Government funding is leading to scientific research that can’t be replicated, according to a new report detailing growing problems in the scientific community.
Published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), the report illustrates how scientific research is susceptible to bias when it is funded by the government and how a considerable number of scientific studies cannot be replicated or reproduced. As a result, government policy based on the research isn’t based on scientific methods and cannot be accepted as fact.
“Medical research, psychology, and economics are all in the grip of a ‘reproducibility crisis.’ A pharmaceutical company attempting to confirm the findings of 53 landmark cancer studies was successful in only six instances, a failure rate of 89%. ” Donna Laframboise, a journalist who authored the report, said in a statement. “Government policies can’t be considered evidence-based if the evidence on which they depend hasn’t been independently verified, yet the vast majority of academic research is never put to this test.”
Laframboise and the GWPF suspect that environmental and climate science are also in the grips of a similar crisis of reproducibility — much of climate modelling is done via supercomputers and therefore cannot be easily checked by peer reviewers or the general public.
“Reproducibility is the backbone of sound science,” Laframboise continued.”If it is infeasible to independently
evaluate the numerous assumptions embedded within climate model software, and if third parties lack comparable computing power, a great deal of climate science would appear to be inherently non-reproducible.”
Featured in new skeptical global warming book: New Book: Evidence-Based Climate Science: ‘Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as the Primary Source of Global Warming’
Astrophysicist Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, Head of Space Research Laboratory at the Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia in new book:
“Since 1990, the Sun has been in the declining phase of the quasi-bicentennial variation in total solar irradiance (TSI). The decrease in the portion of TSI absorbed by the Earth since 1990 has remained uncompensated by the Earth’s long-wave radiation into space at the previous high level because of the thermal inertia of the world’s oceans. As a result, the Earth has, and will continue to have, a negative average annual energy balance and a long-term adverse thermal condition.
“The quasi-centennial epoch of the new Little Ice Age has started at the end 2015 after the maximum phase of solar cycle 24. The start of a solar grand minimum is anticipated in solar cycle 27 ± 1 in 2043 ± 11 and the beginning of phase of deep cooling in the new Little Ice Age in 2060 ± 11.
“The gradual weakening of the Gulf Stream leads to stronger cooling in the zone of its action in western Europe and the eastern parts of the United States and Canada. Quasi-bicentennial cyclic variations of TSI together with successive very important influences of the causal feedback effects are the main fundamental causes of corresponding alternations in climate variation from warming to the Little Ice Age.”
Scientists and Studies predict ‘imminent global COOLING’ ahead – Drop in global temps ‘almost a slam dunk’
Growing number of scientists are predicting global cooling: Russia’s Pulkovo Observatory: ‘We could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years’
Solar energy isn’t all that ‘Green’ argues energy analyst Keith Bryer. He reports that making photovoltaic (PV) panels – known to the person in the street as solar panels – in particular produces by-products poisonous to a degree that dwarfs the miniscule amount radiated by uranium ore scattered across the Karoo. Wind generators need tons of copper, most dug up from enormous open cast mines that scar the landscape.
24 October 2016 – Leaving aside Eskom’s recent falling out of love with wind and solar power, there’s more to worry about these generators than the cost of running them, and feeding their power into the national grid.
Often whispered but rarely said aloud is the pollution they create – pollution every bit as bad as wild fantasies about nuclear radiation. Their pollution never degrades, ever. Recycling the poison is often an afterthought, if that.
Making photovoltaic (PV) panels in particular produces by-products poisonous to a degree that dwarfs the miniscule amount radiated by uranium ore scattered across the Karoo. Wind generators need tons of copper, most dug up from enormous open cast mines that scar the landscape.
But it is PV panels that create most pollution. Even environmental professors dare to say that every PV module uses at least one rare or precious metal such as silver, tellurium (a by-product of copper mining) or indium (from platinum mines).
Most people, including the Greens, have never heard of the latter two elements, or the vicious acids used like hydrochloric, and the even more frightening hydrofluoric. Greens may shudder at open cast mines but these chemicals are far worse.
