‘A crime justified by climate change?’ Jury to decide if ‘threat of climate change is a justifiable defense for criminal acts’
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/14/climate-change-activists-trial-washington
A jury in Washington state is hearing evidence on whether the threat of climate change is a justifiable defense for criminal acts, the first time such a defense has been allowed in an American court.
On Thursday, in a tiny municipal courtroom amid the strip malls and ranch houses of this suburban community north of Seattle, defense attorneys for five climate activists will call the final witnesses in their “Hail Mary pass” that has set up a historic legal showdown.…
Japanese Scientist Slams James Hansen & his colleagues — Calling Them ‘Lawbreakers In The Court Of Science’
Japanese Modeling Expert Slams James Hansen / Climate Scientists, Calling Them “Lawbreakers In The Court Of Science”
There really are many scientists who dispute the alarmist conclusions of the climate scientists. What follows is a scathing open letter from Japanese scientist and modeling expert Kyoji Kimoto to Dr. Syukuro Manabe, Dr. James Hansen and Dr. Robert Cess. ====================================== You are the lawbreakers in the court of science by Kyoji Kimoto 9 January, 2016 Dear Dr. Syukuro Manabe, Dr. James Hansen and Dr. Robert Cess, The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory of the IPCC is based on Manabe & Wetherald (1967) and Hansen et al., (1981) which utilize one dimensional radiative convective equilibrium model (1DRCM) with the fixed lapse rate assumption of 6.5K/km for 1xCO2 and 2xCO2, obtaining the zero feedback climate sensitivity of 1.2-1.3K. However it is theoretically meaningless when the parameter sensitivity analysis is applied to the lapse rate for 2xCO2 as shown here. Hansen himself admitted that 1DRCM is a fudge in an interview with Spencer Weart held on 23 October, 2000 at NASA as shown below. Here Dr. Hansen and his colleagues are referring to a paper by W. C. Wang et al., 1976: “Greenhouse Effects due to Man-Made Perturbations of Trace Gases” Science 194, 685-690. An excerpt from the interview: Weart: This was a radiative convective model, so where’s the convective part come in. Again, are you using somebody else’s… Hansen: That’s trivial. You just put in… Weart: … a lapse rate… Hansen: Yes. So it’s a fudge. That’s why you have to have a 3-D model to do it properly. In the 1-D model, it’s just a fudge, and you can choose different lapse rates and you get somewhat different answers. So you try to pick something that has some physical justification. But the best justification is probably trying to put in the fundamental equations into a 3-D model. See more: https://www.aip.org/history-programs/niels-bohr-library/oral-histories/24309-1 Cess made a mathematical error in Cess (1976), Cess et al., (1989) and Cess et al., (1990) when differentiating his equation OLR=EeffxsigmaxTs^4,which can be detected by any high school student learning differentiation. Manabe and the IPCC AR4 adopted Cess method to obtain the zero feedback climate sensitivity (Planck response) =1.2K. The detailed discussions are here: http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.6-7.1055 The AGW theory of the IPCC has caused huge economic losses to the world, including the collapse of British coal industry and the Fukushima nuclear disaster …
Morano on Obama’s climate ‘legacy’: ‘Prez may succeed in ‘winning’ climate war despite fact that skeptics have won every battle’
Mr. Morano is producer and host of the upcoming film Climate Hustle.
“President Obama laid out his final vision in the State of the Union address. Republicans need to get their act together quickly in order to prevent Obama’s climate legacy from being cemented.
“The GOP nominee for president in 2016 must present a basic plan to roll back Obama’s climate regulations. Here is a simple breakdown of what is needed:
1) Repeal all EPA climate regulations;
2) Withdraw the U.S. from any Paris agreement (nonbinding) ‘commitments’;
3) Withdraw the U.S. from the UN climate treaty process entirely;
4) The U.S. should defund the UN IPCC climate panel;
5) Start praising carbon based energy as one of the greatest liberators of mankind and the best hope for the developing world’s poor.
Anything short of this clear and comprehensive approach will lead to failure and guarantee Obama’s climate policies will become permanent in the U.S. The Republicans need to get a coherent plan and articulate their course of action.
President Obama has proven himself a transformational president, surpassing LBJ and rivaling only FDR for remaking American politics. If we are subjected to the same weak-kneed leadership on climate that we saw in George W. Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney, John Boehner and others, Obama will have succeeded in ‘winning’ the climate war despite the fact that skeptics have won every battle.
Skeptics are seeing more and more prominent scientists join their ranks after reexamining the evidence, many politically left-wing.
Skeptics helped ensure the UN’s Kyoto protocol was never ratified.
Skeptics helped ensure that a carbon tax was never implemented.
Skeptics helped ensure that cap-and-trade never made it into law despite multiple attempts.
Skeptics have won the battle of public opinion.
But skeptics are ‘losing’ the battle when it comes to Obama. By bypassing Congress and using Executive Orders, Obama has finally succeeded in pushing the climate agenda into the law in the U.S. now with domestic climate policy through the EPA in place and the newly added UN Paris ‘commitments’, the climate battle may actually be ‘won’ by the global warming establishment.
To use the warmists own term: 2016 may be a ‘tipping point’ for skeptics if the GOP does not wake up and battle the threat posed by scientifically meaningless climate policies with huge economic, liberty and sovereignty impacts.
The time …
Media Hyping Hurricane Alex in Janaury – ‘But how many such storms occurred without being spotted prior to the satellite era?’
