My Washington State Senate Presentation

Here are the slides which can’t be seen in the video.  The ranking Democrat, Reuven Carlyle, started the proceedings by saying he was embarrassed by my presentation, before I had given it.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

106 Responses to My Washington State Senate Presentation

  1. Andy DC says:

    Seattle just had their biggest snowstorm of the 21st Century.

  2. Agmánd Apafarkas says:

    Thank you for everything you’ve been doing for us all.

  3. Jimmy Haigh says:

    Why are progressives so regressive? Because they are dickheads.

  4. lance says:

    Well done Tony!

  5. Robert says:

    Excellent presentation Tony. Boy, Senator Carlyle is a real appendage!

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      I agree; it was excellent. As an added bonus, I kept watching Sen. Carlyle through the presentation. He seemed to be suffering and fidgeting at times like he had chiggers, hemorrhoidal inflammation and toothache all at once. In the attached picture he seems to be digging something out of his teeth with the temple tip of his glasses:

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      The pain is progressive and unbearable but Sen. Carlyle bravely soldiers on …

  6. Gail Combs says:

    “Why are progressives so regressive?”

    Because their real goal is implementing a totalitarian world government by what ever means are necessary. Science, truth and concern for others are not and never have been part of their agenda. Only the acquisition of more and more power (and money) matters.

    They just rather do so by stealth so they do not risk bodily harm. CAGW was supposed to be the tool allowing them to get Agenda 21 in place world wide while the Trans-Pacific Partnership dismantled the USA, Canada and Australia.

    Trump and the Deplorables tossed a massive monkey wrench into their plans so now they are sulking and tossing tantrums.

    • Scott says:

      Very NICE Gail!…LOL

    • Yes, C8 has never been about rising temps; rather, it’s about replacing Capitalism (C8= Cash Cow, Caucasian Caused, Catastrophic, Carbon, Climate Change) concocted by Maurice Strong and his Rolodex of friends. Tony did a nice job of concisely summarizing and presenting the massive fraud that is C8. Anyone doubting that this is about supplanting Capitalism need only see that silly regressive protestor. His attitude is typical as is the jerk legislator who presented that stack of paper. That too is a typical tactic. You don’t get to examine it, you just have to take the guy at his word. Tony handled that question beautifully. Brian Cox did much the same thing when he whipped out his graph to shut down Malcolm Roberts. Tony’s rebuttal to the legislator questioning about citing the NYT while you’re busily besmirching them was good too. Distinguishing editorializing from reporting on what others say was the perfect approach. This battle will only be won by the calm presentation of the facts and Tony excelled at that in this presentation. Kudos!

    • AndyG55 says:

      Did you know…

      92 percent of left-wing activists in Berlin, Germany, live with their parents, while one in three are unemployed. 84% of those investigated were men, while 73% were between the ages of 18 and 29.

      Great picture of leftist moronic stupidity and cowardice, but you will have to follow the link to see it. :-)

      • gator69 says:

        92 percent of left-wing activists in Berlin, Germany, live with their parents…

        Let’s see how many of them remain left-wing once they start working and paying their own bills. It’s easy to rage against the machine, when mum is doing your laundry and making your bed.

    • GW says:

      Just like Reagan did !!! Previous leaders of the enviro/progressive movement had said Reagan set them back 20 years (best 20 years of my life, the 80’s & 90’s’)

      • cdquarles says:

        Mine too, and I have said to my children that if President Trump can deliver real tax and regulatory reform, they’ll have a much better future. [For a time, human nature being what it is.]

  7. GeologyJim says:

    Love the visual, Gail!

    Progressives do not share the Real World with the rest of us. They live in the murky realms of Consensus Illusion, Virtue Signalling, and Data Falsification.

    Too bad for the poor dears – Reality eventually bites these fog-heads on their cold, frozen butts.

  8. Scott M says:

    Of course he was embarrassed by his total belief in the Religion of Global Warming

  9. Scott M says:

    Tony, Congratulations for getting some major recognition for all your hard work. Your site is always a pleasure to read. I listened to you on Delingpoles podcast, you were great!!!

  10. Guy on the upper left, angrily slams a stack of unknown papers on his desk and claims they are dozens of science papers that go against everything you presented. I wonder how they went against your presentation before you ever gave it. Clearly he got the birds in his cage to pee review them. You should have been like judge Judy and asked him to bring the papers down to you, so you could inspect them, you would have seen that they were probably just a stack of coupons from Piggly Wiggly and some typing paper he grabbed out of the trash. The guy was a horribly stupid clown.

