Showing posts with label global warming denial industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming denial industry. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

EXPOSED - RealClimate.org's McKitrick and McIntyre Files


Continuing my walk down memory lane in honor of the Paris Climate Conference, (well and also for my pal AL with his hate-on for Dr. Mann and rejection of climate proxy data in general as described in the comments thread at Prof Ivar Giaever's pathetic YouTube PseudoScience talk), I'm going to reprint a few posts I'd originally written for my Citizenschallenge Blog a couple years back since the information they hold is a valid and relevant today as it was then.
______________________________________________

Traveling around the blogosphere these past years I keep running into the same misinformation being repeated based on the "authority" of an economist and a mining prospector turned mining engineer with a mathematical background and a political bone to pick.  

Basically they are dead set against any sort of limitations or restrictions being put on carbon fuels and the global warming greenhouse gases we are adding to our thin atmosphere.  Unfortunately they are so politically motivated that they have tossed scientific standards out the window and have adopted the ruthless standards of power-politics where any dirty trick and misrepresentation is part of the 'rules of engagement.'

Unfortunately, this global warming situation requires a commitment to listening and learning or Catastrophic Global Warming will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.  

In order to shed light on the many mistakes and misrepresentations Ross McKitrick and Stephen McIntyre are guilty of I have culled the search results over at RealClimate.org to produce this voluminous reference list.  

It is in chronological order - I hope a one stop source for this information may come in handy for some in their struggle to educate our business and political leaders along with all the folks who prefer to ignore this situation that touches everyone of us.  I've included links within the title to the original at RealClimate.org so please do check them out!

I appreciate the folks at RealClimate.org allowing me to continue with this effort.  
Step right up and see real science in action.

EXPOSED - The RealClimate.org's Hockey Stick Graph Files

Continuing my walk down memory lane in honor of the Paris Climate Conference, (well and also for my pal AL with his hate-on for Dr. Mann and rejection of climate proxy data in general as described in the comments thread at Prof Ivar Giaever's pathetic YouTube PseudoScience talk), I'm going to reprint a few posts I'd originally written for my Citizenschallenge Blog a couple years back since the information they hold is a valid and relevant today as it was then.
________________________________________________   
The Contender writes: "@citizen, My argument is that scientists fall victim to group think sometimes." 
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

How about admitting that all people fall victim to "group think" sometimes, some groups more than others?

With politicians and political advocates being near the top of the list of people who are susceptible to group think.  In fact, they enthusiastically embrace group think, just look at the Republican or the Tea Party's xenophobia towards new or different ideas.  Heck listen to the Republican's ranking member of the Science Committee, Rep. Paul Broun: If it ain't in the Bible it's "Hell-spawned lies."  And, interestingly these are exactly the folks who scream loudest that their claims should be trusted more than the professional experts who understand the science.

But the thing is that "science" by it's very nature is skeptical, self-examining and open to self-correction since acquiring solid facts and continuing genuine learning is its goal.  

Competing and cross-checking each other's work and looking for the break-through to new perspectives and understanding is its imperative.  And finding oneself making mistakes is an accepted part of the learning process - as opposed to the political arena where admitting a mistake is next to suicide.  

The Contender then goes on:
"You are simply wrong about the facts you are claiming about the Hockey Stick. The observation remains that if all the proxies are just put into the standard processing methods, the traditional reconstruction of climate emerges including the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. Only by massaging the data can the past climate events be made to vanish.'
~ ~ ~

The problem here is that only by limiting yourself to the science presented by the usual suspects, such as Heartland, SPPI, ClimateAudit, WUWT and such members of the echo-chamber can such a claim be sustained.  The problem with those sources is they do science in a vacuum - meaning science that's isolated from the sunshine of open review and critique by experts in the field.

This is why I decided to break into the RealClimate.org files in order to reproduce a record of their discussion regarding the Hockey Stick.  Mind you "Mr. Hockey Stick", that is Dr. Mann, is one of the authors at RC.  I bring this up because in America when we charge someone with misdeeds or crimes - we allow, and in fact, expect them to respond to incriminating claims made against them.

