Every time we are on the verge of a breakthrough getting the message out to the press, one or more of a small group of skeptics steps up to the plate and wrecks the message.
A few days later they eat crow and apologize, but the damage is done, the Internet never forgets, and the press becomes gun shy. Why are they doing this?
“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” – Ian Fleming
Skeptics MUST stop fighting among themselves. We are almost as ego-centered as consensus scientists, but fortunately a little brighter.
The real shock will come when self-centered physicists realize that Stalin himself manipulated them into supporting absolute nonsense in the Standard Solar, Climate, Nuclear & Cosmology Models.
“We are almost as ego-centered as consensus scientists”
How many of you are in there?
Michael ZZZ,
Thanks for asking. Our numbers are growing.
We also help identify junk science:
http://junkscience.com/2015/02/11/omanuel-alert-coronal-dynamics-discussed-as-one-of-astronomys-mysteries/
Modern astronomy is junk science.
Do other skeptics suffer from the defects that plagued Oliver:
An arrogant, angry atheist that discovered evidence of Max Planck’s creative and intelligent Mind behind the force that made and sustains all atoms, lives and worlds in the entire Solar System?
The various happening over the last couple of years have certainly started to separate the actual skeptics from the Trojan Horses and Sleepers.
Unfortunately the damage they do can not be undone.
We all know that when we look at something, we don’t actually see it. We register the photons hitting the eye then getting interpreted by the brain.
But we also know that it works, seeing things helps animals to avoid predators, or helps predators catch their food.
So it might be an airy-fairy abstract notion, but it has powerful real world consequences.
This idea of the satellites not measuring temperatures. Is that a similar thing ? Are they using the airy-fairy explanation to avoid the fact that the satellites show a powerful real world result ?
That’s what I am getting , listening to some of these guys
The problem is John Christy and Roy Spencer who control the satellite data are honest scientists and therefore are not tweaking the graphs to order. On top of that there has been 18 plus years of no warming and with the sun in hibernation the only direction the temperature is going to go is down.
They know it. We know it. And therefore the chance of ramming through a global treaty that increases the power of the United Nations and World Bank is becoming slimmer and slimmer. On top of that James Inhofe is now in a position of power as senior member of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee.
They are really really running scared and Mother Nature is chasing them with snow storm after snow storm all across the Northern Hemisphere.
https://i0.wp.com/3.bp.blogspot.com/-7BTnRqeqVxo/Usw2ugazZ8I/AAAAAAAA2Vw/Up68eQgj6Aw/s320/mother_nature_denies_global_warming.jpg
Could be a little $$$ thrown their way or something else that motivates.
Well Judith Curry certainly had 1.2 million tossed to her company as I showed this morning. Muller of Best also has a privately owned corporation with Marlan Downey, a former President of Shell Oil as an employee. (Shell is behind Sustainability/Agenda 21)
http://mullerandassociates.com/our-team/marlan-downey/
Zeke and Mosher are part of the BEST team. I don’t know if they are also on Muller & Associates payroll since they are not listed
http://mullerandassociates.com/our-team/
The nice thing about private corporations is they are great for pay-offs as ‘contracting services’.
What is so apparent and surprising is that within the entire worldwide science of warming ensemble, there are so few that actually deal with the would be cause of climate change.
The same names pop up everywhere, in part because the same media personnel keep going to the same CAGW scientists.
The majority of so called climate scientists are involved in some adjunct fashion, like biologists, psychiatrists or bird watchers.
The rule is of course publish or parish. Most simply write ‘Climate Change’ and go past go and collect 200k or more for their work.
So you do, in fact, get a high percentage that are in the AGW camp.
Zeke and especially the Mosh pit keep throwing out the same brackish. Muller is Muller.
Judith Curry I respect and I follow and sometimes comment on her blog which has the range from well informed to ignorant and very disrespectful commentators.
Her blog ‘climate etc’ is sometimes a starting point for someone like me who has a science background, but has much to learn, as do most but not all commentators
at various sites.
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants2014.html
The key topics for discussion this year include:
Is the economic recovery sustainable?
Who will pay for the demographics?
Does privacy exist?
How special is the relationship in intelligence sharing?
Big shifts in technology and jobs
The future of democracy and the middle class trap
China’s political and economic outlook
The new architecture of the Middle East
Ukraine
What next for Europe?
Current events
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/meeting_2014.html
Climate was NOT a topic.
Only at the 2010 meeting.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/26/bilderberg-group-discusses-global-cooling-at-2010-meeting/
What’s this about?
Steve points out data tampering and first Anthony Watts jumped all over him. Then Zeke Hausfather using Judith Curry’s site jumped all over him and now Luboš Motl has really tromped on him. Luboš didn’t even bother with a pretense of science he just went straight for the Ad Homs.
