American Elephants


I am not optimistic! by The Elephant's Child
January 19, 2021, 8:55 pm
Filed under: Politics | Tags: , ,

President-Elect Biden will be inaugurated tomorrow. Washington DC is garlanded in American flags, the National Guard is very present. The Governor of Florida is furious that his National Guard Troops had to be “vetted” as if they were some kind of unknown military service from some unknown country. You may have noticed that there’s a remarkable amount of plain old rudeness going around.

President-elect Biden seems unfamiliar with both climate science and with basic economics. He wants to “rejoin” the Paris Climate Accords, which assume that the earth is overheating because of CO2 in the air, and the earth will die promptly if we do not eliminate fossil fuels. The earth is not overheating, it has been far warmer in the past and far cooler as well. Spending billions will make taxpayers poorer, but will not improve the climate at all.

The autistic child from Sweden who had been promoting school strikes there, came over to the United States to lecture the United Nations on the proper actions regarding climate. The Press, of course, loved her and she even got her picture painted on the side of a building in Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco. Money and invitations to speak flowed in, her parents hired someone to advise her on her speeches. Now she has just graduated from high school and is still promoting strikes, and her parents are doing very well financially.

President-elect Biden has issued all sorts of pronouncements about his very first day actions. Very scary. Big “stimulus” payments adding billions to the taxpayer’s debt, which economists say is not a good idea. Wants to naturalize any illegal aliens who were here on January first, and pretty much open the borders. There are already caravans on the way north. Some Central American countries have unfortunate governance, and the people are desperate for something better. Instead of demanding fixes for their own government, they are heading to this country where they hope to find work. Democrats hope to turn them all into Democrat voters.

The ideas of free speech and free people are unsurprisingly unpopular with the “ruling class” of many countries. Ruling classes want control, and we must constantly be watchful to deny them that privilege. Always seems strange that so many fail to understand that very basis essential fact.



Climate Panic Is Nothing New, We’ve Been Having Them for Years and Years! by The Elephant's Child

I have mentioned frequently that climate panics are nothing new. The country has been having them for years, every extra cold winter or every hot summer. Perhaps it is just human nature to worry about a changing climate. But it is not a casual matter. For at least 120 years, climate “scientists” have been warning that the climate is going to kill us, but they keep switching from a coming ice age to global warming.

Here’s a timeline of claims just from 1895 to 2014. which doesn’t even include the “1800 and froze to death” Little Ice Age from the early 1800s. Tom Lifson of American Thinker, referred me to Anthony Watts’  WattsUpWithThat.

  • 1902 – “Disappearing Glaciers…deteriorating slowly, with a persistency that means their final annihilation…scientific fact…surely disappearing.” – Los Angeles Times
  • 1912 Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice AgeNew York Times, October 1912
  • 1923 – “Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada” – Professor Gregory of Yale University, American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress, – Chicago Tribune
  • 1923 – “The discoveries of changes in the sun’s heat and the southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age” – Washington Post
  • 1924 MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age New York Times, Sept 18, 1924
  • 1929 – “Most geologists think the world is growing warmer, and that it will continue to get warmer” – Los Angeles Times, in Is another ice age coming?
  • 1932 – “If these things be true, it is evident, therefore that we must be just teetering on an ice age” – The Atlantic magazine, This Cold, Cold World
  • 1933 America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise New York Times, March 27th, 1933
  • 1933 – “…wide-spread and persistent tendency toward warmer weather…Is our climate changing?” – Federal Weather Bureau “Monthly Weather Review.”
  • 1938 – Global warming, caused by man heating the planet with carbon dioxide, “is likely to prove beneficial to mankind in several ways, besides the provision of heat and power.”– Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
  • 1938 – “Experts puzzle over 20 year mercury rise…Chicago is in the front rank of thousands of cities thruout the world which have been affected by a mysterious trend toward warmer climate in the last two decades” – Chicago Tribune
  • 1939 – “Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right… weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer” – Washington Post
  • 1952 – “…we have learned that the world has been getting warmer in the last half century” – New York Times, August 10th, 1962
  • 1954 – “…winters are getting milder, summers drier. Glaciers are receding, deserts growing” – U.S. News and World Report
  • 1954 Climate – the Heat May Be OffFortune Magazine
  • 1959 – “Arctic Findings in Particular Support Theory of Rising Global Temperatures” – New York Times
  • 1969 – “…the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two” – New York Times, February 20th, 1969
  • 1969 – “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000″ — Paul Ehrlich (while he now predicts doom from global warming, this quote only gets honorable mention, as he was talking about his crazy fear of overpopulation)
  • 1970 – “…get a good grip on your long johns, cold weather haters – the worst may be yet to come…there’s no relief in sight” – Washington Post
  • 1974 – Global cooling for the past forty years – Time Magazine
  • 1974 – “Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age” – Washington Post
  • 1974 – “As for the present cooling trend a number of leading climatologists have concluded that it is very bad news indeed” – Fortune magazine, who won a Science Writing Award from the American Institute of Physics for its analysis of the danger
  • 1974 – “…the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure…mass deaths by starvation, and probably anarchy and violence” – New York Times