Discovered and revealed! - Where the climate codes and data have been hiding

Continuing my walk down memory lane in honor of the Paris Climate Conference, (well and also for my pal AL with his hate-on for Dr. Mann and rejection of climate proxy data in general as described in the comments thread at Prof Ivar Giaever's pathetic YouTube PseudoScience talk), I'm going to reprint a few posts I'd originally written for my Citizenschallenge Blog a couple years back since the information they hold is a valid and relevant today as it was then.
_______________________________________________
  
A lot of folks have been convinced climatologists are hiding data - that's why it was interesting to came across this list while I was compiling my previous post.  It doesn't quite jive with the steady stream of accusations and innuendo folks like, Ivar Gaiever and ClimateAudit's Mr. McIntyre keep sending out: 
"I have an ongoing campaign to improve standards of data archiving, disclosure and due diligence - which are independent of any particular substantive points on paleoclimate studies. I have no idea why the “Hockey Team”, as they styled themselves, have elected to withhold data and methods from scrutiny; it’s an unwinnable position, but they’ve done so and I’ll continue to criticize them on this point." (ClimateAudit, Blog Rules and Road Map)
I think a review of the following list makes clear that such talk is political dirty tricks - and not a reflection of reality or the situation within the climate science community.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Data Sources
Filed under: — group @ 27 November 2009

This page is a catalogue that will be kept up to date pointing to selected sources of code and data related to climate science. Please keep us informed of any things we might have missed, or any updates to the links that are needed.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Forbes Follies - Joe Bast Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science


The IPCC's Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science
By Joseph Bast
Reviewed by citizenschallenge

~ ~ ~
First, we should be clear - Joe Bast is a political operative.  Everything he does, he does from a position of defending his policy agenda which is all about protecting the big business status quo.  This is not slander nor misleading and I'm not even opining on whether it is right or wrong.  It is what it is.  

Nowhere in Joe Bast's writings will you find any curiosity or interest in understanding the various dynamics at work in our atmosphere and oceans.  He won't discuss basic geophysical fundamentals, nor review the science that is "settled."  Things that we need to understand before any of the rest of this 'global warming conversation' can make any sense.

Read on as I do a detailed review of Mr. Bast's recent Forbes' Op-Ed attack on the IPCC's WG2 report, including many links to authoritative sources of further information  
(http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/)  
Joe Bast's words are in courier font and unaltered.

Here's an interesting quote worth keeping in mind when reading Joe's take on scientific reality:
"Joe Bast reflecting on the kind of person needed to run the Heartland Institute: 
“My motto is, you need to find a used car salesman who’s a libertarian—
an aggressive, articulate guy who wants to build an organization.” "
Brian Doherty, Radicals for Capitalism: 
A Free-Wheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement 
(New York: Perseus Books Group, 2007).
---

Thursday, July 18, 2013

Discovered and revealed! - Where the climate codes and data have been hiding


While compiling my previous post I came across this interesting list.  I know that a lot of folks have been talked into believing that climatologists are hiding data - I think a review of the following list makes clear that such talk is political dirty tricks - and not a reflection of reality or the situation within the climate science community.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Data Sources
Filed under: — group @ 27 November 2009

This page is a catalogue that will be kept up to date pointing to selected sources of code and data related to climate science. Please keep us informed of any things we might have missed, or any updates to the links that are needed.

Monday, July 15, 2013

"The Enablers" part two: Republican members of our House of Representatives

Recently I wrote an essay "What about the "Enablers" of the Denial Machine?"
Now it's time to look at the politicians who are expecting to be served misleading information in order to justify their continued willfully ignoring our self-created global warming situation.  

The tragedy is that by now, 2013, the evidence and underlying knowledge is so overwhelming that I can't believe these supposedly intelligent people don't know better... at least deep down, but their ruthless commitment to power-politics-games won't allow them to admit it - since that would create a moral responsibility to act.