…Smoking gun graph reveals NASA’s Hansen’s research showed Medieval Warm Period warmer than today – 1990 UN IPCC report used Hansen’s 1981 study
Via: http://realclimatescience.com/2016/01/hansen-confirmed-the-mwp-in-1981/
“Climate fraudsters frequently claim that the 1990 IPCC temperature graph below showing the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was only a representation of Central England Temperatures (CET) and was not global.”
This is nonsense. The graph was derived from James Hansen’s 1981 study, which was taken from temperatures in England, California and Greenland.
(b) is based on temperatures in central England, the tree limit in the White Mountains of California, and oxygen isotope measurements in the Greenland ice (W. Dansgaard of the Geophysical Isotope Laboratory, University of Copenhagen, pers. comm.), with the temperature scale set by the variations in the last 100 years
The overlay below shows that the 1990 IPCC graph is essentially the same graph as Hansen 1981.
The MWP was real.
Flashback: UN Scientist urged: ‘We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period’
#
Related Links:
‘More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was real, global, & warmer than the present’ – Climate Depot’s Medieval Warm Period Round Up of Studies
Check out latest MWP map here.
Roman and Medieval Warm Periods vs. the Current Warm Period – Studies ‘clearly demonstrating that there has been nothing unusual or unprecedented about the mean level of global warmth experienced over the past 18 years of no significant upward or downward trend.’
More Glacier Studies Confirm Roman And Medieval Warm Periods Were Just As Warm As Today
05 Oct 1950 – Weather Theory Debunked History Gives Lie To Cycles
Alpine Glaciers Were Of Similar Size During Medieval Warm Period, New Study Finds – A new paper published in The Cryosphere reconstructs Alpine glacier fluctuations over the past 1600 years and finds glacier lengths of 7 Alpine glaciers were similar during the Medieval Warm Period and the end
New incandescent light bulb ‘to be almost 3 times more efficient than the best LED light bulbs’
An incandescent light bulb, the most efficient bulb
An incandescent light bulb, the most efficient bulb – By Former Harvard Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl
One of the things that the government bureaucracy can’t do is to predict the direction that the free scientific and technological progress will take in the future. No one can really do it, not even the best minds let alone stupid arrogant aßholes that have to be employed as regulators within the government structures.
MIT researchers have reminded us about one striking example. The Wikipedia contains a page titled Phase-out of incandescent light bulbswhose first sentence says:
Governments around the world have passed measures to phase out incandescent light bulbs for general lighting in favor of more energy-efficient lighting alternatives.
You see, governments across the world “passed measures” based on their belief – a dogma, to be more precise – that there’s something intrinsically and unavoidably wrong about incandescent light bulbs when it comes to their energy efficiency and this defect can’t go away.
But the energy is conserved. It can’t get lost, it may only be converted from one form to another. What we care about is whether the form of the energy that we get is “useful”. Heat is often considered useful by many people – but sometimes it’s not.
Incandescent light bulbs are based on the conversion of the electric current to heat which gets converted to light because heated objects emit electromagnetic radiation. The emitted light nicely carries all the frequencies, especially those within the interval of the visible spectrum, but also some frequencies that are “not useful”, like the infrared waves. Those don’t help us to see and only propagate as a form of heat.
But there’s no reason to think that this problem can’t be circumvented. There’s no reason to be confident that the incandescent light bulbs won’t return as the most widespread light bulbs. Yesterday, an MIT group has issued a
press release (“Recycling light”)
…see also: Phys.ORG, Google News…
about their Nature nanotechnology article
Tailoring high-temperature radiation and the resurrection of the incandescent source
which reports their results on the construction of a light bulb that that is going to be almost 3 times more efficient than the best LED light bulbs. The latter only convert 7-15 percent of the energy to light; the new MIT technology is estimated to get to 40 percent
Canadian bridge splits due to extreme cold – ‘Closed indefinitely’
2016: Extreme cold causes Canadian bridge to split.
2007: ‘Global Warming’ claimed to have caused Minnesota bridge collapse
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/01/10/bridge-on-trans-canada-highway-splits-amid-cold-weather
TORONTO – A northern Ontario bridge that is part of the Trans-Canada Highway has been closed indefinitely, police said on Sunday, after media reports it split because of extremely cold weather.
The Nipigon River Bridge, a cable-stayed bridge that opened in November, was closed because of “mechanical issues,” Ontario Provincial Police said. Twitter images showed a gap splitting the highway.
“My first thought was, Canada is cut in half,” Nipigon, Ontario, Mayor Richard Harvey told online news site TB News Watch.
#
How cold weather could have played a role in the failure of the Nipigon Bridge – Jan. 11, 2016 – Ontario experienced a deep freeze. In Nipigon, the temperature went from -6.3 C on Saturday to -15.7 on Sunday. As well, the area experienced high wind gusts as the system bringing the cold weather rolled in…When it comes to the cold weather, bridges — typically comprised of steel cable and concrete — react just like anything else. The steel and concrete expand in warm weather and contract in cold. The cables of a cable-stayed bridge like the one in Nipigon are fasted from a main tower to the ends with bolts. In the cold, the steel in the cables would contract causing the bridge to want to uplift. But that’s what the bolts at the ends are for: to counter that. Though it’s unknown what happened, Green said that it could have been a combination of factors that made the perfect storm: cold weather could have compromised the bolts and the wind could have caused uplift. If the cables had iced, that could have compromised the bridge as well.
#
