The IPCC, Climate Change and Solar Sophistry July 31, 2010
Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.Tags: climate change, Dr Tim ball, global warming, ipcc
trackback
The IPCC, Climate Change and Solar Sophistry
Dr Tim Ball
By Dr. Tim Ball
CFP, July 28, 2010
Give light, and the darkness will disappear of itself. Erasmus (1466 – 1536)
Control of the science and content of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports was planned from before it was officially formed in 1988. Exposure of manipulation to achieve desired results also began early.
Benjamin Santer graduated from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), where Tom Wigley supervised his PhD. He returned to the US working at the government’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He was appointed lead author of Chapter 8, titled “Detection of Climate Change and Attribution of Causes” of the 1995 IPCC Report. It turned out Santer had significantly altered the meaning of the Chapter from that agreed on by the other authors. As Avery and Singer noted in 2006, “Santer single-handedly reversed the ‘climate science’ of the whole IPCC report and with it the global warming political process! The ‘discernible human influence’ supposedly revealed by the IPCC has been cited thousands of times since in media around the world, and has been the ‘stopper’ in millions of debates among nonscientists.”
Read the rest here
Every credible scientific organization on this planet supports the findings of the IPCC panel (e.g., the National Academy of Science, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, etc., etc.). Name a single scientific institution that refutes the IPCC conclusions. Leave out “think tanks” funded by an antiquated fossil-fuel industry clinging to the past along with individual “scientists” whose pay-checks derive from the same. If you cannot name a single, credible, pier-reviewed institution (which you will not be able to do), then please shut up.
Hi, Randall.
The experimental data themselves do not support the findings of the IPCC panel (e.g., the National Academy of Science, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, etc., etc.).
Here are a couple of summary papers for you to read if you want to learn from the precise, space-age measurements:
1. “Composition of the solar interior: Information from isotope ratios”, Proceedings of the 2002 SOHO/GONG Conference on Helioseismology: ESA SP-517 (2003) 345-348:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0410717v1
2. “Earth’s heat source – The Sun” Energy & Environment 20 (2009) 131-144: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.0704
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://myprofile.cos.com/manuelo09
Hi Randall,
So in other words, you only want to consider the opinions of those sucking off the government teat. Those whose budgets dwarf by magnitudes the budgets of the scientists who reached other conclusions. Those whose budgets collapse and livelihoods go away if it turns out that the human influence on the warming is negligible. GOOD CHOICE !!
If you dig a bit you’ll learn that Clinton/Gore loaded many of these “credible scientific organizations” with global waarming “true believers.” Scientists are people too and have their biases. And, as the article cited above clearly illustrates, and as Oliver demonstrates, those biases sometimes distort the actual data.
If you want to be kept abreast of the science you can visit http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/ and also go to http://sepp.org/ and subscribe to the SEPP weekly digest. If the only information you allow yourself to digest is that which reinforces your beliefs, you never take the critical step of questioning the basis for those beliefs and whether they are misplaced.
Take nothing for granted – question everything.
Let me ask you a question. If human factors are to blame for Earth’s warming, why are Mars and Venus warming as well?
Tim Ball is a criminal who should be prosecuted for ‘Crimes Against Humanity’. The blood of a billion people will be on his hands by the end of this century.
Why all this anger and personal attacks?
Let’s let the experimental data observations speak for themselves.
Is co2 aware that the Sun itself wobbles about the center of mass of the Solar System?
Whether or not co2 knows it is unimportant. The empirical fact is the same and that wobble of the Sun about the center-of-mass of the Solar System drives changes in Earth’s climate.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://myprofile.cos.com/manuelo09
As an amateur astronomer I am bewildered by the comments made by “climatologists” as to the cause of “climate change” in the current context of “global warming”.
It seems to me that they are in the only scientific discipline that does not require robust proof to support their theories. As was reported on the radio this past weekend, a member of the IPCC has pointed to the flooding in Pakistan and the fires in Russia and said “this is in line with climate change”. The psychological programming of the masses via the media of the last few years however makes this appear that “climate change” is the cause, but just a little bit of historic research highlights that this is far from the first time these events have occured in these areas at this magnitude.
