every action he takes is harmful to the United States. And I don’t hear anyone in his administration complaining about the direction he is taking the nation.
One more year of this insanity, if we are lucky and vote Biden out of office. Biden and the Democrats have done tremendous damage to the Untied States in the last three years.
Ms. Curry thinks the climate is a problem which must be solved. I have repeatedly asked her why on her website comment section and she either ignores the question of posts a non-answer. As if she is trying to please everyone, which is how I see lukewarmers.
I think the climate is a serious problem
Perhaps te the most serious problem since h i t l e r
Not the climate itself, which has been improving for 50 years, but the 50 years of leftist climate scaremongering about a fake climate crisis, which we are told can only be solved by Nut Zero, which can only be implemented by fascism
Te two serious problems already in progress are Nut Zero and the fascism required to implement it.
RG
I bounce back and forth between an up-vote and a down-vote, settling on a no-vote.
You identified the two serious problems.
Let’s be honest now. Did you actually watch the interview? Maybe you did, but did you listen with confirmation bias, hearing what you expected to hear? Because JC explicitly agreed with you and made the case that there is a UN power play in action since the 1980s.
At no point did she even approach that position that you’re attributing to her. The closest she came was to say that she hopes we’ll find better cheaper cleaner energy sources by the twenty-second century.
I do somewhat understand where you’re coming from because in the past she has taken a more explicit line of “it’s a problem but we need a better solution” along the lines of Bjørn Lomborg. (Which, while I disagree with the premise, is not an extreme and indisputably wrong position, give the amount of uncertainty and the complexity of the climate system).
Once in a while you could consider highlighting the positive points before harping on what you consider to be errors. What I value the most is persuading as many people as possible that THERE IS NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY. For saying that, I praise her.
I have read too many Curry articles and watched some video interview. She is more restrained during interviews, but the articles had more time for thought. And she repeatedly says there is a climate problem that must be solved. She doesn’t think it is an emergency and she talks about uncertainty.
But she never admits there is no climate problem now — even though the climate has been improving for 50 years — and there are no data to support CAGW scaremongering
Have the courage to report there is no climate problem now. But if you think there is a climate problem, then please tell us why in detail.
The first 50 years of global warming was beneficial, so why would the next 50 years of global warming, if that even happens, be a problem?
Judith Curry lives in uncertainty world and she is wrong
It is certain the current climate is not a problem,
It is certain that 50 years of climate scaremongering has been wrong
It is certain that no one should take long term climate predictions seriously
It is certain the future climate will be warmer or colder, and most people prefer warmer.
The only uncertainty is data free long term climate predictions, which are not real science, based on data, and should not be used by politicians to reengineer the world’s economies. Long term climate predictions are climate astrology..
“But if you think there is a climate problem, then please tell us why in detail.
The first 50 years of global warming was beneficial, so why would the next 50 years of global warming, if that even happens, be a problem?
Judith Curry lives in uncertainty world and she is wrong
It is certain the current climate is not a problem,
It is certain that 50 years of climate scaremongering has been wrong
It is certain that no one should take long term climate predictions seriously
It is certain the future climate will be warmer or colder, and most people prefer warmer.
The only uncertainty is data free long term climate predictions, which are not real science, based on data, and should not be used by politicians to reengineer the world’s economies. Long term climate predictions are climate astrology..”
What’s happening.
I agree with everything you just said !!
It is a direct summation of all I have been saying.
I’ll have to double check my comment
If bnice2000 agrees with me
I must now be living in bizarroland
Yes, totally bizarre that you are actually fully correct.
Very unusual indeed !!
RG I bounce back and forth between an up-vote and a down-vote, settling on a no-vote.
bnice2000 gives my comments an upchuck
doesn’t even read them
The fact I quoted your comments, shows I do read them..
So you are back to normal… talking arrant nonsense.
And they really is a load of anti-science JUNK mixed in with the occasional piece of reality.
I don’t think that’s a good conclusion. Judith Curry has a respected voice and she’s willing to risk her life to advocate a rational response to whatever forces change the climate.
She is not a crazy person at a time when we desperately need sane voices.
And you’re sitting there butt-hurt because you don’t have your own view of the world validated on her web site. Her web site, not yours.
If you sit there waiting for someone with a voice to come along that agrees 100% with yours, you will never leave your home. None of us would with a similar attitude.
And if a scientist waited for some sort of “consensus” before posting or before learning, the end result would be no better than what we see now in the UN, or the Al-BBC-Jazeera, or the star-struck ramblings of Michael Mann.
