Posted on 07/15/2014 1:33:08 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama here, says he remembers the morning he spotted a well-known colleague at a gathering of climate experts.
“I walked over and held out my hand to greet him,” Dr. Christy recalled. “He looked me in the eye and he said, ‘No.’ I said, ‘Come on, shake hands with me.’ And he said, ‘No.' ”
Dr. Christy is an outlier on what the vast majority of his colleagues consider to be a matter of consensus: that global warming is both settled science and a dire threat. He regards it as neither. Not that the earth is not heating up. It is, he says, and carbon dioxide spewed from power plants, automobiles and other sources is at least partly responsible.
Dr. Christy has drawn the scorn of his colleagues partly because they believe so much is at stake and he is providing legitimacy to those who refuse to acknowledge that. If the models are imprecise, they argue, the science behind them is compelling, and it is very likely that the world has only a few decades to stave off potentially catastrophic warming.
He says he worries that his climate stances are affecting his chances of publishing future research and winning grants. The largest of them, a four-year Department of Energy stipend to investigate discrepancies between climate models and real-world data, expires in September.
“There’s a climate establishment,” Dr. Christy said. “And I’m not in it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Compare the models with real-world data? Burn him!! Burn him!!! He’s a witch!!
I bet if Exxon matched their federal grants, they would have a change of tune very fast.
They shun everyone who poses a danger to their gravy train.
As a child, I used to be troubled by the Civil War concept of brother taking up arms against brother. 'How could such a thing be?" I thought, with no answer forthcoming. Since the '60s (that is, the 1960's), the veil has been slowly lifted and I've come to realize it is not so mysterious after all.
Professor Christy doesn’t know what he is talking about...there is NO, NONE, ZERO, association with CO2 and “climate change” and human activity is not involved at all...there is NO proof that CO2 has anything to do with global climate cycles.
You're not even right about that, Dr. Christy. Unless a theory can be validated without even fulfilling its own criterion.
No smoking hot spot1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.
If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.
Hello..., reality to Dr. Christy..., YOU ARE A THREAT TO YOUR COLLEAGUES' HONEY POT (Countless "Green" NGOs and the NWO...)
Thoughtcrime will be discovered and the criminal dealt with.
“Where the disagreement comes is that Dr. Christy says the climate models are worthless and that there must be something wrong with the basic model, whereas there are actually a lot of other possibilities,” Dr. Mears said. Among them, he said, were natural variations in the climate and rising trade winds that have helped funnel atmospheric heat into the ocean.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, “Dr.” Mears, but if your model can’t predict natural variations or heat transfer due to tradewinds, then Dr. Christy is actually being charitable in using the term worthless. Since your models are being used to exaggerate the possible outcomes and scare people into destroying the middle class, they are actually evil, and so are you, “Dr.” Mears.
For some real-world evidence of climate change, you could point to the wonderful tourist must-see destination at Mesa Verde, the largest national park of its kind.
http://www.nps.gov/meve/historyculture/cliff_dwellings_home.htm
“The cliff dwellings of Mesa Verde are some of the most notable and best preserved in the North American Continent. Sometime during the late 1190s, after primarily living on the mesa top for 600 years, many Ancestral Puebloans began living in pueblos they built beneath the overhanging cliffs. The structures ranged in size from one-room storage units to villages of more than 150 rooms. While still farming the mesa tops, they continued to reside in the alcoves, repairing, remodeling, and constructing new rooms for nearly a century. By the late 1270s, the population began migrating south into present-day New Mexico and Arizona. By 1300, the Ancestral Puebloan occupation of Mesa Verde ended.”
We could turn to Wikipedia to read:
“By 1300 AD prolonged drought had caused the fragile adaptation to collapse and the Mesa Verde area was abandoned. The surviving Mesa Verde people retreated to the south and east.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesa_Verde_National_Park
So we have a national park that exists due to climate change that nobody in his right mind would attribute to human activity.
Elsewhere, we could read how the ancient city of Rome was fed by wheat raised in areas of North Africa that are now desert, but people who scold the rest of us about what we must do right now to address climate change aren’t interested in ancient changes in the ever-changing climate.
