Passover

Do the chosen people reside in the US?

Obama's "Global Warming": Since 2000, Alaska & U.S. Cooling/Century By -2.4°F & -2.8°F, Respectively

How has the world’s second biggest emitter of CO2 managed to avoid the global warming that President Obama says will doom us all? Prior to 2006 the US was the world’s dominant producer of carbon dioxide believed by some to be the chief GHG responsible for the Global Mean Temperature (GMT) rise of .9C over the last 150 years. And yet, somehow, according to Obama’s own agency(NOAA), the US has managed to escape the dire consequences expected from the rise of CO2? Has the US exported its CO2 to the rest of the world?

As CO2 rises, Gaia surprises.

Hurricanes that form in the Atlantic Basin have steadfastly refused to make landfall in Florida for the last 10 years. Major(category 3,4,5) hurricanes have avoided the US mainland during the decade since Katrina. These are the longest periods of absence in the record for both Florida and the US. Hurricanes in the US have been on a decreasing trend since the 1950s.

Tornadoes for the last 4 years have been below average in the US and on a decreasing trend since the 1950s. This good news is puzzling since rising CO2 is expected to bring more frequent and severe storms.

Why is Mother Nature sparing the US?

After all, CO2 does not discriminate in its choice of residence in the atmosphere. There are approximately 400 ppm everywhere.

Drought is another area where the trend in the US bucks the expected results from CO2 rising unabated in the air. The Palmer Drought index shows that drought in the uS was much worse in the 1930s, 1950s and 1980s than it has been in the 21st century.

Precipitation in the US shows no long term discernible trend with rising CO2.

Similarly, wildfires do not show the expected increase as CO2 has continued to rise. In fact the acres burned have gone down as CO2 has risen. While CO2 is at the highest level that humans have experienced the number of fires in the US have not kept pace.

Floods in the US do not show the expected increase either.   

Crops were supposed to be adversely harmed in a warming world with rising CO2 but to date such has not been the case for US farmers.

Whatever is going on in the US defies the expected scenarios of the Global Climate Models. Perhaps the ‘basic physics’ incorporated in the computer code of these GCMs needs a rethink.  Maybe CO2 in the US has gotten tired of trapping heat and stirring up trouble.

Should CO2 be replaced as the star of our climate drama, offered a less demanding role or be excluded from the cast altogether?

Bouncy, Bouncy

Warmist: ‘As weather bounces between record extremes, what say the climate-change deniers?’

In 2011, the experts were saying that the Texas drought might become permanent. In 2015, they are blaming CO2 for the flooding they weren’t expecting. But climate science has advanced since 2011. Now, whatever extreme weather event should show up is due to too much CO2 in the air because we burn fossil fuels.

If the warmist would stop and think for a bit he could probably come up with the skeptic's argument all by himself.

Does it not occur to the warmist to check history for similar periods of bouncy, bouncy?

What would he find? Has the 2015 Texas reversal never happened in the past?

Same Weather As 1957 Proves Climate Change | Real Science

Drought To Flood Is Normal Weather In Texas

In other words the skeptic will research the data to see if similar instances of a quick end to a drought has ever happened in Texas before 2015. The answer is yes and this relieves the current flooding of any unprecedented claim to fame.

How else could ex-governor Rick Perry expect that the rains would return?

“We’ll be fine,” Perry said in mid-August. “As my dad [a retired cotton farmer] says, ‘It’ll rain. It always does.’”

The Oriny of Royal Dutch Shell

In a comment at the bottom of this article which pointed out the irony of Californians who put plastic balls into a reservoir to try and reduce evaporation during the drought, reader Ian5 proceeded to point out the irony of Royal Dutch Shell which supports a carbon pricing scheme.

Ironic too that the oil platform pictured is owned by Royal Dutch Shell – a company that openly acknowledges that CO2 emissions must be reduced to avoid serious climate change…and also publicly supports an international carbon pricing framework. Ironic too that you never hear the climate change-denying Craig Drucker criticize the petroleum industry when it agrees with the science of climate change.

Perhaps Shell realizes that such a scheme will not work and that governments are stupid but go along with them because they believe it will be less detrimental to their business than an open confrontation with the legislative powers that could enact regulations with far more wealth destroying edicts.

The EU carbon market scam        

All sorts of ridiculous arguments are put forward to disguise the fact that carbon trading doesn’t — and won’t — lead to emissions reductions.

Perhaps Shell is going along to get along not because they actually believe the scheme will reduce CO2 emissions but because they realize that governments don’t know what they are talking about and it is less costly to their business to play along to get along. If Shell assesses the political culture and realizes that they are going to do something no matter how inconsequential to CO2 emissions why wouldn’t they go along with the least expensive scheme? It is just smart business.  

