Time to stand up for Willis

A lot of people have reason to be upset by the abominable BEST propaganda campaign. But few people have been as badly abused by the sly BEST man Muller as our dear Willis! But Willis stands firm! In a comment, he says:

Me, I’ve had it up to here with being lied to by Muller, I’m fed up to my eye-teeth with his tricks and his whoring for the media. Sure, I could pretend Muller is an honest and honorable man like you recommend. But his actions have shown him to be a cunning snake. It is not my habit to address snakes as though they were honorable men.

Note, however, that none of these are “ad hominems”, as I make no claim that Muller being a snake has affected his mathematics or altered his results in the slightest. The data is the data, it says what it says despite Muller’s reptilian ways. I am not arguing against the data, there is no ad-hominem.

(The snake in the picture represents Muller, by the way. This is not an ad hominem, but rather an ad serpentem! I was thinking about using a picture of a whore instead, but this is a family blog).

Let not Willis stand alone. Today we must all be Willis! I am Willis, you are Willis, we are all Willis!

Also read what Dick Lindzen has to say about BEST.

BEST is up to no good

Hope you enjoyed the funny title of today's post. It is about the disgraceful Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project which now has announced its very uninteresting and non-peer-reviewed results. All it proves is that one can manipulate temperature data so that Earth seems to be warming. But we already knew that, didn't we?
Powered by mp3skull.com
But how do they then explain this graph form Newsweek 1975? This amazing graph was revealed by Steven Goddard. Comparing BEST to Orwell's book 1984, he comments: "The cooling after 1950 has disappeared. Winston Smith would be proud!" As educated readers know, Winston Smith was the dictator in 1984 who oppressed his little brother.

The man behind BEST, Richard Muller, has only been pretending to be a skeptic. He is really a eco-warmo-fascist! How could he otherwise come up with an almost-copy of the  Hansen (NASA) and Jones (CRU) curves? He is actually on record as being part of the cult as late as 2008. Thanks to Tony Bummer at NewsBustiers for digging up that nugget! Fortunately, there are a few climate scientists with integrity still left, like Judith Curry!

There is only one scientifically correct response to Muller's skullduggery: to orchestrate a FOI request campaign against Berkeley until they have made all the data available, station by station and year by year! We will not rest until this has been achieved!

Anyhow, if it would be warming, it would not be due to human activities. This was decisively proved in July this year. I quote from ClimateChangeDispatch:

Greenhouse Gas Theory Trashed in Groundbreaking Lab Experiment
WRITTEN BY JOHN O'SULLIVAN | JULY 18 2011 

Greenhouse gas theory of global warming is refuted in momentous Mexican lab experiment. Results mean epic fail for doomsaying cult and climate taxes.

Professor Nasif Nahle of Monterrey, Mexico, backed by a team of international scientists, has faithfully recreated a famous experiment from 1909 to confirm that the greenhouse effect cannot cause global warming..

Astonishingly, the 1909 greenhouse gas experiment first performed by Professor Robert W. Wood at John Hopkins University hadn’t been replicated for a century. This despite over $100 billion spent by the man-made global warming industry trying to prove its case that carbon dioxide is a dangerous atmospheric pollutant.

The analogy had been that greenhouse gases (e.g. CO2) act like the glass in a greenhouse trapping heat in Earth’s atmosphere and if they build up (due to human industrial emissions) the planet would dangerously overheat.

Nahle Nails Shut Climate Scare Coffin

At the Biology Cabinet laboratories Professor Nahle was able to confirm the astounding findings: Wood was right all along. After peer-review the results confirm that the so-called ‘greenhouse effect’ is solely due to the blockage of convective heat transfer within the environment in which it is contained i.e. as in this case, a lab flask.

Indeed, it is the glass of the lab flask (or ‘greenhouse’) that caused the “trapped” radiation all along. The flask (or greenhouse) being what scientists refer to as a ‘closed system’; while Earth’s atmosphere isn’t closed at all but rather open to space allowing heat energy to freely escape.

Read rest here.

So that's it. Global warming theory is dead, and has got the final nail in its rotting coffin! Ha ha ha ha!
Powered by mp3skull.com
Take that, Richard Muller!