It's disheartening and it's getting tougher and tougher to resist giving into hopelessness.  But, resist we must!  So here's my two cents to the effort, sharing a couple articles that highlight the disingenuous game Republicans are playing with our children's future.  Please link to the complete articles for all the details.


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

GOP ‘Climate Disconnect’ Would Sacrifice Climate Research for Weather Forecasting


Amid a growing “climate disconnect” among House GOP members, as cited in a new report released yesterday by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the Environment Subcommittee of the House of Representatives Committee of Science, Space, and Technology proved true to form earlier this week. On Tuesday, in yet another example of partisan split on climate issues, the body passed the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013.
The innocuous-sounding legislation would improve weather forecasting research, but do so by cutting NOAA’s spending on climate change research. The bill eventually passed out of the subcommittee by a voice vote along partisan lines.
{...}
This logic failed to resonate with Republicans, as Vice Chairman Jim Bridenstine (R-OK) explained his opinion that NOAA is spending too much money on “ineffective research on climate,” and suggested weather forecasting should be a higher priority than climate change research.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), took his cue from the Vice Chairman in representing the views of the anti-science, climate denier caucus:
We have seen grant after grant being given to anyone who can come up with something that will excite the public about global climate change in a way that would suggest that mankind is responsible in order to justify restrictions on human activity.
Such grants are, of course, perfectly rational in light of NASA’s recent finding that fully 97 percent of scientists believe climate change is “very likely due to human activities.”
{...}
In 2011-2012, the United States experienced 25 floods, storms, droughts, heat waves and wildfires that caused at least $1 billion in damages each. An analysis by the Center for American Progress found that the federal government, or taxpayers, spent $136 billion from 2011 to 2013 in disaster relief – equivalent to almost $400 per household per year.
{...}
For the full article see:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Anti-Science Climate Denier Caucus: 113th Congress Edition


{...}
{...}
Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus and high costs to taxpayers, there are still elected officials in Congress who refuse to accept that climate change is happening.
Almost 55 percent — 127 members — of the current Republican caucus in the House of Representatives deny the basic tenets of climate science. 65 percent (30 members) of the Senate Republican caucus also deny climate change. What this means is that they have made public statements indicating that they question or reject that climate change is real, is happening, and is caused by human consumption of fossil fuels.
This refusal to accept overwhelming scientific evidence is not just a symptom of the rank-and-file backbenchers. Members of GOP leadership and the committees that make critical decisions on national energy policy and air pollution have even higher concentrations:
  • 90 percent of the Republican leadership in both House and Senate deny climate change
  • 17 out of 22 Republican members of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, or 77 percent, are climate deniers
  • 22 out of 30 Republican members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, or 73 percent deny the reality of climate change
  • 100 percent of Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Republicans have said climate change is not happening or that humans do not cause it
The campaigns of those who reject the reality of climate science are fueled by the fossil fuel industry that advocate for and drive the emissions that cause global warming.
  • The 30 climate deniers in the Senate have taken $20,957,534 in dirty energy contributions while the 70 Senators who haven’t denied the science have only taken $11,944,009 in career contributions. On average, Senate deniers took $698,584 from dirty energy while other Senators took $170,629.
  • The 127 climate deniers in the House have taken $30,787,064 in dirty energy contributions while the 308 members who haven’t denied the science have only taken $21,209,951 in career contributions. On average, House deniers took $242,417 from dirty energy while other members took $68,863.
  • In total, climate deniers, or 157 members, have taken $51,744,598 in dirty energy contributions while other members, or 378, have taken $33,153,960 in career contributions. On average, deniers took $329,583 from dirty energy while other members and Senators took $87,708.
Some states are sorely suffering the effects of climate change in the form of climate-fueled natural disasters even as their elected representatives take in millions from fossil fuel contributions and reject the reality of climate science:
  • 18 members of the Texas congressional delegation deny the reality of climate change. Over their careers, these members have raked in over $10.8 million from oil, gas, and coal interests. Texas has suffered 58 climate-fueled disaster declarations since 2011.
  • More than half of the Oklahoma delegation denies climate change, and together they have received nearly $2.5 million in fossil fuel money. Since 2011, Oklahomans have borne dozens of disasters worsened by climate change.
  • 7 members of the Virginia congressional delegation — more than half — deny climate change and together they pulled in more than $1.25 million from fossil fuels like oil, gas, and coal interests. And Virginians have 8 disaster declarations to show for it.
CAP Action War Room conducted a fresh analysis of public statements from current Representatives and Senators from the 113th Congress on climate change. Here is a comprehensive list of those statements, which will be updated regularly.
This post has been updated to reflect new additions to the anti-science climate denier caucus as well as changes in percentages and fossil fuel contributions.
For the full article see:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~