Grain supply to the city of Rome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_supply_to_the_city_of_Rome
Or this from the Wikipedia entry on Tacfarinas, who was a Numidian deserter from the Roman army who led his own Musulamii tribe and a loose and changing coalition of other Ancient Libyan tribes in a war against the Romans in North Africa during the rule of emperor Tiberius (AD 14-37):
...
The war lasted for about 10 years (from ca. AD 15 to 24) and engaged four successive Roman proconsuls (governors) of the province of Africa (modern Tunisia), which, although a small part of the empire, was economically vital as the source of most of Rome’s grain supply....
“The direct consequence of the war was the registration of the entire Tunisian plateau for land tax and its conversion to mainly wheat cultivation. The Musulamii and other nomadic tribes were likely permanently excluded from what had been their summer grazing grounds and forced to lead a more impoverished existence in the Aures mountains and the arid zone. The war also probably sealed the long-term fate of the client kingdom of Mauretania, which was annexed in AD 44 by the Emperor Claudius (ruled 41-54).”
From the Wikipedia article on Tacfarinas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacfarinas
With respect to the idea that humans are causing harmful changes to the climate at this very moment, I am waiting for some peer-reviewed papers that proposes what the optimum climate is for our biosphere. The first question that would naturally flow would be where is our current climate and trend in relation to this finding.
That nobody seems interested in this vital comparison indicates that climate is being studied for other purposes. Since all the urgent demands that flow from today’s climate science coincidently converge on policy solutions that involve statism, bigger government, higher taxes, less personal liberty, the bigger picture tells me all that I need to know about “climate science”.
“Professor Christy doesn’t know what he is talking about...there is NO, NONE, ZERO, association with CO2 and “climate change” and human activity is not involved at all...there is NO proof that CO2 has anything to do with global climate cycles.”
those are two very different ststements. The second is sort-of true, ie that there is no ‘proof’ that CO2 changes in the range that the Earth is currently witnessing is affecting climate. There is some evidence of correlation but it’s likely not statistically significant once you take all of the ‘climate science’ fudge factors out of the studies. For an excellent source on that issue see climateaudit.org.
However it is not true to say “there is no association with CO2 and climate change and human activity is not involved at all” because that has not been proven, just as the claim that climate change is caused by human activity is also not proven.
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide - Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? By Timothy Ball
No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)
Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.
Sky-high hole blown in AGW theory?
"Forbes reports on a peer-reviewed study that uses NASA data to show that the effects of carbon-based warming have been significantly exaggerated. In fact, much of the heat goes out into space rather than stay trapped in the atmosphere, an outcome that started long before AGW alarmists predicted:"
That article explains why no Hot Spot has been found.
The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science'
It Is Impossible For A 100 ppm Increase In Atmospheric CO2 Concentration To Cause Global Warming
Simple Chemistry and the Real Greenhouse Effect.
Those five articles each show that Greenhouse Theory has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.
Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud
That article kills any thought of planetary warming from any cause. Think about it. If there is absolutely no sign of rising sea levels how could the planet be warming? The rise in sea level in the last 100 years is far less than the average over the last 40,000 years caused by the inter-glacial period we are in.
Imagine how much the left would freak out if the funding process was prejudice against the warmists.
Excellent post.
Exxon and many large oil companies are increasingly under boycott blackmail to conform and constantly under suspicion.
Worse still many of them have been convinced that they can profit from the regulations and inherit market access restrictions the political efforts that result from this hoax will result it.
Most large companies with large lobbying budgets generally do. That is why it is frequently easy to coop them. They know they got the power to insure they will be the one charging sky high prices on whatever is left.
Is the people of the world, the US and other advanced countries who will foot this bill for this Hoax most particularly in the form of much much higher costs of living.
And it is true, In ever collage I have ever been to there is entire degree plans decacated to teaching and spreading this lie. The left over the last few decades have built themselves an entire industry, and an entire population of people entirely depended upon this aggressive financing of this lie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.