    He obviously didn’t listen to a word you said, and brought that stack of papers to the meeting with the intention of delivering that well rehearsed line about “peer reviewed blah blah blah”. That guy, an elected official, is no better than the clown with the banner yelling about “the science is settled”.

    Tony, you cast your pearls before swine here, except the guy on the lower left. He was cool.

  11. Steve Case says:

    Uh huh Goddard (Yeah, I know Goddard isn’t listed anymore) but what about methane? Huh, what about that? Methane is at least 86 times more powerful than CO2 and it’s gonna get us. All that Methane Crathlate will bubble up and become an absolute methane bomb and we’re all gonna roast like Big Daddy on a hot Mississippi night. So it don’t matter much that some two bit scientists fiddled with a few numbers. Just to make sure, did you read that? That’s right 86 times more potent than CO2, 86 ain’t zackley chickin feed you know. And it might be more’n nat. That’s right, a methane bomb and when it goes off all the ice in the world is gonna melt. 86 times hotter than it is today just might cause a few teensy problems.

    • A C Osborn says:

      I really hope that your comment is minus a Sarc tag?
      If not, may I ask you 2 questions, 1. where do you think all the Methane came from?
      2. What do you think the temperature was when all that Methane was originally around?

      • Steve Case says:

        If you haven’t noticed the left is gearing up the methane meme. California just passed methane legislation, and others are going to follow suit. The 86 times more powerful or whatever number they choose to claim isn’t challenged, it seems, by anyone. It’s a good number but at the same time it’s bullshit. The reason it’s bullshit is because 86 times nearly nothing is still nearly nothing. In terms of lies damn lies and statistics, it’s a cheap statistical trick.

  12. Advocatus Diaboli says:

    “The ranking Democrat, Reuven Carlyle, started the proceedings by saying he was embarrassed by my presentation, before I had given it.”

    [sarcasm]Clearly yet another open-minded liberal.[/sarcasm]

    • Robertv says:

      “Why are progressives so regressive?”

      That’s what they get paid for. They are just a tool and tools don’t have to think they just have to OBEY. Being open minded would make them worthless. What do you do with a broken tool?
      The only way you can stop this is by cutting their funding. Abolish the Federal Reserve and eliminate direct taxation. Without funding this bureaucratic monster can’t exist.

    • I just watched Carlyle’s squawk. THAT is a totalitarian, not a liberal. Calling communo-fascist looters “liberal” is counterproductive. First, it’s wrong in the English-speaking world. Second, it gives them protective coloration with which to dupe the unwary. Petr Beckmann, who lived in Boulder, wrote of this often. He, Czech, worked to defend English from 1932 conservative misuse and civilization from communo-fascist variants of socialism armed with nuclear weapons. Anyway, good presentation, but I had to increase the volume by 320% so I could listen to it again while walking the dog.

      • Gail Combs says:

        That is why I try never ever to use the word ‘liberal’ except in the words Classic Liberal and instead use Progressive for the whole darn collection of anti-individual totalitarians.

        • Sunsettommy says:

          Call them LEFTIST is even better.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            I call them Leftists, Commies or totalitarians, otherwise “liberals” or “progressives”. There is nothing liberal about them and the future they are progressing towards is straight out of the most dystopian novels.

            My favorite Colorado newspaper headline from the 1990s:

            Liberals Oppose Liberalized Gun Law

            To this day I think some conservative mole in the “liberal” paper did it on purpose.

        • Jason Calley says:

          I usually use the phrase “self-described “Progressives””. I am thinking that perhaps I should give up on the progressive label and just go straight to “authoritarians.” That really is the heart of their movement. They want to control everything you do. They claim authority even over what you think and say. Screw ’em. I am perfectly willing to let them run their own lives, to do what they wish with their own stuff, to donate their funds to whatever cause they see fit, but I demand — no, let me say, “I DEMAND! ” — that I be left alone to do the same thing. From now on they might be authoritarians, they might be just communists or socialists, but they for darn sure ain’t the boss of me!

          End rant.

