‘83% Consensus’?! 285 Papers From 1960s-’80s Reveal Robust Global Cooling Scientific ‘Consensus’


Beginning in 2003, software engineer William Connolley quietly removed the highly inconvenient references to the global cooling scare of the 1970s from Wikipedia, the world’s most influential and accessed informational source.

It had to be done.  Too many skeptics were (correctly) pointing out that the scientific “consensus” during the 1960s and 1970s was that the Earth had been cooling for decades, and that nascent theorizing regarding the potential for a CO2-induced global warming were still questionable and uncertain.

Not only did Connolley — a co-founder (along with Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt) of the realclimate.com blog — successfully remove (or rewrite) the history of the 1970s global cooling scare from the Wikipedia record, he also erased (or rewrote) references to the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age so as to help create the impression that the paleoclimate is shaped like Mann’s hockey stick graph, with unprecedented and dangerous 20th/21st century warmth.

A 2009 investigative report from UK’s Telegraph detailed the extent of dictatorial-like powers Connolley possessed at Wikipedia, allowing him to remove inconvenient scientific information that didn’t conform to his point of view.

“All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn’t like the subject of a certain article, he removed it — more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred — over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley’s global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia’s blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.

After eviscerating references to 1970s global cooling scare and the warmer-than-now Medieval Warm Period from Wikipedia, and after personally rewriting the Wikipedia commentaries on the greenhouse effect to impute a central, dominant role for CO2, Connolley went on to team up with two other authors to publish a “consensus” manifesto in 2008 that claimed to exp”ose the 1970s global cooling scare as a myth, as something that never really happened.

Peterson, Connolley, and Fleck (2008, hereafter PCF08) published “The Myth

Sea Level Expert Rips Study Claiming Fastest Rise in 2800 years: Study ‘full of very bad violations of observational facts’

But Professor Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, a leading world authority on sea levels and coastal erosion who headed the Department of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics at Stockholm University calls the new study and the media spin surrounding it “demagogic.”
“The PNAS paper is another sad contribution to the demagogic anti-science campaign for AGW. It is at odds with observational facts and ethical principles,” Morner wrote to Climate Depot. “The paper is full of very bad violations of observational facts,” Morner explained.
Few scientists have published as much on the subject of sea level rise as Dr. Mörner. He is also a co-founder of the Prague-based Independent Committee on Geoethics.
Morner noted:
– global tide gauges show moderate mean rates
– many key sites and test sites show little or no rise at all
– nowhere do we find records of true “acceleration”
– satellite altimetry show a mean rise of 0.5 ±0.1 mm/yr after back-callibration
– past sea level oscillations have been faster & steeper that in the last century
Morner explained: “The paper is full of very bad violations of observational facts.”
Just one first example:
This is their graph of sea level change at Christmas Island , Kiribati
This is the tide gauge record from Christmas Island
Morner asked: “How can anyone find a rapidly rising trend in this tide gauge record? It is flat or rather slowly falling – but in no way rising.”
So they work – with no respect to observational facts. A true case for Fraud Investigation,” Morner added.
Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry, Former Chair of School of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology also weighed in on the studies. “So, what to make of all this?” Curry wrote on her blog on Feb. 23, 2016.
Curry: “At a presentation that I made earlier this year to CEOs of

Study: East Antarctic Ice Sheet has stayed frozen for 14 million years – ‘Did not experience significant melting…when CO2 concentrations rivaled what they are today’


The work adds new support for the idea that the EAIS did not experience significant melting even during the Pliocene, a period from 3 to 5 million years ago, when carbon dioxide concentrations rivaled what they are today.

“The Pliocene is sometimes thought to be an analog to what Earth will be like if global warming continues,” said Jane K. Willenbring, an assistant professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Science in Penn’s School of Arts and Sciences. “This gives us some hope that the East Antarctic Ice Sheet could be stable in today’s and future climate conditions.”

By offering support for the idea that the EAIS has been largely stable during the last 14 million years, the research offers some hope that a massive collapse of the ice sheet, and associated sea level rise of tens of meters, may not be imminent.…

World Bank: ‘One in seven people still live without electricity’ – 1.1 billion people