What Royal Dutch Shell says publicly does not change the irony of anti-oil protesters using oil-derived kayaks to protest an oil rig leaving for the Arctic or global warming alarmists using oil-derived plastic balls to reduce evaporation from their global warming induced drought.

The disparity is delicious.

       

               

Ex-Governor Perry Outforecasts the 'Experts'

Back(2011) when Texas was experiencing a drought and the usual alarmist ‘experts’ were telling us this is what we should expect as climate change progresses and that the drought will be permanent then Governor Rick Perry calmly recounted some sage advice taught to him by his daddy: the rains will return.

And so, in 2015, they have.

West Texas city has wettest day in at least 129 years

Perhaps Mr Perry should become a climate change guru.

Summer of 2015 could turn into one of the all-time wettest in Midwest

Nothing like a little rain to get rid of the ‘permanent drought’.

There is a reason why Nobel physicist Richard Feynman taught: "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts".

Will the alarmist admit his error and pomposity? Don’t hold your breath. Alarmists are never wrong; they just change the cause for their alarm. It’s not dry any more? Now it is wet. See, the climate changes and it is all our fault. Some people aren’t happy unless they can claim that the sky is falling. However, they resemble ‘The Boy Who Cried Wolf’ more than Paul Revere.

Mr. Perry’s Dad knows that the climate doesn’t just change. It is cyclical.

Letter to CSICOP re Heartland Challenge

 The letter below was sent to Skeptical Inquirer. Whether or not it will see the light of day on its website is anyone's guess. Will they pick up the challenge at TheClimateBet.com?


================================Sent Jult 21, 2015 via email===================
"It's time for the Heartland Institute to put its money where its exhaust pipe is." Ronald A. Lindsay http://fb.me/3M1OuSwnS Your challenge uses the notoriously diddled data from NASA/GISS. Why would Heartland agree to that? Are you trying to ‘stack the deck’? Would you accept the ‘no change’ challenge at TheClimateBet.com that Al Gore turned down presumably because he doesn’t wager? If not, why not? Nasa’s Gavin Schmidt advises via twitter: “A model result is skillful if it gives better predictions than a simpler alternative.” The ‘no change’ model is as simple as they come and could turn out to be more accurate than the billion dollar Global Climate Models used by the IPCC to make its predictions of doom and gloom.

You might want to follow this ongoing bet with SKS members who agreed to use the satellite datasets because: those series are the best that we’ve got. Will you agree to use them? Will you be honest with yourself if you choose: NOT?

Do we tend to accept statements that confirm our worldview LESS critically than those that do not? Isn’t this why those with a different view are so essential to the process of filtering out BS (Bad Science) from human inquiry?

“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert. J. Robert Oppenheimer.

Supporting Free Inquiry,

Environment Canada 2014-2015 Winter Forecast

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/el-nino-should-keep-polar-vortex-at-bay-environment-canada-says-1.2857371

Environment Canada is expecting the next three months to be average or warmer than normal in almost the entire country, thanks in part to El Nino, a senior climatologist says.

"The good news for all Canadians is that there's no area of significant population where we're showing colder than normal," Dave Phillips told CBC News on Tuesday.

Environment Canada's supercomputer in Montreal has run the numbers, and Phillips said that except for a small area around Lake Superior and part of Nunavut, the winter will be warm in contrast to last year's — one of the longest and coldest on record.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/12-cold-records-for-dec-1-set-this-morning-1.2855769

Good start in Saskatchewan!

Here’s a sample of how the rest of the winter survived all the heat trapping that CO2 was doing this winter:

Record cold in North Bay, Northern Ontario, Canada

Great Lakes ice cover tops 88%

Coldest February ever in Montreal

February 2015 – Toronto’s coldest month ever

February 2015 coldest in 115 years in Canada

Heavy snowfall in New Brunswick

Extreme cold rears its ugly head – again – in several parts of Canada

Some school boards cancel classes, dismiss early as bad weather approaches - Nova Scotia

Frozen pipes plague Toronto amid Canadian deep freeze

How Niagara Falls freezes ... or does it?

More record lows for Ontario

Snowfall warnings for southern Quebec and Nova Scotia

Record lows across Ontario and Saskatchewan

Record freeze on Lake Ontario

Frozen Over: Lake Erie 94 Percent Covered in Ice

Astonishing snowfall totals as massive storm slams Eastern Canada

Heavy snow in eastern Canada

Record cold in Canada

Toronto Island Ferry stuck in ice Sunday - Toronto - CBC ...