Curry is a hero. Not enough to make me enjoy Indian food, but no one is perfect.
Amen Joe! Except that I love curry rice.
Most of what she says is pretty close to the reality…
… very refreshing from a climate scientist.
Curry is a hero in her own mind
In print she claims there is a climate problem that must be fixed, in her articles.
She refuses to tell us what that climate problem is
In interviews she often sounds like a different person, which annoys me.
She’s not a winner in my book
Yes, she is restrained and scientific in interviews
In print Curry there is a climate problem that must be fixed, in her mind, but that belief is not supported by data, so is not real science, and is WRONG
With the lukewarmers like Curry, the ONLY debate with Climate Howler leftists becomes how fast to fix the climate problem … and we conservatives lose that debate every time. The leftists say “why wait” and the lukewarmers instantly lose the debate. This has been happening since the 1970s.
Why do we have to label ourselves or Curry? The whole point of this is “it is not an emergency.” We have generations left to figure out energy.
That’s the only debate that matters now. And we’re losing it because universities are no longer interested in critical thinking.
In the meantime, unless we win that particular debate, we had better teach our children to speak Mandarin.
No. The whole point is that there is no evidence of climate ”change” at all.
A few ”melting glaciers” is not climate change. It’s a few melting glaciers. nothing new. The only ”change” is perhaps a light increase in precipitation and perhaps a slight increase in Tmax in some places in the last few years.
. :The whole point is that there is no evidence of climate ”change” at all:
Now that is a true climate denier
And dingbat.
Climate is pretty much the same as the cooler latter part of the MWP.
And FAR cooler than most of the last 10,000 years.
Don’t let your climate DENIAL kick in in the ****, yet again !
I see. When it starts raining regularly in the Atacama, get back to me.
Ok dickie-bird.
In what way has the global climate changed that can be scientifically proven, (not by models or random correlations) be to of human causation?
Apart from a very slight but highly beneficial natural warming that started at the end of the LIA, coldest period in 10,000 years…
… and a bit of glacier melting of glaciers that mostly didn’t even exist before the LIA…
… in what way has the global climate changed ???
Seems to me that you will be totally incapable of proving that Mike is wrong.
And by the way, yapping like a demented chihuahua, like most climate cultists do, is not scientific evidence either.
To answer that question, you first have to define “global climate”. Good luck with that! The CAGW types will say that GAT “IS global climate!” As ridiculous as that sounds, they’ve been getting away with it for decades.
“[says?] there is a climate problem that must be fixed,….
… but that belief is not supported by data, so is not real science, and is WRONG”
As I repeatedly keep saying.
Thank you. !
If that is true, then she is part of the problem. No ifs or buts. It has already been established (not just suggested) that there is no problem with the climate…
The paper, A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming, said in its abstract, “In conclusion on the basis of observational data, the climate crisis that, according to many sources, we are experiencing today, is not evident yet.”
“With the lukewarmers… “
Which dickie-bird is one of….
There are not enough scientists who speak out against the predictions of global warming doom
Richard Lindzen does
William Happer does
They don’t deny that more CO2 causes global warming. They use the HITRAN database to calculate the future warming from more CO2 will be harmless just like the warming after 1975 has been
They do not say there is a climate problem because real science can’t identify one
The last thing we need is a real scientist saying there is a climate problem that must be fixed, in her writing.
In the one Curry interview I watched, she was promoting her $35 book, and talked mainly about uncertainty, that seems missing from modern climate science.
She seemed like a new person to me but then I though that if she said there was no climate problem, that would hurt her book sales
In my opinion Curry is compromised by financial interests (climate business and book sales) that lead to a middle of the road lukewarmer position .
She gets criticized by the left anyway
But she doesn’t help us Climate Realists
by writing that there is a climate problem
She stands in the middle of the road
and gets hit by traffic from both sides.
Poor dickie-bird.. thinks radiation is the only energy transfer in the atmosphere.
Thinks HITRAN is all there is.
Just… WOW !!
Get outside, dude.. feel the breeze !!
Judith makes money from climate risk assessment. It is in her interest to push climate change. She is not alone in lack of understanding of the precession cycle and how it shifts the peak solar intensity across the globe as well as the inherent thermal lags in the whole system. So she goes with CO2 as the accepted driver of climate change and she rides that wave but offering nuanced solutions rather than the one grand scheme of installing wind and solar generators to fix the weather..