PV panels include the use of sodium hydroxide, hydrofluoric acid, water and electricity
Making PV panels takes sodium hydroxide, hydrofluoric acid, water and electricity – so much for climate change, carbon dioxide emissions and removing toxic chemicals from the environment. The sunlight is free but that’s about it. And most PV panels are made in China these days, and China gets most its electricity from coal burning power stations.
The pollution aspects of making PV panels should be no secret. For thirty years sensible environmentalists in Silicon Valley in the US called the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC) have monitored the problem. They have urged manufacturers to protect their workers, recycle, stop using toxic stuff, and dumping dangerous chemicals.…
Time was eager to share Alec Baldwin’s work advocating for Farm Sanctuary’s Adopt a Turkey project, even though it inappropriately puts the spotlight on only one of the cruel Thanksgiving traditions we are told to participate in (not to mention the holiday itself). We need to advocate for veganism, not just to cut out one animal product once a year.
Baldwin attempts to relate people to how a turkey can have dog-like characteristics, and makes himself seem more down to earth by talking about how he too doesn’t like to think about things that make him feel bad.…
With every baseless scare come the inevitable victims: those who are gullible, through no fault of their own, like children, graduates of eco-science degrees, and people who think the ABC gives them impartial information.
Psychoterratica: or earth related (terra) mental health (psyche) states or conditions.
© 2013 Glenn Albrecht.
GlennAlbrect did a Ted talk, if you can bear to watch it, tell us the best quotes: I spot a “Tipping point of the brain”. He’s a philosopher. If only he understood the philosophy called science, he might be useful.
We live in the richest, safest era of human life on Earth. For a hundred thousand years everyone was afraid of dysentry, snakes, and the marauding tribe next door. They all starved periodically and buried their children often. They said prayers to pagan gods they hoped would save them. Now 1 – 2 billion lucky sods have escaped that dreadful fear, and live a life rich beyond the wildest dreams of the neolithic grinder. Some that won the lottery worry instead that burning coal in Queensland will melt arctic ice and create homeless polar bears. Or they think there are climate death squads.
Apparently the ABC is funded to make Psychoterratica worse, and they are doing the best they can.
Kirsty Melville will present a radio program on Monday.
Though I think there is a secret honesty to this program — look at this sentence in the advertising blurb:
If you don’t fully grasp the wide ranging and complex facts, it can feel like ‘too much’.
So if you do grasp the facts, it’s all cool. Is this Freudian, or just bad English?
One day perhaps people will be able to sue those who caused unnecessary psychoterratica. At least the citizens should get their tax back from the ABC / BBC/ CBC / NPR reporters who do absolutely no cross checking, ever, of anything issued by the IPCC or Greenpeace et al. Will the psychoterrorised get compensation for the superannuation funds that bombed after being disinvested in coal, or for the healthcare we can’t afford because the government frittered away the research funds on windmills?
If the poor petals want to be less afraid, the answer is simple, learn what the scientific method is, fight your instinct to follow the herd, and read skeptical sites. You’ll find out how the climate has always changed, the …
USA’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) providesdata here on snow cover.
Because global warming is supposed to be leading to less snow, one would think that snow cover in terms of area would be trending downwards over the past 50 or so years. However, the data tell us a very different story.
Surprisingly wintertime snow cover area has actually been trending upwards over the past 50 years and all-year snow cover in the northern hemisphere has been pretty much steady, and even of the rise over the past 25 years!.
The following NOAA chart shows us the northern hemisphere show cover for November:
Clearly the November trend is solidly upwards, with especially great area extents over 5 of the last 6 Novembers. The next chart is for December:
In December as well we see especially vast snow cover over many of the past 15 years – even higher than the winters of the 1970s, when we were being bombarded with warnings of global cooling.
3 New Papers Reveal Dominance Of Solar, Cloud Climate Forcing Since The 1980s … With CO2 Only A Bit Player
According to the IPCC (2007), changes in climate occur as a consequence of variations in the Earth’s radiation budget (solar energy absorbed by versus leaving the surface). Changes in the Earth’s radiation budget occur for 3 primary reasons; two of those three reasons involve solar forcing.
