Now at WUWT: Astrologer refutes global warming from chlorofluorocarbons

It is always nice to see a real scientist from one of the hard sciences take on the pseudoscientific superstition of "global climate warming change".  Therefore, the post 'A view of climate “on the ground” from a reporter who was there at the beginning' on WUWT by distinguished astrologer Theodore White is a must read.  I quote:

...
But I digress – in short, when I wrote pieces on the climate, I refused to write on the theory that chlorofluorocarbons were the sole cause of worldwide warming because that had never been proved. Now, though there was evidence that the use of aerosols were clearly evident in the upper atmosphere; the data did not support that this was the cause of the fear-mongering on ozone holes which was all the rage in the climate community of the late 1980s and 1990s.
...
Follow the money pushing the ideological AGW lie. If one examines climate science funding from 1986 to 1996 and then from 1996 to the present – you may find some amazing numbers.
Incredible amounts – increasing yearly and wasted on every bigger and more expensive computers to run models. Careerists who cannot forecast seasonal weather were making things up (and began to alter weather data on purpose) while spending lavishly on computers pushing the AGW ideology – all at the public’s great expense.
....
Still, by 1989, the AGW science did not make sense to me in light that it would violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Which I remind everyone – remains in effect to this very day.

Anyhow, it did not seem to matter to Wirth’s office, Hansen, or the growing careerists at NCAR and NOAA; because whomever was pushing ‘man-made global warming’ on the United States, were also doing it at the international level too.

My view was that it was a conspiracy right from the start to bamboozle the world on the lie of anthropogenic global warming sandbagging much of the mainstream media, the markets and the educational system to not believe their own eyes and ears.
....

With such high-quality contributions, it is no wonder that Whats Up with Watts won the 2012 Weblog Award for Best Science or Technology Weblog.

The retreat has begun!

From the eminent blog NoTricksZone run by the intrepid P Gosselin we learn about the beginning of the desperate retreat of the warmists. Gosselin reports:

Usually warmists screech that humans are 95% responsible for the recent warming, and that huge positive water vapor feedbacks will get involved in the future. So it’s not very often you hear a warmist admit that humans perhaps could be just half responsible for the warming of the last 100 years.

This is what German climate expert Professor Mojib Latif said in an interview this morning with NDR public radio.

And what did Latif Say? Fasten you seat belts, folks, he said this:

"The fact is that there is climate change. The fact is that man is also at least 50% responsible for the warming over the last 100 years.”

Yes, your eyes are not deceiving you: he said "50%". That is 0.35 degrees! That's practically nothing. It is clear that the global warming rats are leaving the sinking climate change ship. It is a nearly incredible u-turn relative to the orthodox ICCCP position. According to the ICCCP bible:

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

Of course, you can expect Latif to be hounded and vilified by the warmist inquisition after this unambiguous admission that the ICCCP is wrong and there is no climate threat. He is surely not going to get any more science grants after he has deserted the dogma of the global warming religion: his days at the gravy train are past. But this is a sure sign that the Berlin Wall of the eco-fascistic mega bureaucracy is beginning to crack, and the cracks will become larger and more until the whole unholy edifice comes tumbling down just like the walls of Jericho!

   

Sudden cooling in 1990's discovered!

Dear readers, today I will publish a graph which is probably the most important graph ever published here.
Consider the typical temperature anomaly graph that the warmist establishment publishes, like this one from NASA.

As you can see, we have an apparent strong warming in the 1990s. Was that because Earth was actually getting warmer during the 1990s?

No, maybe not at all. Now consider the following graph by fearless hockey stick slayer McKitrick, which shows that in the 1990s two things happended.

First, the number of weather stations was dramatically reduced (diamond line). Most of the disappeared stations were in the former Soviet Union, China, Africa and South America. Second, the measured average global temperature went up by 2.5 degrees Celsius (red bars). Note that the measured average temperature in the graph is the unweighted average value of all the weather stations: no “gridding” or other artificial means for manipulating and massageing the data have been used. It’s just the weather station data as they are.

Nobody in his right mind can believe that it actually got 2.5 degrees warmer in one year. Hence, the 2.5 degree must be an artefact of the dramatic and mysterious disappearance of all these thousands of weather stations. Of course, that artefact will inflate the global average temperature, and as we can see in the topmost graph, the global average temperature increased during the 1990’s. It appears that the reduction of the number of stations has not been corrected for. This is quite typical. The warmists from NASA, CRU etc are all too happy to apply a lot of phony corrections upwards, but when it comes to downwards corrections they are not so keen. It is a monumental scandal of enormous proportions that this most needed correction has not been done.
That is until now. Yours truly has recalculated the global temperatures with a correction for the artificial 2.5 degree increase in 1990. The new and true global temperature graph looks as follows.