Agree but manmade CO2 emissions are one cause of global warming and planetary geometry is irrelevant in 50 to 100 year periods.
Curry’s business required a middle of the road approach to climate change in an attempt to please everyone. That’s what we get.
I believe her interviews are biased by financial self interest.
“but manmade CO2 emissions are one cause of global warming “
Scientific evidence please. !
Will some vague numbers scribbled on a piece of paper spewed out of a computer do?
How about 50 years of infrared gas spectroscopy measurements?
Or shall I write to Richard Lindzen and William Happer and tell them bnice2000 thinks they are CO2 fools?
So.. NO EVIDENCE
Ok.
Just calls to authority.. and an ignorance of basic physics where you think gas spectroscopy is the only thing that matters.
That is SAD !!
And now explain how the radiative properties of CO2 cause warming.
Yes it absorbs/blocks a bit in a tiny thin spectrum… (pretty much saturated at 280ppm), so only absorbs on the wings…
…but actual measurement (which you obviously can’t handle) show a corresponding increase in the atmospheric window.
No evidence of any energy being “trapped” whatsoever.
So you cannot even comprehend a simple question?
Here it is again. This time try to concentrate…
You.. “but manmade CO2 emissions are one cause of global warming “
CO2 denier!
Evidence abyss. !!
Idiot.
In theory only. Not in observation. Therefore, why mention it?
The increase of CO2 since 1975 and the rise of the global average temperature correlate well, as the lab spectroscopy measurements predicted,
But never mind that
Look over there
— I see a squirrel
See imaginary squirrels everywhere.
Thinks the atmosphere is the same as a lab jar.
And thinks a tiny short-term correlation is “evidence”
NOT A SCIENTIST, are you dickie-bird.
Did you know that actual lab measurement show that any possible radiative effect of CO2 basically stops at 280ppm. (see chart below)
Did you know that warming by atmospheric CO2 has never been observed or measured anywhere on the planet.
CO2 warming is a theoretical construct based on a radiation-only atmosphere…
.. an atmosphere that DOES NOT EXIST !
If you were capable of understanding actual science, you would realise that.
But I don’t hold any hope of that happening.
No.
Climate models provide ample proof that CO2 is not causing warming because the warming is not “global’ as they predict. Most warming is occurring in the Greenland plateau in January. It has warmed from freezing certain anatomy of brass monkeys to just bitterly cold. The cause of the warming is the same reason the elevation of the ice is increasing. Antarctica and Southern Ocean have sustained cooling trends.
This is precisely the time period when the precession cycle provides noticeable change. Summer solstice sunshine in the Northern Hemisphere started increasing 500 years ago. It was about 100 years later that the current warming trend was observed in measurements and historical observations of sea level. The trend will accelerate for the next 5,000 years and continue for the next 9,000 years. Warming will continue until the permanent ice moves south and down the mountains again. Just like it did 120ka ago.
No climate model predicted the increase in autumn snowfall in the NH:
No climate prognosticator has predicted record snowfall will be a feature of weather reports for the next 9,000 years, which is inevitable due to the changing precession cycle:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-snow-gives-anchorage-record-230500932.html
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/12/04/moscow-shatters-daily-record-snowfall-a83301
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-59243836
So she goes with CO2 as the accepted driver of climate change.
Yes. And one must ask.. why? Maybe we would ask her to define climate ”change”
No one ever answers me when I ask them to.
Climate change is SE Michigan winters significantly warmer than in the 1970s and shoveling snow off out 100 foot driveway three times a winter instead of once a week. Actually the wife does the shoveling and thinks it’s good exercise. I have convinced her men in Michigan usually die while shoveling snow.
That’s our climate change and we love it.
I could not care less about a global average temperature that no one lives in
Oh what a load of nonsense
“I think the climate is a serious problem”
What an idiotic anti-science statement. !
Why put it in ? Or was it a quote ??
If you had said that the “climate agenda” is a serious problem, as your last line suggests, I would agree with you.
Remember.. many things you say show that you are a silly lukewarmer yourself.
The insult posting lunatic returns
Climate is a problem because it led to Nut Zero which will require fascism to implement, and it will still fail
The climate itself is wonderful
Fear of the future climate change is the problem
I’ve been saying that for 26 years.
Before you were born.
You made the idiotic statement.
Don’t blame me !
And it directly contradicts everything you said in a post further up the page.
Weird !!!
You need to be sedated
I don’t contradict myself.
You do takes sentences out of context
and reverse their intended meaning.