1975 Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be InevitableNew York Times, May 21st, 1975

  • 1975 – “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind” Nigel Calder, editor, New Scientist magazine, in an article in International Wildlife Magazine
  • 1976 – “Even U.S. farms may be hit by cooling trend” – U.S. News and World Report
  • 1981 – Global Warming – “of an almost unprecedented magnitude” – New York Times
  • 1988 – I would like to draw three main conclusions. Number one, the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements. Number two, the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship to the greenhouse effect. And number three, our computer climate simulations indicate that thegreenhouse effect is already large enough to begin to effect the probability of extreme events such as summer heat waves. – Jim Hansen, June 1988 testimony before Congress, see His later quote and His superior’s objection for context
  • 1989 -“On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.” – Stephen Schneider, lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Discover magazine, October 1989
  • 1990 – “We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing – in terms of economic policy and environmental policy” – Senator Timothy Wirth
  • 1993 – “Global climate change may alter temperature and rainfall patterns, many scientists fear, with uncertain consequences for agriculture.” – U.S. News and World Report
  • 1998 – No matter if the science [of global warming] is all phony . . . climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” —Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment, Calgary Herald, 1998
  • 2001 – “Scientists no longer doubt that global warming is happening, and almost nobody questions the fact that humans are at least partly responsible.” – Time Magazine, Monday, Apr. 09, 2001
  • 2003 – Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as “synfuels,” shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration” – Jim Hansen, NASA Global Warming activist, Can we defuse The Global Warming Time Bomb?, 2003
  • 2006 – “I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore, Grist magazine, May 2006
  • 2006 – “It is not a debate over whether the earth has been warming over the past century. The earth is always warming or cooling, at least a few tenths of a degree…” — Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology at MIT
  • 2006 – “What we have fundamentally forgotten is simple primary school science. Climate always changes. It is always…warming or cooling, it’s never stable. And if it were stable, it would actually be interesting scientifically because it would be the first time for four and a half billion years.” —Philip Stott, emeritus professor of bio-geography at the University of London
  • 2006 – “Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930’s the media peddled a coming ice age. From the late 1920’s until the 1960’s they warned of global warming. From the 1950’s until the 1970’s they warned us again of a coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate’s fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years.” – Senator James Inhofe, Monday, September 25, 2006
  • 2007– “I gave a talk recently (on fallacies of global warming) and three members of the Canadian government, the environmental cabinet, came up afterwards and said, ‘We agree with you, but it’s not worth our jobs to say anything.’ So what’s being created is a huge industry with billions of dollars of government money and people’s jobs dependent on it.” – Dr. Tim Ball, Coast-to-Coast, Feb 6, 2007
  • 2008 – “Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA’s official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind’s effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress” – Dr. John S. Theon, retired Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA, see above for Hansen quotes

Section updated by Anthony:

  • 2009Climate change: melting ice will trigger wave of natural disasters. Scientists at a London conference next week will warn of earthquakes, avalanches and volcanic eruptions as the atmosphere heats up and geology is altered. Even Britain could face being struck by tsunamis – “Not only are the oceans and atmosphere conspiring against us, bringing baking temperatures, more powerful storms and floods, but the crust beneath our feet seems likely to join in too,” – Professor Bill McGuire, director of the Benfield Hazard Research Centre, at University College London, – The Guardian, Sep 2009.
  • 2010What Global Warming Looks Like. It was more than 5°C (about 10°F) warmer than climatology in the eastern European region including Moscow. There was an area in eastern Asia that was similarly unusually hot. The eastern part of the United States was unusually warm, although not to the degree of the hot spots in Eurasia. James HansenNASA GISS, August 11, 2010.
  • 2011Where Did Global Warming Go? “In Washington, ‘climate change’ has become a lightning rod, it’s a four-letter word,” said Andrew J. Hoffman, director of the University of Michigan’s Erb Institute for Sustainable Development.   – New York Times, Oct 15, 2011.