As you can see, it actually got a lot colder during the 1990s. It suddenly got more than 2 degrees colder. And you know what is really funny? Nobody seems to have noticed. The alarmists have been telling us all these scare stories about how bad everything is going to get if the temperature changes more than two degrees. The whole human race would go extinct, and so on. (Have they never heard about evolution?) Oh dear oh dear! But when it happens in reality, the change is so small that it is not even noticeable. And why should it be? There can be several degrees difference from day to day, and nobody cares. I usually wear the same coat (made of the finest mole-skin) the year around, whether it is warm or cold. Only by employing sophisticated but sound data processing techniques did I manage to discover this sudden cooling. So this definitely proves that (1) there is no warming, but on the contrary a cooling, and (2) climate change on the several-degrees-scale is completely harmless. It is of course no concidence that NASA and CRU conveniently "forgot" to do the correction that I did, and is no wonder that Michael Mann needed a trick to hide the decline. If it came out that the climate is cooling but yet no harm is done, it would be a two-pronged nail in the coffin of the antropogenic global warming scam. Well, now it has come out! Time to retire Pachauri, Hansen and Gore I say!

Exitus acta probat.

Global warming, DDT and malaria - the true story

The graph above is the most important graph I have published on this blog. Indeed, this post may very well be the most important piece of blog science ever to be published on the web!

At first sight, it may seem like a perfectly ordinary global temperature graph from NASA, but if you look closer you see that I have indicated some important events. You may ask yourself "What do those events have got to do with the climate". I will soon explain that.

In 1940 Swiss chemist Paul Müller discovered that DDT was effective against insect pests, but completely harmless to humans and higher animals. It was used by the American army to protect the troops from diseases during WWII, and after the war it was used to eradicate malaria all over the world. People in the tropics were very happy - now their children didn't have to die in malaria anymore. And DDT was perfectly harmless. One could even eat it for breakfast. As a matter of fact, my parents used to serve me and my siblings a bowl of DDT every morning, and it sure haven't done us any harm.


But in 1962, a woman called Rachel Carson wrote a book, Silent Spring, which was a vicious, hysterical and unscientific attack on DDT and other wonderful pesticides. Carson claimed that malaria mosquitoes had the same right to live as African, Asian and Latin American children, and therefore it was wrong to kill the former with DDT to save the latter. In other words, she was a typical environmentalist. Ten years later, and with the support of Jackie Kennedy, the Environmental Protection Agency banned the use of DDT all over the world. The African, Asian and Latin American children immediately started to succumb to malaria again, but the environmentalists didn't care. And they still don't care, although billions of people have died as a direct result of the ban since then! Or they probably just thinks it is good - the fewer humans the better!

Now we come to my great discovery. If we look at the temperature graph, we can see that around 1940, the temperature started to decrease. Then around 1972, it started to increase again. You see: with DDT and no malaria, the world cools. With no DDT and with malaria, it warms. This cannot be a mere coincidence. And the explanation is obvious and undeniable. People with malaria gets a fever, and hence they get warmer. So more people with malaria means more warm people. And this will obviously affect the weather stations, as they typically are placed in or near inhabited areas. And even more important - people need to go near the stations to collect and record the temperature data. If they have a fever, this will make the thermometer readings higher. It is as simple as that. This explanation obviously makes much more sense than that our minuscule emissions of an insignificant trace gas like carbon dioxide would make the entire world warm. The latter goes against every one of the laws of physics and is hubris of the highest degree. But carbon dioxide comes from fossil fuels, the source of all our prosperity, and the environmentalists hate fossil fuels and prosperity.

So the truth is that more malaria causes higher temperatures, and not the other way around like the ICCCP wants us to believe. They have completely got the causal direction wrong, just like they did with the ice cores. My new theory (actually a fact) can also very elegantly explain the Medieval Warming Period. There were lots of plagues at that time, included the dreaded Black Death. No wonder it was so warm then, and civilisation could prosper. I will write a scientific paper about this and publish it in Energy and Environment - the only journal that would dare publish such unorthodox but true discoveries that go against the dogma of the corrupt climatology estabishment and their gate-keepers and tricksters and fugders. The warmists are a bunch of weaselly, no-good, snivelling, yellow-bellied, milquetoast losers quite terrified of having the massive holes in their puny arguments mercilessly exposed by skeptical blog scientists like myself.

The eco-fascists must not get away with their terrible crimes. Look:

• First the eco-fascists ban DDT so billions of children die in malaria. Hitler and Stalin would be envious!
• The heat from the malaria victims makes it appear to be warming.
• Then the the eco-fascists blame the alleged warming on carbon dioxide, the innocent gas of life, in order to halt all use of fossil fuels and make us all live under medieval conditions or worse!

Culpae poena par esto!

The stratosphere is cooling!

Look at the amazing figure at the top! This may very well be the most important figure displayed in this eminent blog ever, and we have already had some pretty important figures! The figure comes from the Remote Sensing Systems webpage. The different curves show how the temperature changes since 1980 according to satellite measurements at different heights in the atmosphere. The people from Remote Sensing systems say that the curves are from different channels, and where in the atmosphere those channels are can be seen in the figure to the right. Beware, the curves of the low channels are at the top and the curves for the high channels are at the bottom in the figure to the top of the figure to the left.