Coincidentally, the fat priest of the climate cult Al Gore unintentionally proved the same thing when he faked a greenhouse gas experiment during his "24 hours of climate reality" propaganda campaign about a month ago. This is the kind of stuff the media should report about! Read the shocking truth at WUWT:

• Video analysis and scene replication suggests that Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project fabricated their Climate 101 video “Simple Experiment”
• Replicating Al Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment shows that his “high school physics” could never work as advertised

Thank God there are people who - unlike Muller - knows how to dedicate their time to important things! Thank you, Anthony Watts!

Galileo was a skeptic, damn it!

It is really going downhill with the American Institute of Physics. They have just published a disgraceful article by some individual by the name of Steven Sherwood in Physics Today. This is really some of the worst garbage I have read in a long time, and that is saying a lot! Sherwood writes about the low degree of acceptance of the so-called climate science and global warming hypothesis among the general public, and compares it to how the ideas of Copernicus and Galileo about the round Earth were opposed. They also compare it to how Einstein's theory of relativity was opposed.

Pardon my French, but this is utterly ridiculous and complete stinking bullshit! Hansen and Mann and Gore cannot be compared to Copernicus and Galileo and Einstein! The latter three were geniuses who were persecuted by the Spanish Inquisition. Hansen and Mann and Gore are not geniuses, qutie the contrary. Hansen and Mann and Gore are the Spanish Inquisition! The people who really are persecuted today are those who dares to speak up against the global warming dogma: brave people like Marc Morano, Anthony Watts, The Lord Monckton, James Delingpole, Andrew Bolt, senator Inhofe, and all the brave people in the Galileo movement. And we can also add Erl Happ to this list, after his brilliant article about high level clouds and surface temperature at WUWT. These are the Copernicuses and Galileos and Einsteins of today!

And what's this thing about Einstein? Einstein was wrong, damn it! Haven't they heard that at the American Institute of Physics? What a bunch of dolts!

Bryce in WSJ: Five Truths About Climate Change

Robert Bryce has a must-read-at-once-and-blog-about opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, where he states Five Truths About Climate Change. Here are the five truths (excerpts):

1) The carbon taxers/limiters have lost. Carbon-dioxide emissions have been the environmental issue of the past decade. .... Here's a reality check: During the same decade that Mr. Gore and the IPCC dominated the environmental debate, global carbon-dioxide emissions rose by 28.5%. ....
2) Regardless of whether it's getting hotter or colder—or both—we are going to need to produce a lot more energy in order to remain productive and comfortable.
3) The carbon-dioxide issue is not about the United States anymore. Sure, the U.S. is the world's second-largest energy consumer. But over the past decade, carbon-dioxide emissions in the U.S. fell by 1.7%. ... Meanwhile, China's emissions jumped by 123% over the past decade and now exceed those of the U.S.
4) We have to get better—and we are—at turning energy into useful power. .... Nearly all of the things we use on a daily basis—light bulbs, computers, automobiles—are vastly more efficient than they were just a few years ago. ....
5) The science is not settled, not by a long shot. Last month, scientists at CERN, the prestigious high-energy physics lab in Switzerland, reported that neutrinos might—repeat, might—travel faster than the speed of light. If serious scientists can question Einstein's theory of relativity, then there must be room for debate about the workings and complexities of the Earth's atmosphere.

Take that! The stupid tree-hugging people who wanted to cut emissions to save of from "the climate catastrophe" lost, and the rest of humanity won! Anyhow, whether there is a problem or not, we still need more energy. That is still much more important than any alleged climate threat. Other countries are  increasing their emissions, so why would we have to do anything? Devices are becoming increasingly more energy efficient, so we are going to want more devices and hence more energy in the future and cannot reduce emissions even if we wanted to. Finally, if Einstein - who was a bloody genius - can be wrong, why would we believe anything that those pesky climate scientists say? Or any scientists for that matter.
The whole thing reminds me about the discussion of pros and cons of slavery (before it was abolished). Now, I know that what I'm about to write might seem a bit politically incorrect, and I want to emphasize that I'm not advocating slavery (though I think it is important that we are allowed to discuss the issue). That most people think that slavery is wrong today is besides the point - we are considering the perfectly valid perspective of slave owners in the past. So here are five truths about slavery, as they might have been seen during the first half of the 19th century:

1. The abolitionists have lost! There are actually more slaves that 10 years ago!
2. We are going to need more slaves in order to remain productive and comfortable
   
3. Slaves are not just about the United States. Other countries, like Russia, have them too.
4. We are getting better at breeding and using the slaves.
5. Newton has been proven wrong so the science is not settled about slavery. (I couldn't write "Einstein" here, because he wasn't born yet.)

