New publication: NIPCC vs. IPCC
A new publication by S. Fred Singer, Professor Emeritus at the University of Virginia, came out last week. Its title: NIPCC vs. IPCC – Adressing the Disparity between Climate Models and Observations: Testing the Hypothesis of Anthropogenic Global Warming. It is meant to be an interim science update of the 2008-NIPCC-report. The base of the 28-pages-booklet was the author’s presentation at the Majorana conference in Erice, Sicily, in August 2011.
What is it about? Whether global warming is natural or manmade is of crucial importance for both climate science and climate policy. Hence the the update on this issue. Besides, the author, an expert in atmospheric and space physics and founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service, discusses chaotic uncertainties of climate models and how to overcome them, Climategate and the Hockeystick graph – and shows “what we can say about the absence of post-1979 warming in the temperature data of the 20th century.”
The brochure has been/is presented by Prof. Singer during his (ongoing) lecture tour in Europe. Editions in German, French, Spanish and other languages are in preparation (German will be next). The book has been published with the support of the European Institute for Climate and Energy.
NIPCC vs. IPCC, Addressing the Disparity between Climate Models and Observations: Testing the Hypothesis of Anthropogenic Global Warming, Interim Science Update, Presented at Majorana Conference in Erice, Sicily, August 2011, ISBN 978-3-940431-28-8, TvR 2011, 28 p. (29×21,5 cm). 27 illustrations and graphs (19 in color). 10,00 EUR.
Popularity: 28% [?]
German University of Leipzig Suppresses Climate-Critical Seminar
Blatant censorship of dissenting scientific opinions on the subject of climate change and its causes is the post-modern trend. After recent attempts to ban the scientifically undesirable paper by renown scientists Spencer & Braswell and the ban of the climate-critical conference at the Belgian Society of European Engineers and Industrialists (SEII) by IPCC Vice Chair Prof. J. van Ypersele, the Faculty for Physics and Geosciences of the University of Leipzig, Germany, is the next to suppress open scientific debate.
Last Tuesday, University of Leipzig science faculty dean Prof. Dr. Jürgen Haase barred a climate seminar organized by (his own) geography professor Werner Kirstein, as well as the use of an auditorium of his own institute (!) and participation by European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) Vice President Michael Limburg as one of the the main speakers. Fortunately the ban was later relaxed and the seminar was allowed to go ahead.
The reason for originally having banned the seminar was a dissertation authored by Michael Limburg, which was critical of climate-science and was submitted to the faculty in March 2010. Two reviewers rejected the dissertation claiming, among other points, that it was inadequate. This is why Limburg was not welcome as a speaker, according to a letter from the Dean. The fact that the same dissertation had been recommended for acceptance by 4 other renowned professors went unmentioned by Haase. Limburg immediately challenged the ban.
What was so inconvenient about Limburg’s dissertation?
Under the supervision of Prof. Werner Kirstein, Limburg had written a dissertation that examined the quality of historical global temperature and sea level data in detail. His conclusions were damning. Using accepted rules for science and measurement, Limburg’s results showed that the datasets did not allow sea level and temperature change over the last 120-150 years to be determined anywhere near the alleged accuracies of millimetres or tenths of a degree Celsius respectively as claimed by the IPCC. The range of uncertainty, in both global mean temperature and sea level, is considerably greater than the total respective changes given by the IPCC. Every factor in attributing the possible causes of the changes was, at best, scientifically questionable.
Popularity: 31% [?]
Svensmark & CERN: cosmic rays influence climate
A cloudy day for global warming zealots
Climate science is anything but settled.
For years, physicist Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Institute (who has presented at conferences organized by CFACT and EIKE) has been asking inconvenient questions about the relationship between the sun, clouds and climate. He demonstrated in the lab that cosmic rays from the sun affect cloud
Henrik Svensmark
formation. Cosmic rays are a factor not meaningfully considered in the computer climate models which global warming proponents have declared to be so robust that they are beyond discussion.