India made significant advances, but progress in sub-Saharan Africa was far too slow, said a report tracking the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative, launched by the U.N. Secretary-General in 2011.
Almost no headway was made in switching people from biomass cooking fuels such as kerosene, wood and dung, the report added.
“We are heading in the right direction to end energy poverty, but we are still far from the finish line,” said Anita Marangoly George, a senior director for energy with the World Bank.
The report warned that traditional indicators can overestimate energy access because power supplies are limited or unreliable for many communities.
For example, new evidence showed that in the Democratic Republic of Congo’s capital Kinshasa, 90 percent of people are judged to have access to electricity because of widespread grid connections, but the streets are dark most nights and few households can use their electrical appliances.
Ben Garside, a senior researcher with the London-based International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), said too much emphasis was placed on investing in large-scale energy projects that feed into national grids.
“The aim is to generate the maximum amount of megawatts, but that won’t address the access issue, which is in rural areas,” he said.
The SE4ALL initiative has three goals, to be met by 2030: providing universal access to modern energy services, doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency and doubling the share of renewables in the global energy mix.
The report said the share of renewable energy – including hydro, solar and wind – grew fast at 4 percent per year from 2010 to 2012. But the annual growth rate should speed up to around 7.5 percent to achieve the 2030 goal, it added.
Energy efficiency also improved, with energy intensity – global economic output divided by total energy consumption – dropping more than 1.7 percent a year, but that rate must also accelerate, the report said.
“We will need to work a lot harder especially to mobilise much larger investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency,” the World Bank’s Marangoly George said.
According to the World Bank and the International Energy Agency, which co-produced the report, annual global investments in energy would have to triple from around $400 billion now to as much as $1.2 trillion to meet the SE4ALL targets.
Of this, between $40 billion and $100 billion is …

Scientists balk at ‘hottest year’ claims: Ignores Satellites showing 18 Year ‘Pause’ – ‘We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree’ – The ‘Pause’ continues

The global warming establishment and the media are crowing about 2010 being in a tie for the “hottest year” ever. The UK Guardian headline sums up the media’s promotion:

UK Guardian: ‘Hottest Year’ Claim: 2014 officially the ‘hottest year’ on record US government scientists say – ‘Nasa and Noaa scientists report 2014 was 0.07F (0.04C) higher than previous records…The global average temperatures over land and sea surface for the year was 1.24F (0.69C) above the 20th century average, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) and Nasa reported. The scientists said 2014 was 0.07F (0.04C) higher than the previous records set in 2005 and 2010.’

But scientists and climate skeptics are countering that the claims of “hottest year” are based on immeasurable temperature differences that are based on hundredths of a degree differences.

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano issued this statement: “There are dueling global datasets — surface temperature records and satellite records — and they disagree. The satellites show an 18 year plus global warming ‘standstill and the satellite was set up to be “more accurate” than the surface records. See: Flashback: 1990 NASA Report: ‘Satellite analysis of upper atmosphere is more accurate, & should be adopted as the standard way to monitor temp change.’

Any temperature claim of “hottest  year” based on surface data is based on hundredths of a degree hotter than previous “hottest years”. This immeasurable difference is not even within the margin of error of temperature gauges. The claim of the “hottest year” is simply a political statement not based on temperature facts. “Hottest year” claims are based on minute fractions of a degree while ignoring satellite data showing Earth is continuing the 18 plus year ‘pause’ or ‘standstill’. See: The Great Pause lengthens again: Global temperature update: The Pause is now 18 years 3 months (219 months)

Monckton jan 2014

Claiming 2014 is the “hottest year” on record based on hundredths of a degree temperature difference is a fancy way of saying the global warming ‘pause’ is continuing.”

End Morano statement. (Morano was former staff of U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee and producer of upcoming documentary Climate Hustle. He also testified in West VA on the climate school curriculum. )


Even former NASA global warming chief scientist  James Hansen, the leading proponent of man-made global warming in the U.S., conceded in 2011 that the “hottest year” rankings are essentially meaningless. Hansen explained that

Scientific American: ‘Greens Should Stop Claiming More Warming Means More War’

‘One chapter of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, published this year, concludes on the basis of the work of Burke et al. that “the effect of climate change on conflict and insecurity has the potential to become a key risk.” But another chapter, written by different authors, examines a broader range of research and concludes that “collectively the research does not conclude that there is a strong positive relationship between warming and armed conflict.”anthropological research finds a weak linkage between resource scarcity and war.

‘The research of Burke et al. has been critiqued by 26 researchers led by Halvard Buhaug of the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) in Norway. In a new analysis in Climatic Change, Buhaug and his colleagues note that the research of Burke et al. “suffers from shortcomings with respect to sample selection and analytical coherence. A modified assessment that addresses some of these problems suggests that scientific research on climate and conflict to date has produced mixed and inconclusive results.” Buhaug’s group probes in detail one subset of the studies analyzed by Burke et al., involving conflicts between “organized non-state actors and state military forces.” Buhaug’s group found “no evidence of a convergence of findings on climate variability and civil conflict. Recent studies disagree not only on the magnitude of the impact of climate variability but also on the direction of the effect.”