Saturday, July 13, 2013

Patrick Michaels - renowned AGW contrarian - a closer look

Speaking of the master manipulators of an complacent public audience, Patrick Michaels is another one of the usual suspects with a long career of misinforming the public - as it happens SkepticalScience re-posted a revealing article from Media Matters today, which I'm happy to add to my collection thanks to the generous sharing policy of John Cook and the folks over at SkepticalScience.com




Patrick Michaels: Cato's Climate Expert Has History Of Getting It Wrong (via Skeptical Science)
Posted on 13 July 2013 by dana1981 This is a re-post of a devastating debunking of Patrick Michaels' history of wrong climate predictions by Shauna Theel at Media Matters. A review of claims made by the Cato Institute's Patrick Michaels over the last…

What about the "Enablers" of the Denial Machine?




There is simply no keeping up with the manmade global warming disinformation campaign that steadfastly flies in the face of all objective appraisals of the evidence  - 

Why, in light of all this evidence, does the 'Republican power-politic global warming denial machine' keep churning out distortions, lies and plain old crazy making?


By Republican power-politic global warming denial machine I'm referring to the likes of the Marshall Institute, Heartland Institute, SPPI, Murdoch media machine, Morano, Watts, McIntyre, Koch bro's, et al. - peddlers of transparent science fiction.


What I find most disheartening is that at the heart of  this endless flow of calculatedly deceptive stories is the fact that this is exactly what the Republican general public and politicians expect to hear. 

These are the enablers and they countenance no objectivity or doubt.  The Republican and Tea Party public expect to be assured that the 1950s haven't ended... they reject introspection, and serious scientific investigation, while refusing to face real world challenges barreling down on us - rejecting tons worth of legitimate information with a passionate anger.

It's as though they couldn't care less about what scientists are actually learning - all they want is soothing bromides that justify their willful ignorance regarding the state of our one and only home planet.  In step the likes of Krauthammer, etc.

For all appearances this public has abandoned critical thinking skills and the pursuit of genuine learning - in favor of Holly-world storytelling where facts are selected and adjusted to the needs of the story teller's plot... in this case, that Reaganomics principles reign supreme over all other considerations and that we can disregard our Earth's processes.

Unfortunately, we live on a real planet, a miraculous planet, like no other.  Yes, climate has always changed... we also know our climate has been in a few thousands year old "goldilocks zone" enabling a complex society to thrive. 

Why then, can't Republicans realize that means this wonderful rare climatic era is most precious and needs to be protected?
~ ~ ~ 


This bit of venting was prompted by Charles Krauthammer's recent ridiculous commentary (Obama's global-warming folly).  Fortunately, Dana Nuccitelli has written an excellent review which is available for reposting.  Thank you Dana and the rest of the SkepticalScience team.


Charles Krauthammer's flat-earther global warming folly (via Skeptical Science)
Posted on 10 July 2013 by dana1981 Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer recently wrote an opinion piece that was published by many media outlets including The Washington Post, claiming that President Obama's Climate Action Plan is a "folly." In…

Sunday, June 16, 2013

The Forbes conversation continues - 13 points examined



As the world warms the "manmade global warming" debate gets ever more surreal.  

Seems that no matter how much evidence accumulates, the Republican power-politic devotees come up with ever more disconnected claims and rationalizations.  

Couple days ago I was confronted with the following 13 points, (15 including the intro and closing), by someone named "scottar" over at the Forbes' comments pages.  After his jabbing introduction he begins his list with "You-all have failed to account for:"

It turned out, his items are very well accounted for and the list of 13 was little more than a list highlighting scottar's profound misunderstanding of climatology.  

