James Dodge

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@wil_da_beast630 @PIAccount1 Wilfred, it was a controlled demolition. Time to take the blinders off. The emperor has no clothes.

https://t.co/D6E9ehjXHR

[Jonathan Cohler @cohler]

Climate Science's Favorite Bluff
Two generations of climate scientists have been trained to repeat it. None of them can define what it means.

There is a phrase that circulates like a password in climate discussions. Someone points out that atmospheric CO₂ has a short turnover time. Within minutes an IPCC defender arrives and types the same empty accusation.

"You've confused the short residence time with the long adjustment time."

They never say what the adjustment time is.
They never cite a measurement.
They never write an equation.
They just deploy the phrase and consider the matter closed.

It is a climate shibboleth. A tribal password.
It has the shape of an argument and none of the substance.

No Operational Definition Exists

The IPCC has published six Assessment Reports. Search them for an operational definition of "adjustment time" that a physicist could take into the lab and measure. You will not find one.

There is no experiment that yields the number.
There is no observation that constrains it.
There is no derivation from first principles that produces it.

It appears as an output of the Bern Impulse Response Function, and nowhere else.

The Bern IRF is a curve fit to a bunch of models. No measurements or DATA involved at any step. Four exponentials with hand-tuned coefficients. Joos himself, the primary author, wrote in 2013 that the coefficients "should not be interpreted as distinct physical processes." IPCC AR5 Box 6.1 ignored him and used the coefficients exactly that way.

The "long adjustment time" is the tail of that fitted curve. It is what an ensemble of falsified models produces, not what nature does.

What The Measurements Actually Show

ACTUAL residence time τ_res is measured. Koutsoyiannis 2024 (Water 16, 2402) gives τ_res = 3.80 ± 0.12 yr from Mauna Loa and Barrow flux data. This number is derived, not assumed. It is peer-reviewed.

ACTUAL relaxation time τ_rel is also measured. Bomb radiocarbon left a spike in atmospheric ¹⁴C back in the 1960s. That spike decayed. It decayed as a single clean exponential across 52 years of Hua 2022 compilation data. Fit statistics: τ_rel = 18.4 years, permanent fraction = ZERO.

Zero. Not small. Zero.

The Bern IRF requires that 22% of an atmospheric CO₂ pulse remain airborne essentially forever, with an e-folding time of 165 years and longest decay timescale of 394 years!

Bomb-¹⁴C proves this cannot be. The spike decayed all the way down. Nothing stuck.

Every IPCC Global Warming Potential and Absolute Global Warming Potential number rests on that permanent fraction. Every "hundreds to thousands of years" persistence claim rests on that permanent fraction. The permanent fraction DOES NOT EXIST.

The Rhetorical Machine

Once you understand there is no measurement behind the "adjustment time," the deployment pattern becomes clear.

The phrase is not an answer to a technical question. It is a way to end the conversation without answering the technical question. The speaker asserts confusion in the opponent. The opponent now has to defend against a charge of confusion instead of pressing the original point. The audience, hearing an insider vocabulary word they do not know, assumes the speaker knows something they do not.

Nobody asks the speaker to define the term. Nobody asks for the measurement. Nobody asks how a quantity with no operational definition can be used to correct someone else's arithmetic.

The IPCC has trained an army of "useful idiots" to repeat the phrase. The army repeats it. The army has never been shown the underlying number because there is no underlying number.

The Fit Underneath The Fit

The defenders of the long adjustment time have one fallback when pressed. They say the Bern IRF parameters were derived from complex model runs. As if that rescued the number.

It does the opposite. It confirms the emptiness.

The Bern IRF is a curve fit. What it is fitted to is not atmospheric data. It is fitted to the output of coupled carbon-cycle models. Those models produce a long tail because they were built to produce a long tail.
The Revelle buffer is assumed.
The deep-ocean equilibration timescale is assumed. The permanent airborne fraction is assumed.
The model integrates the assumptions forward.

Joos fits four exponentials to the trajectory. The IPCC cites the four exponentials as if they described nature.

Nature never appears in the chain.

Model to fit to citation. That is the whole architecture. At no step does an observation enter and constrain a parameter.

There is a further tell. If the adjustment-time parameters described a physical quantity, they would be stable across successive fits. They are not. The Bern IRF coefficients change from AR2 to AR3 to AR4 to AR5. The permanent fraction moves. The individual e-folding times move. This is what parameter drift looks like when a curve is being refitted to changing model output. It is not what a physical constant looks like.

A measured quantity does not shift every seven years because the modeling group updated their code.

The Ensemble Move

And it is worse than fitting to a single model.

The parameters are fitted to an ensemble of models. This makes the epistemic situation worse, not better.

An ensemble in physics or statistics is a defined mathematical object. It requires the members to be independent draws from a common distribution, or to satisfy some other explicit sampling criterion, so that averaging across members reduces variance in a way that is calculable. The central limit theorem needs independent identically distributed samples. Bayesian model averaging needs priors and likelihoods. Any ensemble claim needs a stated mathematical structure that justifies treating the average as more informative than any single member.

CMIP has no such structure.

The CMIP models share code lineages, share parameterizations, share tuning targets, share the same falsified assumptions about tropospheric moist convection, share the same falsified radiative-disequilibrium premise, share the same assumed Revelle buffering, share the same assumed permanent airborne fraction. They are not independent. They have never been shown to be draws from any distribution. There is no likelihood function. There is no prior. The "ensemble mean" is an arithmetic average of correlated non-independent trajectories from models with shared failure modes.

That average has no statistical meaning. Averaging thirty models that all get the tropical hot spot wrong does not produce a better estimate of the tropical hot spot. It produces the same wrong answer with a spuriously narrow confidence interval.

And no individual member of the ensemble matches observation. Not one. Every CMIP run diverges from measured tropospheric temperature profiles. Every run diverges from ARGO ocean heat content. Every run produces the tropical hot spot that is not there. If any single model matched reality you could point to it. Nobody does. The defense is always the ensemble mean, precisely because no individual member is defensible.

Because the ensemble averaging has no mathematical basis, the standard practice of quoting "CMIP ensemble spread" as a measure of uncertainty is also empty. The spread is the disagreement among models that are all wrong. It is not a confidence interval. It does not bound the true value. It bounds the range of failure modes.

Layers of the Lie

A parameter fit to an illegitimate arithmetic mean of individually falsified simulations, whose spread is not an uncertainty, quoted as if it constrained a physical quantity that has no operational definition, deployed rhetorically to accuse others of confusion.

Every layer is empty.

The Foreclosure

The bomb-radiocarbon relaxation is a direct atmospheric observation with no model assumptions. It is inconsistent with any Bern-like impulse response, at any parameter setting. The operator-equivalence theorem proves this by Cauchy-Schwarz and Vandermonde arguments that hold for every choice of coefficients, not just the current ones.

There is no "long adjustment time" hiding somewhere waiting to be discovered. The physical system does not admit one. The tracer went in, and it came out, and it followed a single exponential the whole way.

When someone next tells you that you have confused residence time with adjustment time, ask them one question.

What is the operational definition of adjustment time, and where is the measurement that yields its value?

They will not answer.
They cannot answer.
There is no answer.

And they have been taught to keep saying the sentence anyway.

SHAME ON THEM

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@MAGAx2028 @bowtrip76 @ScarlettGrace92 @Mawmaw_Patriot Whatever you say https://t.co/Tvsk1ZrQX6

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@MAGAx2028 @bowtrip76 @ScarlettGrace92 @Mawmaw_Patriot No tin hats necessary. Watch world trade center 7 implode on itself. Obvious control demolition. The third building to collapse in on its own footprint at free fall speeds on that day. Wake up and exit Plato's cave.

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@ScarlettGrace92 I have always called it what it was. It was a controlled demolition. Had nothing to do with a bunch of Saudi Arabians hijacking airplanes. Watch world trade center 7. Implode on itself and tell me that was not a controlled demolition. Wake up.

[James Dodge @do50601621]

I don't agree. I'm very working class and I have A boat and I like to take my kids tubing and skiing on local lakes. It cost me like $2,000. And yes it's been a bit of upkeep. Boats are not super cheap but it has not been an expensive hobby overall, not at all. Very accessible. RFK Jr is indicating that he bought a cheap 1989 boat that was like 12 years old when he got it from an auction that cost him next to nothing and he had a tremendous amount of Joy with his family doing that together outdoors. It is very accessible for any working-class family who wants to do it. You have to be handy, maybe and willing to spend a little time fixing it up yourself to avoid expensive mechanic fees. But it's super accessible. I think you've misread his comic

[James Dodge @do50601621]

Healthy people tend not to have putrid body oder. If you know you smell bad shower up. If it's noticable on close sniff, but mild and inoffensive, run with it.

Me and my wife are weekly or biweekly bathers, always have been. We smell fine to each other. Different strokes for different folks, but I think we bathe too much and many soaps and cosmetic chems are deleterious to our health.

[Robert F. Kennedy Jr @RobertKennedyJr]

At his press conference today, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro accused me of promoting conspiracy theories because I told him, during an earlier telephone conversation, that some Americans had religious objections to the MMR vaccine because it contained fetal tissue. “There is no fetal tissue in the MMR,” he told me.

This is a segment from a videotaped deposition of Stanley Plotkin, the inventor of the MMR vaccine. Plotkin admits to butchering 76 aborted normally developing fetuses, all over three months old, in just one of the many studies that led to the development of his vaccine.

The rubella virus used in MMR-II is grown on the cultured cell line composed of lung tissue from an aborted three-month-old female embryo and listed as “WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts” in the ingredients of MMR-II as portions of these cells end up in each vial of MMR II.

During Dr. Plotkin’s deposition, Attorney Aaron Siri asked: “Isn’t it true that MMR II contains approximately 150 nanograms cells substrate double-strand DNA and single-strand DNA per dose purposefully fragmented to approximately 215 base pairs in length?” Dr. Plotkin answered: “Yeah, that’s probably correct, yes.”

This equals approximately 646 billion pieces of human DNA from an aborted fetal cell line in each vial of MMR-II.

In addition to the human DNA, there is also an unspecified amount of human cellular debris in each dose of MMR-II.

During our phone conversation, Governor Shapiro also accused me of promoting vaccine misinformation. When I asked him for an example, he was unable to provide one, but this did not deter him from publicly repeating that accusation during his press event. As I told him, HHS does not tolerate misinformation by any employee. I offered to point to hundreds of instances of vaccine misinformation by the Biden administration about which I had never heard him complain.

Governor Shapiro also faulted me for the decline in Pennsylvania vaccination rates from 97% - 93.2%. When I pushed back on this assertion, he acknowledged that most of the decline occurred during the Biden administration. It’s unfortunately true that the government lockdowns, deceptions, manipulation, and overreach during Covid severely damaged public faith in the vaccine program.

Governor Shapiro’s press conference was an example of the same species of gaslighting.

The Trump administration is working to restore public trust not by gaslighting or manipulating, but by being truthful, at last, with the public.

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@SqSehrish It's either 4 or 10. Could be step siblings or half brothers that have additional siblings of their own.

[William Meijer @williameijer]

One reason young liberal White women have become uniquely radicalized is that there are now zero personal benefits and very high reputational costs to telling them empirical truths that may more accurately inform their worldview.

The professor who tries gets bad reviews, the male friend gets called a mansplainer, and the smart woman gets excluded from her peer group. Any lie that feels good in the moment is reinforced without opposition.

There’s one problem, however: if you let acute feelings be your guiding star, you’ll optimize for self-destruction. Young liberal White women are experiencing unprecedented levels of distress, dysfunction, and mental illness precisely because their immediate desires are more catered to than at any point in human history.

Unsubstantiated victim narratives and support for mass unselected immigration are to young liberal White women what alcohol is to alcoholics: emotional remedies that make them feel acutely better but chronically worse.

What do the data say about the gender pay gap? Who’s making cities unsafe? I've tried telling them, but young liberal White women do not want to know. For many, life is an endless pursuit of acute vibes maximization, and reality isn't as fulfilling as fiction.

I suspect that young liberal White women won’t bounce back—that most of those over 25 are lost forever, psychologically and genetically. I wish it weren’t like that because I love many of them

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@Ashleyb00112 If sex is not a priority in your relationship, do not expect any man to hang around. It is one among many priorities, but if you're not putting out he's not staying.

[Jimmy Dore @jimmy_dore]

Still can’t believe that The New York Times ADMITTED & PRINTED that the "conspiracy theorists" were right about COVID and that Fauci and the "experts" LIED to the public.

What’s even more disturbing is how many people I know in Hollywood who are completely ignoring all this & don’t have the decency to APOLOGIZE to the people they viciously slandered & attacked for being skeptical of BiG Pharma & government during COVID.

I can forgive the people who acted like monsters & we’re wrong about Covid, but they’ll NEVER forgive me for being right about Covid. @AnitaKrishna1

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@Beno10_MFC It's 10

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@Excellentsalvic 1975

[James Dodge @do50601621]

@ProfKlase @AaronSiriSG Zachary gfy you myopic shill

[James Dodge @do50601621]

A unique human life begins at conception. This is a completely uncontroversial statement which every biologist under this one will confirm. What do you make of that? Do you diminish the life because it is not fully developed? When is a life fully developed?. Is it after the hippocampus is developed some around 25 years old? Is it just outside the womb? Is it after puberty? Is it after consciousness somewhere around 10 weeks inside the womb? Where do you draw such distinctions?

I am not religious, but I do increasingly value human life and We are at a time when we are so far below replacing our own population. I think it's quite unwise to be terminating unborn humans. And anyone who says it doesn't raise a moral question I think it's not considering the fullness of the issue.

[Jessica Rose 🤙 @JesslovesMJK]

I am going in today, and I must say - as morbid as it sounds - I am so excited. Fauci is a talking head in a white coat, so the brief synopsis below sounds about right to me. I almost feel bad for the guy on a grand-scale-come-uppance level. His eyes are deeply sad. He knows what he's doing.

To be continued... I will publish my review when I am done, which might not be today. I am very thorough when reading important documents, and no AI short-cuts will be taken. This is too important not to be 100% human eye-related. Which is quite beautiful and poetic considering Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist!
@RandPaul @jeffreytucker

[Geert Vanden Bossche @GVDBossche]

Now we’re finally getting to the damn core of it. All those so-called scientists, perched up high in their ivory towers, flapping their arrogant traps wide open to lecture and mock anyone who dared have an opinion on that massive Gain-of-Function experiment they ran on a herd of gullible sheep; they weren’t doing science at all. Just stroking their own egos the entire time.
Meanwhile a handful of actual scientists were grinding day and night, chasing down all these never-seen, unknown horrors triggered by that abominable C-19 jab and fighting tooth and nail to warn people about the toxic medical wreckage it caused. But this pack of mainstream-media scum just strutted around flaunting their total illiteracy and slammed the door shut on anyone who called out their criminal bullshit.
Unbelievable that the general public never woke up to how this rabble was drowning in insane conflicts of interest or how they treated any open scientific debate with us like it was the fucking plague.

[Jimmy Dore @jimmy_dore]

“Science” intentionally poisoned & damaged children’s hearts for profit. Children had ZERO risk from COVID yet they poisoned them anyway.

No big deal.

This will never be reported correctly, nor will anyone ever be held accountable.

Most people will never even acknowledge any of it because to do so would require them to realize they acted like evil monsters.

[memetic_sisyphus @memeticsisyphus]

Yes we understand you don’t have an ethical standard beyond whatever gets you what you want. We understand that quite well. We think it’s horrendous, we aren’t confused.