Note that the above are not my personal views: they are just intended to illustrate the soundness of Bryce's five points by means of a historical analogy. And as a matter of fact, the alleged slave problem eventually solved itself, without the need for any "slave taxes" or any world governance. The explanation is simple: during the second half of the 19th century, industrialism made slavery obsolete. The former slaves became happy employees. And if there really is a climate problem, I'm sure that it will also soon be solved by itself, without any "carbon taxes" or world governance.

However, if we would try to reduce emissions, it would likely destroy industrialization, and we would have to resort to slavery again. So to be against Al Gore is actually to be against slavery!

NSF: It is reasonable to suspect Mann of falsifying data

An investigation by the National Science Foundation into the Climategate scandal has come to the conclusion that there are strong grounds for suspicions against Michael "Hide the decline" Mann and his accomplices. The report concludes:

"As noted above, no specific allegation or evidence of data fabrication or falsification was made to the University; rather, the University developed its allegation of data falsification based on a reading of publicly released emails, many of which contained language that reasonably caused individuals, not party to the communications, to suspect some impropriety on the part of the authors."

We were right all along. Finally, we have been vindicated! Now please can we get back all the countless billions of our tax-payers dollars and euros spent on this fraud?

Obviously, the Warmistas will desperately try to spin this in any ways they can! It's time to jump off the AGW bandwagon now, boys!

Update: As can be observed below, the forces of misdirection and desinformation are already gathering. There are some statements in the report that unfortunately are somewhat ambiguous when taken out of context, and it is those statements the trolls predictably are trying to spin. They include:

"Although the Subject's data is still available and still the focus of significant critical examination, no direct evidence has been presented that indicates the Subject fabricated the raw data he used for his research or falsified his results."

"Such scientific debate is ongoing, but does not, in itself, constitute evidence of research misconduct."

 "Concerning False Claims, 18 USC #287 and 31 USC ##3729-33 and False Statement, 18 USC #1001, we examined the elements of each suggested offense and have concluded that there is insufficient evidence of violation of any of these statutes to warrant investigation."

"We reviewed the emails and concluded that nothing contained in them evidenced research misconduct withing the definition of the NSF Research Misconduct Regulation. ... We found no basis to conclude that the emails were evidence of research misconduct or that they pointed to such evidence."

While some unscrupulous individuals will claim that this means that Mann is innocent like a little lamb with a shiny white fleece that has just been white washed, we know that what it really says is that Mann and his Team have hidden all the evidence, just like they did "hide the decline of global temperatures the last decades." Indeed, we know and have always known that the Team-tribe is up to no good. Why are they trying to hide that Arabs colonized Greenland during the very very hot medieval period? We are very skeptical about the whole AGW thing, and nothing you say is ever going to change our mind! We stand up for the truth, against enviro-tyranny.

Update 2: Marc Morano at Climate Depot agrees with my analysis:

"It doesn't conclude there is 'nothing wrong' with Mann's conclusions, all it concludes is there is no basis to conclude he did anything improper WITH NSF FUNDING"

Precisely! Maybe Mann did his falsifications with money he stole from orphans, or earned by trafficking, or counterfeited, or got as bribes from the rising Soviet Union. Until that has been disproved, we have no choice but to consider him guilty as charged!

Anthony Bright-Paul winner of 2011 von Monckhofen Award for Pedagogical Excellence

The prestigous von Monckhofen Award for Pedagogical Excellence goes this year, that is AD 2011, to Anthony Bright-Paul for his most pedagogical refutation of the greenhouse effect and hence also of the entire global warming climate change fraud. It is a demonstration of the most impeccable logic and brilliant clarity. Indeed, it is so clear and simple that even Al'Gore might be able to understand it provided he can get his big fat butt out of his jet plane for once. I'm especially impressed by the way Mr Bright-Paul uses beer as a vehicle of explanation and identification. Congratulations, Mr Bright-Paul! You are a most deserving winner.