To the vexation of true climate believers, Svensmark’s work has been confirmed at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research. CERN is home to the Hadron super conducting super collider near Geneva. CERN simulated the effect of cosmic rays in the earth’s atmosphere and found that it does indeed influence cloud formation.
This is very inconvenient science for the global warming campaigners, researchers and myriad carbon carpetbaggers, all of whose incomes have come to depend on government willingness to accept the authority of climate models as gospel. The more people know about computer climate models, the less they are willing to curtail the freedom and prosperity of the developed world.
Can E
uropean scientists like Svensmark and the researchers at CERN restore rigorous scientific questioning to climate science? Will scientists again research, question, write and speak without fear of political reprisal? Is this the beginning of a new enlightenment? Europe’s done it before.
Popularity: 40% [?]
Is this a War, or What?
by Einar Du Rietz
I Don't Want No Climate War
Apparently the UN climate meetings are not enough. Now, the Security Council will get involved.
From our beloved Guardian, we learn that: “A special meeting of the United Nations security council is due to consider whether to expand its mission to keep the peace in an era of climate change.”
We know that everyone was stressed up at the latest Bonn conference, but isn’t this going a bit to far?
The Security Council, like it not, is a product of the Cold War. In essence in order to avoid a destruction of the planet by a nuclear war. Hence the peculiar rules for who’s in or out. Again, like it or not, but this is a serious thing.
Here’s my modest recommendation: Just leave people alone. We don’t need no Green Helmets. There has basically been no Global Warming for over ten years, and even if it should come, infrastructure, economy, market economy you name it, is the only way out.
There might not be an imminent threat of nuclear war, but that’s no excuse for making up another Armageddon.
Popularity: 31% [?]
Massive carbon fraud cost Germany €850 million
“Fictitious trades, fictitious companies, bogus addresses”
The Süddeutschen Zeitung reports that German fraud investigators have found that €850 million fell off the table when shady companies swarmed into the carbon trading, emissions and energy business. The criminal companies rake in tens to hundreds of millions, fend off regulators with delaying tactics and then announce bankruptcy or disappear.
Düsseldorf tax investigators found that in less than a quarter of an hour emissions certificates might change hands five times. The same CO2 allowance would trade up to 18 times. A perverse form of recycling as the Süddeutschen Zeitung makes clear.
Fraud's new mascot
Elements of the investigation were code named “Odin,” “Tango,” and “Polar Bear.” How appropriate that the cute, but vicious bear of the northern waste should become a code word for fraud after having long been the favorite propaganda image of warming pressure groups.
Carbon trading, global warming policies and alternative energy schemes have become favorite tools of organized crime. CFACT’s Einar Du Rietz has written on mafia influence in wind farming. Maybe the Wind Fellas Blew Them. CFACT Europe has also reported on Italian carbon millionaire Oreste Vigorito’s fraud arrest. While the criminal exploitation of global warming has cost billions, it is small change compared to the hundreds of billions being looted legally with the full cooperation and encouragement of governments and the UN. How much more waste, fraud and abuse will free peoples tolerate before they shout, “ENOUGH!?”
MORE (Auf Deutsch) at Süddeutschen Zeitung
Popularity: unranked [?]
The media, while still often hostile, now takes serious interest in our activities and today is willing to openly question whether the IPCC and climate campaigners are always right. Today, more and more people in Germany realize they have been misinformed and I can say without exaggerating that our work played an important part in this. We see a real change, not just among ordinary citizens, but also business leaders, lawmakers, media executives and the consulting industry (which is very influential in Germany). People from every sector of society are giving positive feedback, attending events, buying our publications and are now not shy about giving us advice. People read the newspaper and decided for themselves that something didn’t smell right. EIKE with the help from CFACT gave them the facts and a way to meet one another, organize and communicate.