Toronto gets another blast of extreme cold

Halifax urging residents to stay home for next 24 to 36 hours

Ferry carrying 230 passengers freed from ice in Quebec

Terrace, Kitimat, B.C. digging out from near record-breaking snowfall

Cold temperatures, more snow arrive in Toronto

Maritimes weather: Frosty temperatures continue

B.C. First Nation evacuates 700 residents after heavy snowfall in Kitimat

Snowfall and extreme cold warnings across various parts of Canada.

 Windsor, Ontario cleans up after record snowfall

Blizzard conditions close down Canadian province of Prince Edward Island

Saint John, N.B. declares state of emergency as snow buries Atlantic Canada

Snow and extreme cold continue to grip eastern Canada and the far north

Snow amounts of 60 cm (23.6″) forecast for parts of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Heavy snow and cold across many parts of Canada

Blizzard warnings for Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Nunavut, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories

Newfoundland and Labrador – 78 cm of snow in 48 hours! (with video)

Record snowfall in Grand Prairie, Alberta

Snow event of the century in British Columbia

Record Snowfall at British Columbia Ski Resort – Video

Cold weather in Yukon drives record breaking power use

and on and on and on. List not meant to be exhaustive.

Environment Canada can’t get their winter prediction correct only 3 months into the future but climate science can tell us what the world will be like in 2100? Anybody buying that snake oil?

How many millions spent on the Environment Canada supercomputer? 

To be fair some parts of BC were blessed with an early spring. Does that mean their carbon tax was not working?

Parroting the Alarmist Script

In this article the journalist/reporter presents all the major script lines of the man made climate change message.

It is an example of what Donna LaFramboise referred to here

“Experts imagining they know what will happen next. Journalists pretending that experts know what they’re talking about.”

Chris Arsenault parroted the academic ‘experts’.

His first sentence contains the unjustified belief that gets repeated as if it were true and unchallenged.

Despite a scientific consensus that human activity is causing the planet to warm up

Does Chris assume there is a consensus because that’s what he has heard? Is he unaware that there are scientific challenges to this assertion? We are told incessantly, as if it is their most prized and irrefutable argument for man made climate change, that there is a consensus among climate scientists that the climate is changing and it is our fault.

’97 Articles Refuting The ’97% Consensus’

Was it Aquinas who advised: Ask not who made the claim ask if the claim is true. If it  were possible to resurrect him and bring Aquinas forward into our age it is probable that he would like to add a corollary to his epithet. Ask not how many made the claim ask if the claim is true. The who and how many are red herrings designed to draw your attention away from whether the claim is true. Consensus is an argument for the simpleminded and if presented as a valid argument on a logic exam it would attract an ‘X’ in the margin.

Who would use such invalid arguments? Why would they need them?

Mutual agreement proves mutual agreement. It does not prove truth.

Bertrand Russell knew about consensus: "The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”

Has Russell identified the phenomenon of groupthink?

Chris understands the following correctly:

Both groups generally agree that climate change is real, according to the study based on an Internet survey of U.S. residents. But the two camps differ on whether human activity is causing warming.

But is he aware of the ruckus that was raised by the statement from NOAA that Chris alludes to?

The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said in January that 2014 was the warmest year since records began in the late 19th century.

Here is but one objection. Satellites: Warming pause continues & 2014 not the hottest        

Chris continues the party line.

U.N. experts believe it’s 95 percent likely that human activities, including the burning of fossil fuels, are causing the planet to warm.

And what do the experts say caused the planet to warm in the past? Are they sure that the same forces aren’t responsible for the late 20th century warming they are so concerned about? With the divergence between their global climate models which expect a warmer world than reality is providing perhaps it is 95% certain that they don’t know what they are talking about.

Some scientists may say the following but some do not. Is Chris aware of the skeptic objections to these beliefs or is he deliberately leaving them out? Is he a parrot, biased or ignorant?

Inaction is leading to serious consequences including rising sea levels, wild weather patterns and a loss of biodiversity, scientists say.

Sea levels have been rising since the end of the last ice age long before we were driving SUVs. What caused them to start rising? Chris?

Some recent research points to a slowdown in the rise of the seas. From ClimateDepot.com:

Sea level rise instead decelerated over the 20th century, decelerated 31% since 2002 and decelerated 44% since 2004 to less than 7 inches per century. There is no evidence of an acceleration of sea level rise, and therefore no evidence of any man-made effect on sea levels.

Here is NOAA on the ‘scientists’ wild weather: NOAA Report Destroys Global Warming Link To Extreme Weather  Chris?

Boston Globe had an article asking for the bodies. How many animals are really going extinct? ‘Where are the bodies? Actual documented extinctions are vanishingly rare’  Chris?

Parroting the script gets you an easy article but are you concerned about the truth in it?

Data destroys dogma and the truth is in the details.

We need fewer “journalists pretending that experts know what they’re talking about.”