  • 2012Global warming close to becoming irreversible-scientists. “This is the critical decade. If we don’t get the curves turned around this decade we will cross those lines,” said Will Steffen, executive director of the Australian National University’s climate change institute, speaking at a conference in London. Reuters, Mar 26, 2012
  • 2013Global-warming ‘proof’ is evaporating.  The 2013 hurricane season just ended as one of the five quietest years since 1960. But don’t expect anyone who pointed to last year’s hurricanes as “proof” of the need to act against global warming to apologize; the warmists don’t work that way. New York Post, Dec 5, 2013
  • 2014  – Climate change: It’s even worse than we thought.  Five years ago, the last report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change painted a gloomy picture of our planet’s future. As climate scientists gather evidence for the next report, due in 2014, Michael Le Page gives seven reasons why things are looking even grimmer. – New Scientist (undated in 2014)

Sorry, Greta. Lots of people get fooled by public pronouncements. You are not alone.



Easing Your Mind a Bit About Climate Change by The Elephant's Child

The Weekly letter from Ken Haapala, President of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) gets into Groupthink or Bureaucratic Science. British journalist Christopher Booker. who has just died, was working on a book on groupthink and climate change— expanding on a paper on the subject which was published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

NOTE: You can download the complete weekly report in an easily printable form at http://www.sepp.org/the-week-that-was.cfm…

Let me just include a couple of bits from the report:

Led by John Christy, the Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), has 40 years of direct measurement of atmospheric temperature trends, yet the IPCC and others cling to surface measurements with very poor global coverage, with data contaminated by the urban heat-island effect. The IPCC ignores atmospheric data, where the greenhouse effect occurs. Based on their 40-years’ worth of worldwide data, the UAH group has estimated, in a published paper, that a doubling of carbon dioxide (CO2) will result in an increase in temperatures of about 1.1ºC or 2ºF.

And: physicist William van Wijngaarden and his colleagues, using measurements of the effects of greenhouse gases without the effects of clouds, have found that a doubling of CO2 (from 400 parts per million to 800 parts per million), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O) with a 6% increase in the dominant greenhouse gas, water vapor, will result in an increase in temperatures of about 1 to 1.5ºC or 2 to 3ºF. The lowest value the IPCC projects is 1.5ºC, which is the highest value of what van Wijngaarden projects. The highest value of the IPCC is 4.5ºC, far higher than van Wijngaarden.

The work of van Wijngaarden is based on libraries compiled by Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Atomic and Molecular Physics, the updating of which is discussed in a recent paper published in the Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer. Unlike data from some groups, the data are not a secret and can be explored using the internet and a laptop computer. Those who wish to do so need to realize certain terms may be confusing. For example, species and Isotopologues refer to different isotopes of an atom, resulting in variants of the same molecule. For example, Except for extreme cases in laboratories, hydrogen has 3 isotopes depending on the number of neutrons. The most common form of hydrogen has no neutrons.

That kind of puts a different light on the fear that increases in CO2 are inexorably warming the planet and we are all going to die in just 12 years from a roasting planet. Holman Jenkins, writing at the Wall Street Journal says: Ignore climate-science reporting in major U.S. news organs. The press has given up wrestling with the limits of knowledge or accurately relaying the caveats tied to highly abstract computer models. If a worst-case scenario materializes, humanity will have recourse to relatively cheap geoengineering solutions to attempt to mitigate warming.



Mark Steyn Takes on The “True Believers” and Rebukes Them. by The Elephant's Child

The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation’s Hearing:  Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate over the Magnitude of Human Impact on Earth’s Climate. December 8, 2015

Mark Steyn rebukes the Democrats in a climate hearing: “You’re effectively enforcing a state ideology!”



Meet Dr. John Christy, Renowned Climate Scientist. by The Elephant's Child
November 15, 2009, 9:49 pm
Filed under: Energy, Environment, Science/Technology | Tags: , ,

Dr. John Christy is a prominent University of Alabama in Huntsville climate scientist.  He has testified before Congress many times, and often begins a speech by reminding his audience that “consensus is not science.” Dr. Christy spoke to the Huntsville Rotary last week, and the Huntsville Times outlined his basic argument, clear and simple, which is worth sharing:

* The data being used to predict catastrophic warming is suspect.

* Models generated from that data “overstate the warming” actually taking place. The earth is warming, but not that much, and it has warmed and cooled for eons.

* The Earth’s atmosphere is nowhere near as sensitive to carbon dioxide as some environmentalists believe.

* Any “solution” to perceived global warming must balance the growing worldwide demand for energy against cutting carbon dioxide output.

* Fleet mileage requirements now proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency “would reduce global temperatures by about 1/100th of a degree,” Christy said.

* You would need to replace 1,000 coal-fired power plants with 1,000 nuclear plants to change global climate even .15 of a degree, he said.

” This is the scale (of global climate) we are talking about,” Christy said.

In his talk, Christy also took aim at several other widely discussed pronouncements.

