A Simple Plan To Save Climate Science

I rode my bicycle up to the National Center For Atmospheric Research (NCAR) yesterday -like I do most days. NCAR has been experiencing record cold the last few days.

The first director of NCAR was Dr. Walter Orr Roberts, a brilliant solar physicist who understood that the Sun controlled Earth’s climate.

In 1973, Roberts predicted a drought based on sunspot cycles.

27 Sep 1973, Page 38 – El Paso Herald-Post at Newspapers.com

The drought occurred, exactly as he predicted.


Kevin Trenberth has attempted to protect funding for NCAR by ramping up the global warming BS. This strategy is doomed to fail, sooner rather than later. I have worked as a contractor at NCAR on several weather and climate modeling projects. The people there are very good.

My suggestion is to use the talent at NCAR to return to doing actual science, rather than wasting their time and energy on generating global warming propaganda. NCAR should go back to their roots, and do what Dr. Roberts wanted them to do – science.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to A Simple Plan To Save Climate Science

  1. Roy says:

    Great photos Tony!

  2. Mddwave says:

    You inspired me to learn more about Dr Roberts.

    Wikipedia portrays Roberts as “For decades, Roberts argued for action to halt anthropogenic global warming.”, but who believes Wikipedia.


  3. Steven Fraser says:

    Somebody with a bike like yours has been following you.

    BTW: the pic of the Flatirons is a real keeper. It deserves to be published more widely.

  4. dave1billion says:


    Have you ever ridden one of the new “fat tire” bikes? They were being advertised everywhere in Breckenridge last week.

    I find it amusing that you’re able to ride in the snow just fine without tires the width of my (admittedly thin) biceps.

    • neal s says:

      Jobst Brandt would regularly ride just about anywhere with skinny tires. He wrote “The Bicycle Wheel” which is the definitive text on the wire spoked bicycle wheel. Jobst was a gifted mechanical engineer with the heart and mind of a true scientist. There is a wealth of his informed opinions about cycling out on the web.

    • tonyheller says:

      The road was clear. I was just posing the bike in the snow.

  5. Ulric Lyons says:

    What occurred in 1975-76 is not a sunspot cycle issue, neither was it to do with low solar activity levels. It was due to a particular heliocentric quadrupole Jovian configuration exciting solar magnetic activities, producing a period of much stronger solar wind conditions. There were slightly oblique heliocentric analogues in 2003, 1948-49, 1934, which is why those years had such high regional temperatures. The ones with the tightest angles, like 1976, occur every 69.05 years (the AMO frequency) for four times, by which time there is some slip, and then a 41.5 year step to complete the 317.67 year grand synodic cycle of Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus. So going back 317.67 years from 2003, we find a baking hot year in the middle of the Maunder Minimum in 1686: https://climexp.knmi.nl/data/tcet.dat
    and late summer of 1658 in England, 317.67 years before 1976, was described as having excessive heat, and Italy excessive heat and drought.
    At three times that period, at very close to 953 years, there is also a finer harmony with Earth and Venus, so dominant temperature anomalies will occur almost the same time of year at a given Jovian configuration, Such as the winters of 1963 and 1010, the latter was one of two times that the River Nile is known to have frozen.
    I have a predictable logic for each two-three-four body Jovian syzygy and quadrature established, some augment solar activity levels, others diminish it, producing distinct hold and cold events.

  6. Robertv says:

    CMEs and Solar Energetic Particles | Joan Burkepile, NCAR/HAO


  7. The only issue that will save climate science is the recognition that carbon dioxide does not “trap” heat and that there is no “greenhouse effect” making earth warmer than it should be.
    There is a peculiarly hostile and dismissive nature of the response by supporters of the ‘consensus’ to those who question all this, a group that includes many eminent scientists and other experts.
    Ultimately their groupthink must always end up in someway colliding uncomfortably with the reality their blinkered vision has overlooked.
    Get the facts, make the right decision.

Leave a Reply

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