Rather than swapping claims and opinions I thought I would simply share a variety of educational videos that directly speak to his various claims.  And then I invited some calm fact-based defense of his various claims and commentary on the lessons offered in the videos I shared.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 


From the Forbes comments section to "Global Warming Alarmist Caught Doctoring 97% Consensus Claim"

Saturday, June 15, 2013

Heartland Institute caught in a lie - Chinese Academy of Science objects



It's official, Heartland Institute and Anthony Wattsupwiththat have once again been caught out in a lie.

You can find the following statement at the official Chinese Academy of Sciences webpage:

I have added the highlights

The Statements on the Chinese Translation of
the“Climate Change Reconsidered—NIPCC Report”
时间: | 2013-06-14 | | 【大 中 小】【打印】【关闭】

The Chinese translation of the “Climate Change Reconsidered—NIPCC report” was organized by the Information Center for Global Change Studies, published in May 2013 through Science Press, with an accompanying workshop on climate change issues in Beijing on June 15, 2013. However, the Heartland Institute published the news titled “Chinese Academy of Sciences publishes Heartland Institute research skeptical of Global Warming” in a strongly misleading way on its website, implying that the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) supports their views, in contrary to what is clearly stated in the Translators’ Note in the Chinese translation. 

The claim of the Heartland Institute about CAS’ endorsement of its report is completely false. To clarify the fact, we formally issue the following statements: 

Friday, June 14, 2013

Chinese Academy of Sciences comments on Heartland / Watts claims

Since I've found that Anthony Watts and Heartland Institute can't be taken at face value, {considering their respect for the truth is non-existent}, I decided to email the Chinese Academy of Sciences in the hope of getting to the bottom of the mystery of the missing substance behind claims of a collaboration and June 15th Gala unveiling of the NIPCC attack on climate science.

Dear CAS Representative,

Anthony Watts at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/12/h ... -ceremony/

claims
Heartland’s NIPCC report to be accepted by Chinese Academy of Sciences in special ceremony:

"All three men will be in Beijing for the Chinese Academy of Sciences event on June 15, 2013 to speak about the translation of Climate Change Reconsidered. Scores of additional scientists, economists, and policy experts reviewed and contributed to the volumes."

But I can't find any such event being announce at your website?
http://english.cas.cn/Ne/
=========================

Is this event happening?

Any information you can offer will be appreciated.
Thank you for your time and hopefully interest.

Sincerely,
PM
This morning I received a reply to my question.

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Dr. Harrison Schmitt and Dr. William Happer attack science... again

The crazy-making never seems to end.  When ideology blinds rationality it's an ugly thing as we can witness in the latest 
(May 9th, 2013) broadside from Dr. Harrison Schmitt and Dr. William Happer, at the ever ready to mislead Wall Street Journal's Op-Ed pages {also here, here, here, to mention a few.}

It's another example of contrarian science in a vacuum - where you can get away with writing a bunch of impressive sounding stuff and present it to under-educated, politically scared people, desperate for soothing news, and ready to embrace anything that gives them the answers they want - rather than the truth they need.

Now if Schmitt and Happer had something serious to offer, they would write up a paper and have it published in a professional scientific journal where experts could judge the merits of the claims made.  But, they've never done that, believing that past glories is all it takes to establish their legitimacy.

Instead they write an op-ed filled with so much misdirection and misrepresentations we can drive a high school science class through it.  I don't have that, but I do have a review from those reporters of climate science over at SkepticalScience.com which is worth sharing.

With no further ado, I present a serious evaluation of their May 9th, 2013 article: 


Schmitt and Happer manufacture doubt (via Skeptical Science)
Posted on 15 May 2013 by Dumb Scientist Dr. Harrison Schmitt and Dr. William Happer, who have scientific backgrounds but are not climate scientists, just wrote an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal. Despite their claims, global warming continues. This continued warming is confirmed by GRACE,…