* One cost of mandating harsh energy controls is the migration of industry to areas where requirements are less, Christy said.

* Temperatures in the Arctic have increased over the last 100 years, he agreed, but that’s only because 100 years ago “was the coldest it’s been in a long time.”

* Arctic ice has melted, but ice has grown in Antarctica. Between the two, there’s about as much ice as always.

* There are more polar bears now, not fewer. Canada issues 800 bear-hunting permits each year, he pointed out.

* Temperatures may be warmer in Greenland, but scientific experiments with ice fields show “that 4,000 years ago, it was warmer in Greenland than it is today.

* Greenland did not melt,” Christy said.

* Why is the apocalyptic view of climate change so widespread?

“Funding comes if you have an alarming story,” Christy said.

He also cited “group think” and said scientists revel in the attention their views about climate brings. “It’s almost a drug,” Christy said.

 



Meet Dr. Murry Salby, Atmospheric Physicist, And The Trials and Tribulations of scientific Research Today. by The Elephant's Child
April 27, 1915, 6:32 am
Filed under: Politics | Tags: , , , ,

Professor Murry Salby in London, March 2015

Dr. Murry Salby is an American atmospheric physicist in Australia. He has been on a lecture tour in Europe, explaining his new research. His research applies observed changes of climate and atmospheric tracers to resolve the budget of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The mechanisms behind the evolution of CO2, are revealed including its increase during the 20th century. His analysis determines the respective roles of human and natural sources of CO2, with an upper bound on the contribution from fossil fuel emissions. Sounds complicated, but it will throw a big monkey wrench in the IPCC “consensus,” and President Obama’s fixation on “carbon pollution.”

Well, we just ‘celebrated’ Earth Day, and the president said:

Our carbon pollution has fallen by 10 percent since 2007, even as we’ve grown our economy and seen the longest streak of private-sector job growth on record.  We’ve committed to doubling the pace at which we cut carbon pollution, and China has committed, for the first time, to limiting their emissions.  And because the world’s two largest economies came together, there’s new hope that, with American leadership, this year, the world will finally reach an agreement to prevent the worst impacts of climate change before it’s too late.

And from Rupert Darwall, writing at City Journal:

And yet, highly credentialed scientists, including Nobel Prize–winning physicist Ivar Glaever, reject what is often called the “climate consensus.” Giaever resigned from the American Physical Society in protest of the group’s statement that evidence of global warming was “incontrovertible” and that governments needed to move immediately to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. Sixteen distinguished scientists signed a 2012 Wall Street Journal article, in which they argued that taking drastic action to “decarbonize” the world’s economy—an effort that would have major effects on economic growth and quality of life, especially in the developing world—was not justified by observable scientific evidence. And, like Giaever, they objected to the notion of a climate consensus—and to the unscientific shutting down of inquiry and the marginalization of dissenters as “heretics.” Most recently, renowned climate scientist Lennart Bengsston stepped down from his post at a climate-skeptic think tank after he received hundreds of angry e-mails from scientists. He called the pressure “virtually unbearable.”

Another dissenter, the American atmospheric physicist Murry Salby, has produced a serious analysis that undermines key assumptions underpinning the AGW worldview. His work and its reception illustrate just how unsettled climate science remains—and how determined AGW proponents are to enforce consensus on one of the great questions of our age.

Dr. Salbly’s story is astonishing. Pure science which involves research, testing of hypotheses, doing it all again, and seeing what is supported by direct observation, good honest science without pre-conceptions is in direct conflict with the quest for grants and publicity, and especially the “settled science” which is the basis for getting those grants and awards. Settled science does not exist in the scientific profession. Everything is open to what is supported by direct observation and what can be established by someone else repeating your experiments. Climate science has been captured by politics. There is no such thing as “consensus” in science.

The article is long, but the story of what happened to Dr. Salby is important, as is grasping the nature and consequences of his work. Apparently true believers in Australia aren’t about to allow anyone to cast a skeptical eye on their claims. Swedish climate scientist Pehr Björnbom has replicated Dr. Salby’s work. Dr. Salby presents research that challenges the IPCC “consensus.”

As I wrote in an earlier post, Christina Figueres, the executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate change admitted that the goal of environmental activists was to get rid of Capitalism as an economic development model. She also thinks the world has too many people and wants to get rid of significant numbers of them. Never mind that you could put the entire population of the world in Texas, with the density of New York City. So you can see, it’s all about carbon dioxide!

With the hard Left, the issue is never the issue. In this case, it’s grants for wind farms and solar arrays, electric cars, (which by the way are not selling) and now Obama’s crusade to save Americans’ health from the ravages of too much CO2 — you know, the stuff we exhale every time we breathe.




<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: