Tag Archives: climate science

HadCRUT4 data limitations render IPCC analyses unreliable

“HadCRUT4 is the primary dataset used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to make its dramatic claims about “man-made global warming”, to justify its demands for trillions of dollars to be spent on “combating climate change” and as the basis for the Paris Climate Accord.

But according to a groundbreaking analysis by Australian researcher John McLean it’s far too sloppy to be taken seriously even by climate scientists, let alone a body as influential as the IPCC or by the governments of the world.” click here

Climategate – the next episode from Arizona

“Nearly seven years ago, on December 7th, 2011, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic’s (FME Law) sought public records from the University of Arizona related to the Mann-Bradley-Hughes temperature reconstruction that looks like a hockey stick, and development of an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.  They refused much of the request and FME Law sued.  Now (on September 18th, 2018) legal counsel for the University informed FME Law that they were done, that they would be withdrawing their appeal of the trial court’s decision, end the case and disclose the records.” click here

Mr. Harrison Ford should stick to acting and pretending, not making climate prognostication

I’m not sure who he is talking about. It’s amazing hollywood actors actually make statements like this. (Or perhaps, Mr. Ford does comedy too.)

“Actor Harrison Ford has called out “people who don’t believe in science or, worse than that, pretend they don’t believe in science” and claims that we are “shit out of time” to save the planet from global warming.” click here

Be sure to do your homework when investigating surface temperatures.

“Everything the New York Times said in that 2006 article was fact-free superstition, junk science and fake news, which is their standard operating procedure.  And of course they censor anyone who tells the truth.” click here

Elsevier needs to step in to ensure fair scientific journal reviews; Fire biased “gatekeeper” editors and reviewers

“Harde’s conclusion that less than 15% of the increase in CO2 concentration since the 19th century could be attributed to anthropogenic emissions was deemed unacceptable by gatekeepers of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) viewpoint.  A critical reply to the paper was consequently published, but it included assumptive errors and misrepresentations of the original points.  Harde’s exhaustive reply to the criticism has been refused publication, which has effectively silenced scientific debate on this salient topic.” click here

RSS satellite data set corrupted, no longer reliable

“…an interesting analysis by Professor Fritz Vahrenholt and Dr Sebastian Lüning (at diekaltesonne.de/schwerer-klimadopingverdacht-gegen-rss-satellitentemperaturen-nachtraglich-um-anderthalb-grad-angehoben) concludes that his dataset, having been thus tampered with, can no longer be considered reliable. The analysis sheds light on how the RSS dataset was massaged. The two scientists conclude that the ex-post-facto post-processing of the satellite data by RSS was insufficiently justified.” click here

Hothouse earth paper is advocacy dressed up as science

“Yet, it is not a research paper and contains nothing new in the way of climate science. It is a future scenario pieced together by quoting selected (cherry-picked) references with a lot of hand-waving in-between. The author’s say it’s not conclusive, and they hope it’s not going to be true. They have a responsibility to ask the question, they claim, admitting it’s extreme.” click here