Thanks for laying that out. For Zeke/Mosher I don’t see a surprise there as they are defending BEST as you would expect them to do, their credibility is on the line due to their involvement in it and what it was intended for. Looking at it that way it is difficult to see them as “sceptics”, at least as far as BEST is concerned.
Oh yeah. It’s like groundhog day with this stuff.
In my view it is this (with less due diligence than shown there):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jabjgY6B2nM
Paired with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8zPNMqVi2E
Cat fight?
Maybe this will cheer you all up! http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/02/forum_on_climate_change_postpo.html
Regretfully, Steven, our opponent is a propaganda master with free access to most of the world’s tax revenues and political power.
No political party or nation is on our side in this battle, although they seem to fight with each other.
Fortunately, Steven, truth is our ally and lies cannot defeat truth.
I am confident that frightened world leaders that formed the UN to forbid public knowledge worldwide of the energy that destroyed Hiroshima, . . .
will discover they have been trying to hide the Creator and Sustainer of every atom, life and world in the solar system, . . .
but I have no idea when, or in what way the Sun’s pulsar core will by-pass the gatekeepers of public knowledge.
Before entering this battle, I found the instructions useful that Lord Krishna gave to Arjuna in Chapter 2 of the Bhagavad Gita.
It’s more or less the same reason why Libertarians will never have a POTUS. As skeptics we are not sheep, we think for ourselves and refuse to follow a ‘Dear Leader’. The Borg have an advantage here.
gator69 says: “we are not sheep, we think for ourselves”
Does anyone else see the irony in this statement?
Libertarians are not a “we”.
Is Michael ZZZ a sheep asleep?
You have to wonder.
The Libertarian Party is an American national political party that reflects, represents and promotes the ideas and philosophies of libertarianism (freedom as a political end) and free-market, laissez-faire capitalism (no government interference in the economy).
Maybe this is what he thought he was talking about.
ANARCHIST 1: a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power
I think further elaborating on the decrease in daily max’s and the increase in nighttime lows between 1936 and 2014, 1998, etc. would be very effective. Perhaps a histogram with counts and 10 degree intervals would show the complete fraud of homogenized temperature records. Thanks for all you do Tony.
Also, I’m almost sure that variance per station is down in the 21st century vs. early 20th century. That would put a stake in the heart of “extreme temperatues” caused by CO2.
I’ve enjoyed L. Motl’s blog when I’ve been there in the past, but how disappointing to read his ignorant comment here. I’m still hoping that truth will prevail over the dishonest manipulations and fear mongering. Love Gail’s cartoon; Mother Nature always does have the last word. The hubris of so many of the warming “scientists” would be funny if it weren’t so damaging to life as we enjoy it today. Like young Alex Epstein says in his book, The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, there are no substitutes for fossil fuels unless we want to go back to living in caves and hunkering over wood fires wishing we had found a slow mammal of some kind to cook for dinner. Note: that is my “take”, but he makes a very powerful case for using the abundant dense energy that the earth provides.
And for the icing on the cake Mother Nature is certainly having the last word and she is not finished yet by a long shot. (Two more storms on the way)
Rosco says:
You have no idea of how happy I am that the Peoples Republic of Taxachusetts is getting taught a harsh lesson about Gore Bull Warbling by Mother Nature.
Think HAAaaavard, Yale, Amherst, and even MIT
As the nation state and secularization began to emerge in the early modern period, the mode of governance was the creation of a mythology for mass consumption. This mythology incorporated aspects of magic and religiosity, yet served to transfer real power from the church to the state. The underbelly of the renaissance, the enlightenment, and the scientific revolution was the inquisition and the witch craze which finally ended on our own soil in Salem. The likes of Pascal and Newton, let alone the masses, actually believed that old women travelled on the backs of devils to great orgies.
Carbon is the current mythology. It is only a lever for hegemony…
NOAA admits they adjusted their raw temperature data to make the past cooler and the present warmer. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/temperature-monitoring.php “Adjustments largely account for the impact of instrument and siting changes but appear to leave a small overall residual negative (“cool”) bias in the adjusted USHCN version 2 CONUS average maximum temperature.”
NOAA’s explanation for this does not hold water in my opinion. If the data is bogus why not just discard it? It’s pretty fishy when all the so called bogus data is adjusted to cool the past and warm the present. Other examples include in-filling of missing data with warm data rather than cooler data from nearby stations. So much adjusted and missing temperature data says past temperature data are so rotten all the records should all be tossed out. The State Of Denmark Comes To Mind
“NOAA’s explanation for this does not hold water in my opinion.”