        • T says:

          I would also caution about the use of any traditional labels. There are a great many good, smart, fair-minded people who have socially liberal ideas, while being fiscally conservative. And vice-versa. And other stripes and shapes beside. It looks to be a two-sided world, because our political systems makes it so. Political parties sell these platforms of ideas that conflate a great many otherwise legitimately different ideas, but if you want to stay registered with one and remain “one with Landrew” you have to swallow hard on some of them. I regard that as crap and if nothing else and it continues to underscore and reenforce my current to desire to remain a registered Independent to my dying day. There’s nothing inherently wrong in being either progressive or conservative, so long as your thoughtful about your opinions and allow them to evolve as you encounter new information. We’re all prone to hubris. Everyone. Once you feel your “side” is chosen and absolutely true (at all times), your hubris has you ensnared. Humility, thoughtfulness, kindness and good humor always. Even and especially when it’s the toughest to be so.

  13. CLIVE says:

    Excellent presentation. Thank you. I’ve downloaded your slide show.

    You were challenged about your recent Tweet about the NYT, yet you had referenced it many times. You said, “they have changed and gone downhill” or something to that effect.” The huge difference between (say) 1975 and 2017 is that, in ’75 they published items of interest and were less biased. Today, they only publish items that fit AGW and would never write a word that opposed their opinions about AGW.

    Loved your response to the first “peer reviewed” question.

    Thanks again.

    In Lethbridge, Alberta where at 9 PM it is -31°C with a wind chill of -42°C!! Supposed to be +9° (~48°F) in less than 48 hours which means wind which means bad drifting after the huge snow dump we received on the weekend.

  14. mat says:

    It’s like being walked through your entire blog in one sitting. Someone needs to edit this with the slides as the main video feed, as video doesn’t do justice to the back of your head…:p

  15. AndyOz says:

    Outstanding presentation. Perfect practice makes perfect.
    And handled the questions well too. Congrats.
    The uncovering of the fraud is now on the official record.

    I love it when politicians reach for “peer reviewed science papers” which they couldn’t read let alone understand. Appealing to authority is another “refuge of scoundrels’.

    The climate scam is unravelling fast. Scientists are less afraid of getting sacked for telling the truth and calling out the fraudsters. More and more will come forward.

    • Steve Case says:

      AndyOz says at 5:32 am
      I love it when politicians reach for “peer reviewed science papers” which they couldn’t read let alone understand. Appealing to authority is another “refuge of scoundrels’.

      I like Tony’s answer, that he’d be one of the 97%.

    • Of course Tony didn’t have the time to get into the whole peer review scam; but, that process too is one that has been massively corrupted. Peer reviewed piffle is what it is.

  16. Kristy Royce says:

    Big crowd.

  17. Windsong says:

    It was great to meet Tony in person in Olympia, and see his presentation for the Washington State Senate EE&T Committee. I had been concerned there may have been a protester or two who may show up and make a scene; current m.o. for a lot of progressives these days. Mentioned that concern to a relative who is an Asst Sgt at Arms in the WA State Legislature. He assured me if anything happened, it would be handled quickly. He was right.

    Not sure why the TVW camera is fixed at that one angle, unless it helps keep the committee members from fidgeting more than they do now. Certainly doesn’t help viewers get a sense of the speakers, or any visual aids on the big screens. Anyway, I own the gray hair that fills the lower right corner during much of the video.

  18. Michael D Smith says:

    Tony, that was a simply OUTSTANDING presentation! You are a natural. Your qualifications are astonishing, and you had total command over the question and answer session. Bravo!

  19. Brad-DXT says:

    I enjoyed watching your presentation Tony.
    I admire how you handled yourself with the hostile politicians.

    When you told the politician that slammed down a pile of papers that the data the papers were based on was corrupt, he didn’t have a good come back.

    That Carlyle joker looked like he would start pulling his hair out or start crying during your presentation which I thought brought good comic relief. I noticed that he was concentrating on trying to attack your character and reasoning ability than trying to contradict the facts laid out before him. Sounds like an adherent to Alinsky.

    Thank you for your excellent work.

    • I will have to watch the video next to see their expressions. I was reviewing the slides as Tony whipped through them.

      Because we readers of this blog are fully aware of Tony’s arguments, we didn’t have a problem following it. But, for those newbies, their heads were spinning and exploding. Too much information for one to digest in one sitting. As the Chairman said, I’ll read it to better understand it.

  20. R. De Haan says:

    Next time if a buffoon comes up with tla stash of reports say this: The peer review process is corrupt because the fraudulent clique is doing the peer review on eachothers work just like they colude on manufacturing data. You can burn those reports because they are not worth the paper they are printed on.

