Thursday, February 25, 2016

In One Ear and Out the Other

The Real Science site has a post on "Understanding Climate Science in One Paragraph", a paragraph that informs the reader that the globe warmed from 1977 to 1991, and very little if any since.

I find this interesting, because I informed the Real Science author and his readers of this (I specified the time period as 1976 to 1989/90) as early as September 2013, nearly two and a half years ago--and in a number of later comments on the site. To my knowledge, he never mentioned my insight, including in this latest post. (To be fair, no other blog ever acknowledged me either, when I tried to inform them years ago that the global mean sea surface temperatures, from late 2010 through much of 2011, precisely tracked those in 1990/91, twenty years earlier.)

The Real Science author also never mentioned my informing him that US Temperatures Have Been Falsely Adjusted According to the Level of Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere either--but he told it to his readers two years later (precisely two years later, as a matter of fact).

His acceptance of my insights thus has seemed to lag my attempts to inform him of them by two years or so, and without ever mentioning me. So I have generally stopped visiting his site.

Anthony Watts, meanwhile, will no longer accept my comments on his "wattsupwiththat" site, and he has been hostile to me ever since my Venus/Earth temperatures comparison showed any competent physical scientist that there is absolutely NO carbon dioxide "greenhouse effect" (which he adamantly defends), all the way from the 0.04% CO2 in Earth's atmosphere to the 96.5% in Venus's. The "greenhouse effect" is a religious cult, of brainwashed believers, whether "consensus" or "skeptics".

This is one of the reasons why I don't post on my blog as often as others in the climate debate--I have found both "warmists" and "lukewarm" critics of the warmist "consensus" to be tone-deaf to me, and to the definitive evidence I have tried to put forward.

The other, main reasons are 1)that the public climate discourse, on the part of those in power now and their loyal followers, is insane and immune to honest reason, and 2)that almost no one wants to listen to my main message to the world, of the Great Design of the "gods", which overthrows the central theories of all the earth and life sciences, and heralds a new scientific paradigm, beyond that of "undirected evolution" of the physical world, and of the universe beyond. I have given definitive evidence proving that as well, on this blog.

The mess that is "climate science" is just the tip of a general incompetence in science today, across all fields of science, from the submicroscopic to the cosmic.

I do not write this to complain, but to inform anyone who wants to know the truth about the real size of the problem we face.


  1. I never tried to calculate the kinds of results of input the way you have ; but when I read reports that the sign of results of alleged carbon dioxide change could not be assigned reliably...the idea of calculating effects from such a device left me totally unimpressed.

    1. Good Morning, Opit,

      You are talking about the supposed effects of "forcings", which the consensus climate scientists have misdirected themselves and everyone else with ever since the "greenhouse effect" was raised to prominence, as far back as 1960 or so by Carl Sagan (who infected James Hansen with it). That was the first and greatest "forcing" that opened the way for all the others. And neither it nor any of the others have ANY validity, as my Venus/Earth comparison definitively showed. They all continue to live, in the minds of those who slavishly follow consensus theory, because they all feed off of the "radiative transfer theory" of atmospheric warming, which is sacred science in academia (and in all of our subsequently suborned institutions).

      The bottom line is, all of the supposed "forcings" of global warming are local and transient in nature, in short WEATHER, not climate, least of all global climate, represented by the global mean surface temperature. Climate scientists all continue to show their incompetence by not facing the definitive evidence and realizing they are running after transient weather effects, and ignoring the global constraint that makes the unchanging Standard Atmosphere the true model of the atmosphere. Their "physics" is full of imaginary monsters, that keep them all from seeing the really simple physics of the atmosphere, shorn of the seeming chaos of transient weather--the unchanging stage upon which, and within which, all that seeming sound and fury play out. Their monsters are small characters, dwarfed by the stability of the global stage upon which they perform, over and over, the same play they have always performed.