As further motivation, I will simply let Mr Bright-Paul's text speak for itself:

The History of Science is the history of wrong conclusions, being eventually overturned by more evidence, or more correctly by logic. Even today, the data that science uncovers is more often than not misunderstood.
...
These questions concern the properties of gases. The question here is whether gases are active or passive?

Can Carbon Dioxide be frozen?
Can Carbon Dioxide be liquefied?
Can Carbon Dioxide be cooled?
Can Carbon Dioxide be warmed?
In this case I will suggest that the answer in every case must be, Yes. Carbon Dioxide can be made into Dry Ice, which is even colder than Water Ice, and can even cause frostbite. Carbon Dioxide can be liquefied and is often so done for ease of transportation. Carbon Dioxide can be cooled, as in Ice-Cold lager from a fridge. Carbon Dioxide can be warmed as in warm beer. So the question is this: Is Carbon Dioxide active or passive? Please note above the use of the passive tense.

Let us do the same with Water Vapour?
...
I hope so – in all cases it is clear that gases are passive. They re-act. In no way can a Gas jump out of a Gasholder or a can, like a Genie, and say ‘Tickety-Boo!’ ( I am willing to be corrected!)
...
What conclusion, what logical conclusions must follow from that? If gases are passive, if gases can be warmed or can be cooled, if gases have no inherent temperature of their own, then there is no way that they can cause warming. They are either warmed or cooled.

If we put a potato a microwave oven and switch on the power, the potato can be baked within 10 minutes. But put the same potato in a freezer, how long will it take to bake? Is there a hot spot in the freezer? And yet our noble scientists have been searching for a Hot Spot at 10 Kilometres high in the Troposphere, that is some 33,000 feet! It is not a question of Science it is a question for Logic; it is a question of Philosophy.

The crux of the argument is philosophical and the nub of it is logic. To suggest that Man is somehow creating radical changes in Climate is an inadmissible conclusion. And as to Man warming the Globe, it is a complete impossibility.

Underground volcanoes, not humans, are causing rising CO2

Our friends at WUWT recently had a post about underwater volcanoes. In this post, I would like to discuss another kind of volcanoes that have been sadly (or deliberately) overlooked in the climate debate: underground volcanoes.

Underground volcano (courtesy USA Today) 

We know very little about what can be found deep in the Earth's crust. NASA is sending rockets to penetrate Uranus, but very little is done to probe the depths of the bowels of our own home planet, mother Earth. This is a sad state of affairs. Hence, we don't know how many underground volcanoes there are. There might be billions, hidden from our eyes by miles of Earth's crust. There might be huge underground volcanoes, the size of Alaska, and we have no idea about them. And they are all emitting carbon dioxide on a scale that dwarfs our puny human emissions. The so-called "climate scientists" simply haven't taken this into account in their "models" of the so-called "carbon cycle". The IPCC has, not surprisingly, been silent about the topic. Image the arrogance of climate modelers who assume that they know all the major natural processes. Let alone their impact. Just tweak the right parameters and viola the model fits the data, even though it is incomplete. “With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.”

Temperature and CO2 the last centuries according to E. Beck

The graph above shows how carbon dioxide has fluctuated the last centuries. It obviously has no relation to human activities. The only explanation is underground volcanoes: we can notice that they are both emitting CO2 and causing warming. Of course, the eruption of a single Alaska-sized underground volcano under the Arctic sea would be sufficient to explain the melting of the Artic sea ice (which is now by the way recovering). And yet, we would never be able to detect that volcano. We should learn to be humble about how little we really know about Earth and its climate, and the secrets it hides in its interior.

Mole drill for exploring Earth's interior

Indeed, until we know what secrets lie below Earths surface, before we have sent expeditions into the depths of the planet, it would be futile and a pointless waste to try to reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere by burning less fossil fuels. Futile! Pointless!