    Great job but we have to drain this swamp.

    • Robertv says:

      But you first have to build the dike so nothing can get in again if not it is like pumping air in a tire with holes .

    • Another approach is to show that the fake Consensus is comprised by 2000 ex-scientists turned political bureaucrats. The Petition Project that successfully blocks Senate ratification of the Kyoto protocol to this day was signed by 15 times as many degreed scientists. If consensus were to determine science, it would be “settled” on the side of freedom, not coercive bans, rationing, fines, penalties or carbon taxes.

  21. R. De Haan says:

    They were clearly rail roading your effort. What an annoying bunch of people. The video however has been made to bear witness of your excellent presentation where you keep your cool. The bozo with the banner was the cherry on the cake.
    Now plaster it all over the web.

  22. Greg says:

    Well spoken Tony!

    What an audience… A few may have been seeking truth, the rest clearly minds made up, fidgeting and distracted, waiting to attack the messenger without any consideration of the message.

    Please keep speaking as long as anyone cares to listen.

    • Dissent wrecks their hypnosis of others, and the effect is huge. One dissenter like Rudy reduces the error rate by a solid 15%, and makes the deliberate liars uncomfortable. This result is from the Solomon Asch experiment written up as Opinions and Social Pressure back in 1955.

  23. CheshireRed says:

    Good work Tony. Another step in the right direction and as for pushback from the Carlyle’s of this world, well that’s to be expected when their judgement is called out. AGW theory is currently taking the heaviest hits in its 30 year lifetime and advocates know it. If it’s going to be taken down, now is the time.

  24. RGB from Oz says:

    I’ll add my congratulations and thanks Tony. You have hit your straps with this presentation. I will look forward to seeing and re-posting a video which includes your presentation and the slides. Hoping someone is up to it.

    • CheshireRed says:

      Open a duplicate tab, open Tony’s slides and you can then listen to the speech on one tab (not much happens there bar the idiot at the end so you’re not missing anything visual) while you scroll through the slides on the duplicate.

  25. richard says:

    Amazing CV,

    In the Vid watch Reuven Carlyle’s body language, he is not listening, he is doing everything he can to not listen.

    Ive seen this behaviour with Nigel Farage at Brussels when he is talking , Junkers and all the other shysters start shuffling papers, reading reports, anything but listen.

    It’s disrespectful and Very childish.

    • SxyxS says:

      There is no need for Carlyle to listen as it makes no difference.

      If someone is too dumb to understand a thing and even paid for to not understand it than listening to arguments wouldn’t change much .
      (i mean-these idiots believe that batshit crazy islam with 1400 years of violence,slavery,pedophilia and 30000+ terrorattacks in the past 16 years is the religion of peace though the meaning of the word Islam is submission and mohammed was such an incredibly dumb person that he gave God his fathers name(mohammeds fathers name was Abd-Allah :)
      – how can you expect that such persons can understand science,when they cannot understand the most obvious and primitive things.

      Their only weapon therefore is:
      arrogance,ignorance,intidimation,violence,submission(just like islam)

      Carlyle just just there to show what an ingnorant and dumb prick he is
      -and he was very succesfull doing this.

      • Edmonton Al says:

        SxyxS : Absolutely right on. Perfect.

      • Dan Kurt says:

        re: “[State Senator Reuven] Carlyle just just there to show what an ingnorant and dumb prick he is….” SxyxS

        Doubt if he is DUMB. Ignorant and a Prick, apparently.
        Education: Harvard University, University of Massachusetts Amherst, John F. Kennedy School of Government.

        Dan Kurt

        p.s. For 14 years I had a condo three blocks from his district in Seattle. Believe it or not, there is a larger than life statue of Lenin (called Lennie by the deranged locals) on the main drag there (Fremont District).,_Seattle

        • SxyxS says:

          Well Dan,
          George W Bush
          has a Harvard & Yale Education.(the top of the tops)

          And he is a dumb,ignorant,prick.
          (or lets say:an ignorant,agendadriven ,corrupt liar)

    • rapscallion says:

      LOL, and the beauty of it all is that our Nigel gives ’em such an ear bashing. God how they hate it. How I love watching them squirm. What they really, really hate is that 99 times out of a 100 he’s also right. He really flashed them up the week after we voted to leave the corrupt EUSSR. How they howled, and how I laughed and bathed in the their tears.