Yes. NASA offers an explanation for the adjustments — except that it is not really an explanation. Anyone who reads their statement can see that what they offer is an assertion; they do not actually explain what they did. They say that what they did “largely account(s) for the impact of instrument and siting changes.” OK, kind of them to say so, but WHAT instrument change? WHAT siting change? How did they determine that changes happened? Was there metadata on the changes, or did they just say, “there is a jump in the data here — it must be a siting change!” How did they determine how MUCH to adjust? And, most glaringly, did they offer any rationalization at all to explain the very, very odd circumstance that all around the world there must have been a consistent pattern of reading temperatures too warm decades ago, reading them just right for a few years and now in reading the temperatures too low?
NASA has offered an obfuscation designed to look like an explanation. Why would that be?
Tony, it would be nice if you were a little less cyrptic on these small posts.
“… one or more of a small group of skeptics steps up to the plate and wrecks the message …”
What groups are we talking about? What did they say? Who made them eat crow?
~Mark
The skeptics need to remember Reagan’s 11th Commandment.
AHHHhhhh but are they skeptics or Trojan Horses? link
BTW The Trojan Horse was the original symbol for US Army SF. http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//monthly_02_2013/post-3653-0-46538400-1360514386.jpg
That is what the original 10th Special Forces crest on the green flash worn on the green beret in 10th SF looked like. The group I belonged to was the oldest of the SF groups. It was originally made up of Communist hating displaced persons from the countries the Soviets made into the Warsaw Pact after WW II. BTW back when the first company was formed in Germany the whole bunch of them swam the English channel as a group.
Apologies? I don’t think so. They hole they are in is too deep.
What’s with Michaels?
http://www.cato.org/blog/great-temperature-adjustment-flap?utm_content=buffer13c2b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
“…some of the adjustments for measurement biases introduce scientifically defensible warming trends.”
He swallowed the kool aid Mosher and Zeke served him.
Tony has a tendency to be a bit cryptic so if you have not been following the blog for a while it is like you came into the middle of a conversation with Calvin Coolidge.
“In sum, I’d hold fire about “the biggest science scandal ever.” The facts are:
when the global temperature records were reworked by people as skeptical as yours truly, nothing much emerged;
some of the data have been mangled, like the Central Park record—and there are serious problems over some land areas in the Southern Hemisphere
and
some of the adjustments for measurement biases introduce scientifically defensible warming trends.”
It seems some prominent skeptics have gone a little wishy-washy and are climbing on the fence.
What difference does it make, right? What about Iceland, just for starters? Where is the defense of the mishmash they call data? Adjusted data is no longer data, but total a SWAG.
I understand that adjustments were made monthly. I think most believe it was an occasional thing based on station moves, at least that is the impression given.
“…I think most believe it was an occasional thing based on station moves, at least that is the impression given….”
……
Wel Lubos Motl/Zeke/Mosher for the BEST dataset explained that one.
They SAY it is based on station moves but it is actually based on an AlGoreRhythm that looks at the data and if the data jumps around “fixes its” No human eyes look at the evidence. They are too lazy. It is all done by a computer program.
The results give you this for Reykjavik in Iceland
“The animation below flashes between GISS V2 and V3′ (2012)
Notice how a discontinuity is introduced around the 1930s when the station rapidly warmed over five years. Another discontinuity in 1940 and a third in 1960
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/iceland-1.gif?w=640
The 2013 version.
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/reykjavik.gif
A graph that is not automated
“Arctic warmth in the 1940’s just didn’t fit the Arctic warming narrative, so NASA erased it two years ago.”
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/screenhunter_1894-jan-16-18-40.gif?w=640&h=443
Was getting rid of the 1940s warming spike intentional? Yes!
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/02/18/making-the-1940s-warming-spike-disappear-in-iceland/
Let’s see if I can get that third graph to show
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/screenhunter_1894-jan-16-18-40.gif
Hansen was caught and backpedaled a bit.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/05/11/hansen-covering-his-tracks-in-iceland/
What they can’t tamper with is the written record of eyewitnesses.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/latest-giss-data-tampering-in-iceland/
Paul Homewood has also done a lot of work.
The latest: Temperature Adjustments Transform Arctic Climate History
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/loftslaghiti2_thumb_thumb.png
“Figure 2. 7-year running means of temperature at three locations in Iceland, Reykjavík (red trace)), Stykkishólmur (blue trace) og Akureyri (green trace). Kuldakast = cold period. The first of the marked periods was the coldest one in the north (Akureyri), the second one was the coldest in Reykjavík.”
Adjustments to experimental data and observations – in fields of science as diverse as climate, solar and nuclear physics – all appear to be driven by UN’s Agenda 21.