“Global climate is determined by the radiation balance of the planet. There are three fundamental ways the Earth’s radiation balance can change, thereby causing a climate change:
(1) changing the incoming solar radiation (e.g., by changes in the Earth’s orbit or in the Sun itself),
(2) changing the fraction of solar radiation that is reflected (this fraction is called the albedo – it can be changed, for example, by changes in cloud cover, small particles called aerosols or land cover), and
(3) altering the longwave energy radiated back to space (e.g., by changes in greenhouse gas concentrations).”
Reason (3) is, of course, the one that gets nearly all the attention from those who wish to characterize climate changes as primarily influenced by — or caused by — human activity. That’s where the 100 parts per million change in atmospheric CO2 concentration since 1900 comes in. According to the latest IPCC report, the total amount of radiative forcing attributed to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations since 1750 (through 2011) is just 1.8 W m-2. Again, that’s the total accumulated radiative effect attributed to CO2-forcing of climate changes over the last 260 years.
To put this into context, consider that the total amount of radiative forcing attributed to the +22 parts per million CO2 increase for the 2000-2010 period is claimed to be just 0.2 W m-2 by Feldman and co-authors (2015):
“Here we present observationally based evidence of clear-sky CO2 surface radiative forcing that is directly attributable to the increase, between 2000 and 2010, of 22 parts per million atmospheric CO2. … The time series both show statistically significant trends of 0.2 W m−2 per decade (with respective uncertainties of ±0.06 W m−2 per decade and ±0.07 W m−2 per decade)”
Remember that. CO2 climate-forcing amounts to merely 0.2 W m-2 per decade with a 22 parts per million increase in atmospheric concentration during the first decade of the 21st century, when there was a pause in global warming.…
UN issues ‘new urban agenda’: You will be forced into ‘compact cities’ in order to ‘foster green economic growth’
With an enthusiastic call for “sustainable urban development,” the United Nations has adopted a far-reaching document intended as a blueprint for the future of cities around the world. Described by the UN as an “inclusive, action-oriented, and concise document,” the “New Urban Agenda” (NUA) was approved on Oct. 21, the final day of the UN’s Habitat III conference in Quito, Ecuador.
The NUA, the UN proclaims, “will guide the next twenty years of sustainable and transformative urban development worldwide.” “It is a vision,” the UN explains, “of pluralistic, sustainable, disaster-resilient societies that foster green economic growth.” The centerpiece of the NUA is the promotion of “compact cities,” in which people will have little choice but to live in densely populated, high-rise buildings in order to lower their impact on the environment.
According to UN figures, some 30,000 people attended Habitat III, 10,000 of whom were international visitors, representing 167 countries.
New Urban Agenda
In keeping with long-standing UN tradition, the Habitat III conference was convened to address a “crisis.” This one involves the problems facing cities. They are said to require “urgent action.” And who better than the United Nations, aided by a coterie of self-described “urban exports” and “stakeholders” could provide the top-down solutions that will make the world’s cities a better place to live in the decades to come? Among the commitments contained in the New Urban Agenda are:
Ensure environmental sustainability, by promoting clean energy and sustainable use of land and resources in urban development; by protecting ecosystems and biodiversity, including adopting healthy lifestyles in harmony with nature; by promoting sustainable consumption and production patterns; by building urban resilience, by reducing disaster risks; and by mitigating and adapting to climate change.
Readdress the way we plan, finance, develop, govern, and manage cities and human settlements, recognizing sustainable urban and territorial development as essential to the achievement of sustainable development and prosperity for all.
A new study in Nature says #Climate Change may force the polar vortex to dip down more often, triggering bone-chilling winters in Europe and North America. Many of the claims of an overheated Earth dissipate during winter as temperatures plummet and heating bills rise. Yet the authors write that as the Arctic warms and more sea ice melts, additional ocean water is exposed, absorbing the sun’s warmth.
The excess warmth then gets released over a longer time period, interrupting the polar vortex and pushing it down into lower latitudes. Sea ice, however, reflects the sun’s rays back into space, causing temperatures to plummet during thewinter. That’s what happened in early 2014 and 2015 when Arctic air bullied its way toward more temperate regions.