    • It’s necessary. To be effective at duping others it helps if you really BELIEVE 2+2=5… evidence to the contrary interferes with the Act of Faith. But paid liars, as in the Solomon Asch experiment, are effective thickeners of the stack of paper even though they say nothing and do not actively seek to change the test subject’s opinion.

  26. Robertv says:

    On behalf of #waleg, we apologize to people of WA that GOP granted @SteveSGoddard discredited far right wing climate denier open platform.

    Some great comments. Looks like it backfires.

    Gavin Schmidt wants a copy

    Gavin Schmidt ‏@ClimateOfGavin · 8h8 hours ago

    @Reuvencarlyle since he mentioned me multiple times, happy to critique the presentation if you can send me a copy & if it would be useful

    • Gail Combs says:

      Gavin Schmidt just wants to make sure he has his defence ready and the data bit-bleached so his Donkey doesn’t land in jail…

  27. CheshireRed says:

    A typical alarmist sting in the tail at the end, there. ‘Don’t allow these people a platform to speak’ sounds about par for the liberal alarmist course.

  28. Pethefin says:

    Beautifully delivered cold facts, Tony. I would like to propose that you consider making the point about the migration and massacre of the temperature stations even sharper by adding a graph like the one John Coleman uses:

  29. QV says:

    The trouble is, some people don’t want to listen, because their minds are closed.

  30. TimboA says:

    Here’s my favorite tweet….in reply to @joemalx

    Tony Duncan‏ @tonydunc

    @joemalx @Reuvencarlyle @SteveSGoddard mo. Only if you do so out of complete ignarance and necesity for huge conspiracy to believe

  31. Don B says:

    There is a lot work to be done in Washington State and the rest of the left coast – those people are nuts.

    “The Seattle City Council voted 9-0 Tuesday to cut banking ties with Wells Fargo because of the bank’s role as a lender to the Dakota Access Pipeline project. The city will not renew its contract, which continues through 2018.”

  32. Squidly says:

    Tony, great presentation! … I definitely applaud your efforts in this matter. However, I would point out that I believe your time and effort with the Washington State legislature we completely futile and a big waste of your time. I know that State very well, and they are not interested in facts, nor are they interested in anything to do with their constituencies aside from voting them another term. You could convince them 100% that your presentation is factual, and I would not make one whit of difference in their behavior or policy making. Their policy making is never based upon facts, only based upon business and political climes.

    Washington State is the bastion of Marxism in this country. As Don B. indicates, they are completely nuts. I was born and raised there, my parents still live there, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that Washington State is, and always will be, a total waste of your time. They simply don’t care for facts.

    • tonyheller says:

      The head of the committee, Senator Ericksen, is now the communications head for the EPA transition. He invited me, and clearly my efforts were not a waste of time.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Superb Tony
        Very easy to understand. Now I have to kick Hubby back off his computer to hear the questions and answers.

      • Squidly says:

        While I understand the invite from Senator Ericksen, it certainly was a waste of time in terms of accomplishing anything within the realm of Washington State. Again, you aren’t going to get anywhere with those people. I mean, come on, just look at what happened with Judge James Robart and Trump’s immigration ban. These people in Washington don’t give a rat’s rump. They will do and think whatever the hell they wish, regardless of fact. I applaud Senator Ericksen for inviting you. That was very gracious, but I still cannot help feeling that they just wasted a lot of your precious time, effort and money.

        What do you feel you accomplished? .. What value did your time spent bring?

    • Sunsettommy says:


      most of the leftists are in just two counties in Western Washington, unfortunately they are the two most populous counties. Eastern Washington is about 98% Republican.

      The two biggest cities are extreme leftists,Seattle (King County) and Tacoma (Pierce county).

      • Squidly says:


        I am extremely familiar with Washington State. I was born there, I grew up there. My parents have lived there for some 60 years. I have many family members who live all up and down the left-coast, through Washington, Oregon and Kalifornistan. Sea-Tac, Everett, Bellevue, Portland, Salem, Eugene, Medford, Sacramento San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, Los Angeles and San Diego … those cities dictate ALL politics and political policies up and down the left-cost.

        The extreme leftists are all in the greater populated areas along the coast. Anywhere inside of that line is conservative, especially along and east of the Cascade mountain range.

        However, legislatively, all 3 of those States are DEEP DEEP blue. The population of the cities mentioned above simply outnumber the rest.