Leftists do that to Donald Trump
Are you a leftist?
You took my sentence out of context and reversed the intended meaning. You are a boozer and a loser.
Poor dickie-bird.
caught out in a massive self-contradiction.
… and goes on a petulant huffy-rant.
Do you know how incredibly childish you are looking !! 🙂
Climate did not lead to nut zero. Moronic misinterpretations and outright pseudoscience by Mann et al did. The climate didn’t do anything.
The rising CO2 level and warming temperatures since 1975 allowed the creation of the global warming emergency hoax.
Real science tells us more CO2 impedes Earth’s ability to cool itself.
But real science does not predict any emergency unless worst case assumptions and theories are attached to known characteristics of CO2.
And that is exactly what happened.
It is all based on global warming since 1975, and the very likely fact that rising CO2 was one cause of that harmless warming.
And that’s ALL it says. It is YOU and your kind filling in the imaginary dots.
Yet another utterly meaningless statement.
Did you always have trouble with the dictionary?
The only known characteristic of co2 is that it is a radiative gas. No one knows what it does to the planet’s temperature. Stop making stuff up.
“Real science tells us more CO2 impedes Earth’s ability to cool itself.”
UTTER BS !!
Well said Mike.
dickie-bird is not really “there” with cause and effect.
or much else that requires rational scientific thought.
bnice2000 the website junkyard dog pulls a sentence out of context and goes on the attack, making himself appear to be a fool … once again … as usual.
I’ll paraphrase my prior comment, typing slowly, so even you can keep up.
The (warming) climate is a problem because wild guess predictions of climate doom have been abused to promote Nut Zero. Nut Zero is an impossible green dream that can only be forced upon us by fascist governments.
I tried to use small words here, so even a 12 year old child could understand my comment
Go out and find a 12 year old child to read this comment and explain it to you
”The (warming) climate is a problem because wild guess predictions of climate doom have been abused to promote Nut Zero.”
So the (warming) climate is not a problem then. Got it. It’ like pulling teeth isn’t it? 😀
Huffy-puffy rant at being caught out in a massive self-contradiction.. HILARIOUS.
YOU TYPED IT… you wear it.
Get over yourself. !!
quote directly from your post.
It is the response to the fabrications of the climate agenda which are the problem.
“Climate” is not a problem at all.
Your comment remains totally idiotic.
The IPCC is just a big consensus manufacturing exercise.
Manufacturing consensus is a political act, and the IPCC has naught to do with science. It does attempt to play science on TV, and a lot of dummies salute and click their heels, but we should properly fart in its general direction.
The IPCC was formed by the UNFCCC and briefed to identify the best evidence for man-made climate change. Far too many people—almost everyone I would guess—thinks it is supposed to assess the evidence that there is (man-made) climate change. It is not and it was never intended to. That determination had already been made before it was formed. It is the reason it was formed. So we can hardly be outraged that it is a “consensus manufacturing exercise”. That is its avowed purpose.
To be honest I am too busy being outraged at the journalists and campaigners who wildly exagerate the claims of the IPCC. So much so that I can often use the IPCC assessment reports to rebut the people who try to discuss climate alarm with me. Jim Skea, the chairman of the IPCC has himself issued rebukes about the exaggerations. If the IPCC is telling us campaigners and journalists go too far that is a finding we can take seriously.
X5-class solar flare and earthquake in Japan of magnitude 7.5.
Yes are you concluding that there’s a link, Ren?
Kudos to Judith Curry.
“The IPCC is just a big consensus manufacturing exercise”
The IPCC is step 2 of Cotter’s 7 stages of change (build a guiding coalition). If you look at the whole climate change program you can see every one of his stages being used.
I highly recommend Don Surber’s column today for an entertaining eye opener.
Don Surber has a very good take on our slide into oblivion.
Worst century ever
“Roadside bombers and tsunamis. Oh God, how I miss those Commies.”
JAN 1, 2024
Don Surber
https://donsurber.substack.com/p/worst-century-ever
Continued talk of “solutions”… as if there is a problem….
Solutions to natural climate variability ???
Yeah.. right !!!
Solutions to natural climate variability ???
Yes, let’s find a solution to rain.
I have one….. an Umbrella !! 🙂
Hurricane Risk ?? No evidence that there is much change in Hurricane risk..
Just trying to forecast them as accurately as possible is the best way to start to mitigate risk.
Sea level rise risk ?? at a steady 2mm or so per year… PANIC !!