John Coleman’s Global Warming Blog
November 15, 2010
“From 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming”
That is a direct quote from Dr. Phil Jones, the Director of Research at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, the climate research institution of record in England.
Since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
That statement from a paper written by Dr. David Evans, Mathematician and Engineer, Ph.D. Electrical Engineering from Stanford University. He also writes as below:
So far that debate has just consisted of a simple sleight of hand: show evidence of global warming, and while the audience is stunned at the implications, simply assert that it is due to carbon emissions.
The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.
If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don't you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now?
Dr. Evans new paper is very detailed and makes a strong case that carbon dioxide is not a significant greenhouse gas and its warming is having a minor impact on our climate.
The introduction to his new paper is written by JOANNE NOVA, a well know TV and radio personality, written and speaker in Australia, which is where Dr. Evans was engaged to do atmospheric carbon calculations by the government climate office for several years before he realized there is no significant man-made global warming. This is from her introduction:
> Official thermometers are overwhelmingly in warm localities such as near air conditioner exhaust vents, buildings, concrete, tarmac, or asphalt.
> Officials hide the Argo data, which shows the world's oceans are cooling.
> They ignore hundreds of thousands of weather balloon results that show the climate models overestimate future warming by at least 300%.
> Climate scientists frequently point to the last 130 years of global warming, but don't mention the full story: the planet started warming before 1700, over a century before humans started pumping out meaningful amounts of CO2.
> Leading authors publish a crucial graph with a deceptive colour scheme that imitates the results they wish they'd got. Why did a leading peer-reviewed climate journal publish such a naked and childish attempt at cheating?
> Their adjustments blatantly transform the original raw data from thermometers into rising trends. And they selectively ignore thousands of other thermometers where there is less warming.
> The Russian, Chinese and Indian climate establishments, which are financially independent of the western climate establishment, are all skeptical. As are many scientists from other branches of science, and many retired climate scientists (who no longer have anything to lose by speaking their minds).
Only a Fool Would Ignore the Message in the Pattern
Here is more from Dr. Evans paper:
The western climate establishment supports the concept that global warming is man-made, and disparages all other theories. They issue reports that overwhelm their readers with detail, written in dense language that is difficult for a layperson to decode. Basically their message is authoritarian: “we are the experts, it is very complicated, you can't understand it, so just accept what we say.”
But their message is nonsense. Everyone is familiar with temperature, and everyone (except the “politically sophisticated”) knows that siting official thermometers near air conditioners is cheating. The reality is that the temperature and other data has become unfavorable to their climate theory, so they hide behind complexity and authority instead of simply telling you what is going on.
While their theory seemed plausible 15 years ago, new evidence has proven the influence of CO2 to be greatly exaggerated. There is a germ of truth to their theory, but our emissions are not nearly as serious as they make out. The western climate establishment does not want you to know this, presumably for fear of losing the considerable income, perks, status, and influence that has come their way since they started promoting their theory. So they have taken to bamboozling us with “science”, and to cheating.
The public, politicians, and media do not generally understand science, but they do understand cheating. This paper focused on a few of the more easily understood or critical examples of establishment cheating.
The western climate establishment receives a great deal of public money as a result of their cheating. Obtaining money under false pretences, by deception, is technically fraud. We can leave it to government auditors and criminal investigators to sort that out as necessary, but in the meantime what matters most is whether the western climate establishment is right or wrong. If they are right, we aren't doing enough to curb emissions and prevent disaster. If they are wrong, we are wasting time and resources that would be better spent elsewhere, entrenching a vast gravy train of parasites, and extending the influence of government into our economy.
The obvious cheating of the western climate establishment strongly suggests they are hiding something and that they are wrong.
That their cheating is so blatant suggests that the media has not put them under any real scrutiny. It is left to retired scientists and bloggers to point out their cheating and errors, over the Internet. Our media has been incapable or unwilling.
It's been a lucrative theory for the western climate establishment, but reality will force them to abandon it eventually. And the political class will realize they were taken in.
This is an excellent presentation of science gone bad that perpetuates the global warming theory, a theory that will soon cost taxpayers dearly through the rule making of the California Air Resources Board and the federal Environmental Agency, unless they are stopped in Court.
You can read Dr Evans latest paper at
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/corruption/climate-corruption.pdf
John Coleman