        Go take a look at what they have done all through the Columbia River Gorge. When I was a kid, that was beautiful pristine acreage for miles upon miles. Now, it is littered with bird beaters (wind mills) absolutely destroying the natural beauty, habitat and wildlife all up and down the gorge. Recall that they have done this all in the name of “climate change”. No, not because they needed electricity, as Washington State is awash with energy, from hydroelectric to nuclear (my father was an engineer at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation for 40 years).

        I’m telling you whether or not Senator Ericksen is a “nice guy”, perhaps with good intentions for Tony to present to the legislature, I believe it was a sad waste of Tony’s time. I am personally angry about it because I feel Tony’s time has tremendous value, and I personally believe this was nothing but to spite him. And that angers me. I value Tony’s work, I don’t like it being disrespected in that manner.

        My two cents …

  33. R. De Haan says:

    Most of these dumb assess get funding from Soros including Ryan, Rubio and our corrupt fence hopper McCain.
    No way to convince them of anything.
    Only mony speaks.

  34. richard verney says:

    With reference to the opening remark:

    If only we were dealing with 1950s science and the standards of rigour that were then applied, we would not be in this mess!

    The problem is that we are not dealing with 1950s science but rather late 20th century pseudo science. Post normal modernism, reinvention of facts is where we have gone wrong.

    Science is about numbers. The integrity of data is paramount. The problem is with the collection and processing of the data. We have fallen down at the first hurdle, and no science can be conducted on the temperature data sets available since they do not withstand scientific rigour.

    The failing in this science is simple. it should have started with an audit of the data source. All bad data should have been thrown away at the outset. we should accpet that due to spatial coverage issues, there is no worthwhile data in the Southern Hemisphere, and hence no global data. the only sample set woth a pinch of salt is that of the Northern Hemisphere.

    Science is also about experimentation and replication of results We should have conducted a review like the surfacestation review of all temperature stations and selected only those that have pristine data, ie., no siting issues, no station moves, thorough known history of screens and instruments, no encroachment of UHI or adjacent land use change, best practices and procedures of observation and record keeping. This audit might have left only 20 or 30 stations suitable in each country. Those stations ought to have been retrofitted with the same LIG thermometers as used in the 1930s/1940s and then we should have observed in accordance with the same practice and procedure historically used at the site in question.

    There would then be no need for any adjustments to raw data, no homogenisation etc. Simply compare today’s LIG readings with the raw data of those obtained in the 1930s/1940s. No attempt to create anomalies or a Hemispherical wide set. Just examine each station individually to see what if any change has occurred.

    Why compare with the 1930s/1940s? Simple. Some 95% of all manmade CO2 emissions have taken place the 1940. If global temperatures in the selected sites in the Northern Henisphere have not changed, given that CO2 is a well mixed gas, we know that CO2 cannot be having a big impact on the planet as a whole (well apart from greening it).

    You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. the first task is to get good data upon which scientific scrutiny can be made.

  35. It dawns on me that Tony’s rebuttal to the 97% of scientist claim was new, to wit, they agree but the data, produced by a small group is defective. So, their being duped. Brilliant argument.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Tony clearly thought about an effective rebuttal of their dumb talking points.

    • RAH says:

      Clearly if someone is still using that 97% stat when it’s been proven false time and again, then there is no use arguing with them about it’s accuracy in such a forum. So Tony handled it perfectly. Making his questioner seem more radical while he presented a common sense argument that anyone could understand. Well ALMOST anyone.

  36. I wish there was an edit feature so I could fix my stupid spelling mistake. “So they’re being duped.”

  37. Well done.

    And well done those who invited you.

  38. pmc47025 says:

    The Seattle Weakly doesn’t like evidence. It appears that my comments there were moderated, time will tell.

  39. GCN3030 says:

    Tony Heller Answers WA State Senator Kevin Ranker on Climate Science 2/7/2017

    Kevin Ranker: “I have a question, so I feel like the only ones still debating climate science are this Legislature and Congress. I feel like some of this presentation today may be alternative facts, (drops stack of papers), that is several dozen peer reviewed papers by hundreds of scientists that are all directly contrary to your entire testimony, how do you explain that?”

    Tony Heller: “Well exactly which parts of my testimony do you feel it’s contrary to?”

    Kevin Ranker: “This says climate change is real, it is human caused, it’s undebatable, and it is dozens of scientists, I mean hundreds of scientists in dozens of peer reviewed papers by people who have their degrees in climate science.”