As such, I find it highly improbable that any alledged “climate change” caused by man has anything to do it with it at all when you consider the previous occurrances of these events were outside the primary time frame determined for current “climate change”.
I can only summize that the IPCC is nothing short of a mouthpiece for Governments to further some agenda.
Many years of dumbing down science and critical thinking in schools is obviously paying off, with the sheer number of people within the general population failing to question the claims and asking for substantial proof. Just saying “we are scientists from the IPCC – listen to us” is, in my opinion, unacceptable.
With deep regrets, I agree with Astronomer: “. . . the IPCC is nothing short of a mouthpiece for Governments to further some agenda.”
There was one major benefit from the Climategate scandal. It finally exposed the depths of the corruption of science.
Al Gore, world leaders, the UN’s IPCC, major news organizations, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the Alliance of Science Academies worldwide, the government funding agencies that are controlled by NAS through budget review (NASA, DOE, EPA, etc), funding agencies overseas, European Space Agency (ESA), Nature, Science, etc. – All acted as propaganda mouthpieces for an invisible world government.
Suddenly I understood why Nature reversed itself and refused to consider any criticism of the Standard Solar Model (SSM) of the Sun as a ball of hydrogen, almost immediately after publishing a news report in 1983 on the demise (death) of established dogmas on the formation of the Solar System [“The demise of established dogmas on the formation of the Solar System”, Nature 303 (1983) 286].
http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/swart-1983.pdf
Finally, I am pleased to report that there are encouraging signs that some folks at Nature are trying to undo some of censorship of the recent past.
Two days ago, Nature finally published critical comments from me on two Nature News Blogs:
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/
1. “Why is society not acting on climate change? John Holdren asks ESA meeting” – August 05, 2010
Comment: The obvious answer to Holdren’s question:
The Climategate e-mails showed that the data that formed the basis for the CO2-induced global warming is not trustworthy.
2. “Obama nominates NOAA chief scientist” – August 06, 2010
Comment: How sad it is!
Just as the public learned that data had been manipulated to promote the CO2-induced global warming story, . . .
Another federal agency claims that ocean acidification is global warming’s “equally evil twin”.
What a sad state of affairs for science!
With deep regrets,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://myprofile.cos.com/manuelo09
Randall is correct that many well-known scientific organizations have taken stands in favor of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). But does he realize how unusual that is? Does he realize the corrupting power of public money?
Science is NEVER determined by what “the authorities” say, only by honest evidence and solid logic. This is completely different from religion and politics (the other major disciplines with a stake in AGW) They are driven by a hierarchy where the authorities are the law.
At the end of the 19th century, classical physics was considered “settled science” in the sense that credible individuals rarely questioned it. But there were problems that indicated something was wrong. Maxwell’s equations were not invariant under a Newtonian transformation. A little Jewish man came forth with the explanation in 1905. But it was not his brilliance that carried the day or the grudging approval of the scientific elite decades later that decided in favor of his ‘Theory of Relativity.’ It was honest evidence.
That’s just the way science works. Albert Einstein understood that perfectly.
As to ‘co2hound,’ he needs to grow up. Professor Tim Ball is a distinguished scientist who deserves everyone’s respect, whether they agree with him or not.
There is much evidence out there that scientific scams have cost many lives. Rachael Carson’s ‘Silent Spring’ scam involving the abrupt banning of DDT allowed malaria to get out of hand and resulted in the deaths of an estimated 40 million people (mostly black Africans).
Today a billion people go hungry around the world (according to the UN World Food Program). WHY? Because we in America decided to start fermenting our vast crop surpluses to produce ethanol rather than donating them to feed the world’s hungry. Hence, the AGW scam is starting to have dire consequences.
And where is the predicted warming??
Gordon J. Fulks, PhD (Physics)
Corbett, Oregon USA
gordonfulks@hotmail.com