Look very carefully at the curves. The curve for the lowest part of the atmosphere (TLT, at the top) shows an increasing temperature, ie warming. However, the curve for the highest part of the atmosphere, i.e. the stratosphere (TLS, at the bottom), shows a decreasing temperature, ie cooling!

I'm going to repeat that again, because this is probably the most important thing I have ever written on this blog. The lower atmosphere is warming, but the higher atmosphere is cooling!

How could this be, if we have global warming? Then all the atmosphere should be warming! Anything else would be a violation of the second law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law! I could explain that with complicated mathematical formulas, but then you, dear reader, couldn't follow my train of thoughts anymore. It suffices to say that one is not allowed to violate natural laws. If the so-called climate scientists new as much about physics and mathematics as I do, they would also understand that, but they don't.

So it is apparent that Earth is not warming. We only have a redistribution of temperature in the atmosphere. This is an incontestable fact. But how could this be? The explanation is quite simple - an increase in the force of gravity. When gravity increases, the air atoms are drawn towards the ground, and that results in a higher air pressure. According to the ideal gas law, higher pressure leads to higher temperature. As there are fewer air atoms at the top of the atmosphere, there is a lower pressure and hence a lower temperature. It is all quite elementary if one only is aware of the basics laws of physics. Unfortunately, the so-called climate scientists are not, and their so-called climate models are completely and utterly useless; mere figments of their twisted imaginations!

But do we have independent evidence that the force of gravity is increasing? Yes, indeed we do. We are the evidence ourselves, each time we step up on the bathroom scale. Most people are actually getting heavier and heavier. Chances are that you are getting heavier and heavier, dear reader! Admit it! The graph to the right shows how the people in the Netherlands are getting heavier (percent of men (green), women (red) and both (blue) with a BMI of 30 or more). The same pattern can be seen in other countries. This can only be explained by an increase in the force of gravity. It clearly cannot have anything to do with a minuscle increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide atoms in the atmosphere, as the global warming scammers would like us to believe. Therefore, it has to be the force of gravity.

A bove maiore discit arare minor.

20 definite disproofs against global warming

According to IPCC, the world is getting warmer and this is due to human emissions of carbon dioxide. Dear reader, I have to admit that also I once believed in the IPCC dogma, until I started to independently investigate the science. I soon discovered that the AGW theory (ie hypothesis) can easily be disproved by a number of indisputable scientific facts supported by thousands of scientific articles, blog entries and youtube videos which for obvious (nudge nudge) reasons didn’t make it into the IPCC propaganda reports. Learn these facts verbatim, and you will emerge victorious from every debate with the warmist scum!

1. Temperatures have never increased – global warming stopped in 1998.
2. We cannot accurately measure temperature. A single thermometer has an error of plus/minus several degrees Kevin, and if you use a thousand thermometers, the error is magnified to plus/minus several thousands degrees Kevin (law of large numbers).
3. The level of carbon dioxide has not increased.
4. We cannot measure carbon dioxide in the air with any meaningful accuracy – the atoms are transparent, and the amounts are too small (parts of billions).
5. Carbon dioxide is an insignificant trace gas.
6. Human emissions of carbon dioxide are dwarfed by the emissions of nature, in particular from volcanoes and fish.
7. There is no way emissions of carbon dioxide can change the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That level is determined by other factors, such as temperature.
8. There is no correlations whatsoever between temperature and carbon dioxide.
9. Correlation is not causation.
10. There are thousands of natural factors that control the climate much more than any human activities and we know very little about these factors. The uncertainty is gargantuan!
11. There is no proven physical theory that supports the notion that carbon dioxide can cause warming.
12. AGW theory is based on quantum mechanics, which was disproved by Einstein: God does not play dice (alea iacta est).
13. If carbon dioxide hypothetically would have any effect on temperature, it would have been saturated by now.
14. The greenhouse effect violates the second law of thermodynamics.
15. The greenhouse effect is a misnomer – there is nothing like the glass panels of a greenhouse.
16. It was much warmer during previous historical periods when there was no carbon dioxide. For instance, it was several degrees warmer during the medieval warm period (MWP) when Greenland was green and covered by grape vines.
17. The computer models which are the only support for the AGW hypothesis are nothing more than glorified computer games, which only do what you program them to do. Garbage in, garbage out as any programmer can testify!
18. Computer models of the climate do not take into account clouds, water vapour, the oceans, geothermal energy, the sun and that Earth is spherical. Therefore, they are completely unrealistic.
19. AGW theory cannot explain the medieval warming period, the little ice age, the big ice age, the Roman warming period, the Minoan warming period, the ice on the Themes and the extinction of the dinosaurs.
20. AGW theory is not falsifiable, and hence not a scientific theory according to Popper!

Cognito ergo sum!