    Tony Heller: “First of all, the stuff which I presented this morning was work which has been done by very small groups of people within NASA and NOAA, and as I mentioned upfront that the work that your referring to depends on the accuracy of that data. If the underlying temperature data is incorrect, it severely affects their conclusions and it also affects the conclusions of policy makers. That’s why it’s important that we get down to this and that’s why what Senator Ericksen mentioned upfront is very accurate.

    I’m a geologist; I’m well aware that the climate changes. In 1975 the National Academy of Science’S report said the climates of the Earth have always been changing, how much and how fast we do not know.

    20,000 years ago Chicago was under a mile of ice. In the 1930’s it was so hit in the midwest people had to move out. The climate does change, it changes all the time.

    There is no question that carbon dioxide impacts the radiative balance of the atmosphere. I have worked personally on software development for the National Center for Atmospheric Research’shows radiative transfer model. I am very versed in this. I understand that more carbon dioxide increases temperature somewhat.

    What is being debated is how much, is ithere serious, is it a problem.

    I think it is a straw man argument to say you either believe in climate science or you don’t, that’s not what’s going on here.

    I would agree with your 97% consensus; what I disagree with is the amount, I disagree with the way the temperature data has a been handled.”

  40. Akseli Kattainen says:

    You are my hero. Very well given presentation.

  41. CheshireRed says:

    Carlyle getting absolutely rinsed on Twitter. Almost every reply has it right, too: ‘Instead of attacking Goddard, counter his views’.

    • RAH says:

      Their lawyers. When they can’t attack the facts their only choice is to attack the character of the presenter.

      Great Job Tony. For some reason I suspect that your round of presentations over the last 6 months are a work up for a presentation before our own Congress in the future? Possibly in testimony before a Congressional committee during a review of NOAA and or NASA GISS procedures for the Trump administration or something like that?

  42. David Reich says:

    Thank you for your outstanding presentation. In spite of the fact that there were only a handful of attendees holding onto their golden calf presuppositions, there are at least two reasons why I found it so vitally important. First, the fact that you have made this information available herein allows the rest of us to use it to influence others who have been duped by the media and by prevailing mentality that “government knows best”. I plan on coveting much of your information at an upcoming church adult ed Sunday school class where we discuss “Issues of the day”. Second, the fact that you were speak in front of a legislative body adds credibility to your information.

    One point I would add to some other readers is that there is an increasing amount of peer-reviewed articles being published in leading science journals that refute the alarmist claims. Last year alone, over 500 such papers were published, many of which I have linked and shared to the dismay of progressive regressives confronting the claim that all scientists act in unison. We need to rally the troops and take head on this idiotic April 22 march of “scientists”. Putting forth data, rebuttals and arguments as you have gives us all added credibility against the forces that want to radically alter the entire utility grid based on a lie. Martin Luther did not convince anyone at the Diet of Worms, but his efforts sure changed history. Bravo!

  43. Edmonton Al says:

    Wonderful presentation Tony.
    I am disgusted with the rudeness of some of the attendees.
    Most totally disinterested.

  44. Susan Lautz says:

    I listened to it twice, but I still don’t understand what that guy was apologizing for at the end. Any ideas?

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Reuven Carlyle was apologizing to his extreme Left electorate in Seattle’s 36th District for the proxy humiliation The People suffered by having their Senator sit helplessly through Tony’s reactionary outrage.

      Look at the poor Senator in the picture above covering his face. He seemed desperate at times. I reckon the downtown hipsters got wasted last night to forget their shame and they will take it out on him. I mean, first the national election, and now this?

      At least they have an assisted suicide law in Washington. They just need to extend it from the terminally ill to the terminally stupid.

  45. TW says:

    Great slides and thanks for sharing them!
    Keep up the good work!

  46. During a speech in Pasco, Washington in 1991, Gov. Lee further denounced the growing number of scientists advancing theories of climate change by telling her audience to “beware of averages. The average person has one breast and one testicle.”
    Dixie Ray Lee~

  47. Steve says:

    Great presentation. Well done, and thanks.

  48. Thank you Tony for your summary. It is tragic that science has sunk so low that fraud is not just an isolated event, like Piltdown Man, but Federally Funded.

    I also find it very disheartening that actually looking at data didn’t persuade one mind.

    Besides being a former scientist, I do a little video production. If you would like, I can edit your slides and testimony video into a single video for your use, if that would be advantageous.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *