What 97% of climate scientist agree on is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that's radiative effects impede cooling to produce an average warming of 1.1C per doubling of atmospheric concentration. And that's about it. Some scientists, like MIT's Richard Lindzen, believe negative feedbacks naturally mitigate to stabilize surface temperatures.
Almost all the scientists who get NSF funding promote the opposite idea, that positive feedbacks that amplify any radiative "forcings." The higher the climate scientist's model's amplification, the higher their grant funding. The UN IPCC collects all peer reviewed research and puts out an assessment every 6-8 years. None of these show data supporting an increase in tropical cyclone or wildfire frequency or intensity in the last 100 years. It is, however, a projection of very very highly funded and vocal few scientists that man-caused warming is directly responsible for worldwide suffering and "climate refugees."
Since CO2 and water vapor only warm by slowing night time cooling, their warming affects mainly cold latitude winter nights. Although this certainly poses a danger to Greenland and Antarctica's glaciers, increased precipitation could also mitigate increased calving as seen is happening to some degree (See Zwally 2015).
Scientists who have become suspicious about climate science being corrupted and spoken out have been made to pay with forced career changes. Since they lose their government funding they become liabilities to academic institutions. For example, former Georgia Tech Physics Dept. Head, Dr. Judith Curry. After having a long career as a climate science physics professor at GA Tech she was effectively forced out about 5 years ago. She now runs a successful climate consulting and forecasting business, CFAN and hosts a blog at https://t.co/HPcr33rDO5.
Her crime, "climate heresy," was outlined in a 2010 article by Scientific American. https://t.co/iEIq6DwYhQ She started to ask questions that challenged the cause. Asked about what shook her from loyalty to the consensus and she often points to the 2009 email leaks from the U. of East Anglia Climate Research Unit that exposed nefarious conversations of top climate scientists conspiring to silence publishing of critics as well as squelching skeptic's FIOA requests for their data. The most damning email came from the head of the CRU, Phil Jones, who openly admitted to falsifying the science by covering up a major known flaw in tree ring data that was used to claim current temperatures are unprecedented in the last 1000 years. Jones explained in his 2001 email that he intended to reproduce Michael Mann's now famous hockey stick graph showing this 1000 years of data for the upcoming 2001 World Meteorological Organization meeting. In Jones's words he would "use Mike's Nature [journal] paper trick...to hide the decline." The decline they all knew was that the tree ring data showed global temperatures falling from 1960-1990s while they were actually rising. The trick was to delete the data after 1960 and replace it with weather station data and splice it in the chart without anyone noticing.
For twenty years Wikipedia had the trick as a legitimate mathematical trick. Recently the truth is finally coming forth for those still alive and interested in a now ancient incident. https://t.co/vhdlDyqjxe
Before this scandal hit the climate blogs in 2009 Judith Curry was a climate superstar, having recently coauthored a paper showing that cyclone activity was increasing. She now points to the flaws in that 2005 (after Katrina) paper and many more in the consensus science. Her assessment now to focus on hardening and resilience rather than CO2 mitigation. But she has a new book that covers her story and that of climate in much more detail. https://t.co/RZA9blMAQE
Everyone needs to hear this message! This powerful message is from a woman speaking about the revolution in Iran. This is what's happening now in the US and what will happen to the libs who are helping them.
It's funny that Grok did not want to get much into the weeds. But yes, there is much more to the debate. The scandal is that rather than debate the alarmist scientists feel they have big government and media backing so they don't have to debate. Instead they work on censoring the opposing experts, just during Covid.
Steven D’Antuono—head of the Washington FBI Field Office—did NOT acquiesce to demands by Main Justice, particularly Jay Bratt, to raid Mar a Lago after Biden DOJ obtained security footage from inside the president’s residence showing boxes being moved around.
D’Antuono repeatedly resisted demands by top Biden DOJ officials to raid MAL because Trump and his lawyers continued to cooperate with the FBI to produce files. (Another reminder that Trump allowed Bratt and 3 FBI agents into Mar a Lago on June 3, 2022 to look for government papers. That wasn’t enough for Bratt, who immediately pushed for an armed, surprise raid, which happened on August 8.)
D’Antuono clashed with DOJ officials including DOJ NSD chief Matt Olsen for weeks until he was overruled by deputy FBI director Paul Abbate.
There is no indication footage of boxes being moved out of a storage area convinced D’Antuono and other WFO officials to agree with the raid.
Further - court proceedings in the documents case revealed Jack Smith’s team could not prove that any of the alleged classified papers were discovered in the boxes that has been moved.
This article is 🐑 prep for more bad news to come.
I don't believe there are shills on either side. The alarmers honestly have been made to fear climate catastrophe, just like Greta, (at least at the beginning). Then an identity is born and lots of positive reinforcement, and even fame (with help). This was a similar dynamic for many young academics, see Michael Mann. The real puppet masters are people like Gore, Kerry and Obama, who control the academic and NGO funding via the deep budget.
The average Dem has no idea why they support hundreds of billions of inflationary dollars going to Ukraine and the higher fuel and fertilizer prices that go along with prolonging a corrupt former Soviet satellite. But higher fuel prices to force the #1 sponsor of terror to give up on nukes and ICBMs pointed at USA and Israeli, whom they daily chant to erradicate, is a no.
Kamala is dumb and tipsy. Hillary is corrupt and self dealing, breaking her promise to Obama in 2008 to close the Clinton foundation to get the Secretary position. Instead she set up a home brew server for a non-government email to use for government business, including classified info.
I’m going to keep saying this because few reporters know it.
Jack Smith’s team ADMITTED in court in Florida they could not prove that any of the alleged classified files were found in the boxes that had been moved inside Mar a Lago (which is not a crime anyway)
Smith’s team also could not prove that any of the alleged classified files were in the boxes stacked in the MAL ballroom or bathroom—those photos were taken off an aide’s phone in early 2021, not taken by the FBI or DOJ, which is what Smith wanted everyone to believe.
Michael Mann's work was the product of political activists looking for an young academic to accept their money and support. Before "Mike's Nature Trick" [MBH 98, 99], which launched the world's eye to climate and Al Gore's terribly flawed movie, there was no clear trend in temperature proxy data for the past millennium. The problems included extremely weak signals, if they existed at all, and more importantly, a "divergence problem." The tree ring proxies showed annual average temperatures on a falling trend after 1960, diverging from the thermometer record. If the proxies did not work in the 20th century then why would they have worked in 11th or 13th or 16th centuries?
Letters from the IPCC top brass saw the divergent tree data as: "diluting the message", as a “problem”, as a “potential distraction/detraction”. A "stone in their shoe." Mann and Phil Jones fixed all that with fudging and slight of hand, creating the hockey stick by a flawed code that would be proven in McIntyre and McKitrick (2005) to be capable of turning synthetic data of random noise into a hockey stick.
Elizabeth Waffle is 88 years old. She lives in a trailer in Milan, Michigan. No computer. Spotty phone internet. Modest pension after her house burned down.
Federal records put her name on 14,696 ActBlue donations totaling nearly $150,000 over five years. Roughly eight a day. Average under ten bucks each. Forty-seven of them to Abdul El-Sayed.
When Charlie LeDuff showed her the paperwork, she said the only thing that fit.
“Hell no. I don’t have that kind of money.”
Democrats spent years selling the country a “small-dollar grassroots” story. The machine that powered it is under House investigation for foreign donations, weakened fraud checks, passport “verification” that only counted characters, and a legal team that walked out after 2024. Their CEO took the Fifth.
The names stayed on the filings. The money still moved. El-Sayed is the nominee.
They call it small donors. She calls it impossible.
@ClimateAudit So the courts and congress are rubber stamping any actions that Trump takes? Is that your argument? Or is it that Trump says stuff off the cuff that needs to be processed in context of his larger statements and policies? Is Trump talking trash to Iran or invading Iran?
@grok, Did climate academic, Jagedesh Shukla, get 19 other climate academics to sign a letter to Eric Holder in 2015 to investigate Judith Curry, Roger Pielke Jr. and others under the RICO criminal racketeering statute? And was it found by Pielke Jr. and Stephen McIntyre that Shukla was improperly using government grants to fund his family run foundation and a school he built in India?
@grok@PaulGarvey4@GeorgeE34743660@curryja@ClimateRealists@RogerPielkeJr@grok, Did Rep. Raúl Grijalva launch a congressional witch hunt on Judith Curry and Roger Pielke Jr. to find if there was fossil fuel funding of their work? What was the outcome of that 2015 investigation? Was there any wrongdoing found?
@grok was Judith Curry a highly regarded climate scientist until around the 2009 Climategate emails revealed what she believed was poor scientific behavior among those leading the field like Phil Jones, Michael Mann and Kevin Trenberth? Is it true that her starting to question MBH 98 and even her own work on Webster et al (2005) that she got labeled a "climate heretic" by Scientific American?
"Measurements show higher effect."
Yes. but only if you assume 100% of the increase is from CO2 and not natural millennial variation, land use changes and non-climate effects on weather station records, like moving from an urban heat island out to an airport, and then that slowly gets urbanized or has the land developed, raising the local temperature readings. The sea records are a mess from inconsistent measurement techniques and sparse sampling. Both land and sea records have been highly "corrected" many times over.