JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



John O’Sullivan puts his house on the line — more than any skeptic ought to be asked to do

UPDATE 2014: Claims made that “Michael Mann Faces Bankruptcy as his Courtroom Climate Capers Collapse” on Feb 22, are incorrect. See here for more information.  This post below is two years old, and many things have changed. — Jo

It’s slipped past most skeptics with all the action lately, but John O’Sullivan is putting in above and beyond what any single skeptical soul ought to.

He’s already been a key figure helping Tim Ball in the legal fight with the UVA establishment, which has spent over a million dollars helping Michael Mann to hide emails. The case was launched by Michael Mann, but could turn out to do a huge favor to skeptics — the discovery process is a powerful tool, and we all know who has been hiding their methods, their data, and their work-related correspondence.

Tim Ball and John O’Sullivan are helping all the free citizens of the West. The burden should not be theirs alone. There are many claims for help at the moment, but that is a sign that the grand scam is coming to a head.

– Jo
————————————————————————————
Official: I Just Bet My House on the Outcome of Science Trial of the Century
No truer headline will you read. Last month this author literally wagered his home, life savings, and all his possessions on the outcome of a crucial global warming lawsuit currently ongoing in Canada.
So what is it that drove me to such apparent recklessness endangering not only my own well-being but that of my family? Well, to me this pivotal lawsuit encapsulates the archetypal ‘good versus evil’ battle no conscientious parent can ignore.
Dr. Ball famously declared that his adversary belongs “in the state pen, not Penn State.” For that Ball was summarily hit with a libel suit and Ball’s legal fees could exceed $300,000. But defiantly, the septuagenarian says, “if you think education is expensive – try ignorance.”

So persuasive is the evidence to me that last night I signed a contract in favor of Dr. Ball to forsake my worldly goods in the event the B.C. court ruled in favor of his adversary, Dr. Michael Mann .

 An honest jury will see from Ball’s evidence that Mann perpetrated a cynical and heinous crime by secretly doctoring proxy climate data from a handful of tree rings he took from a corner of California that was then claimed to represent a 1,000-year temperature record for the globe. The Mann graph typifies all that is wrong with post-normal science now practiced in our universities.
With billions of dollars of climate taxes resting on the outcome, it’s no flannel to label the Mann-v-Ball trial in the British Columbia Supreme Court as the ‘science trial of the century,’ the most profound of its kind since the Scopes ‘Monkey Trial’ of 1925.
Ball, a 72-year-old retiree has already used up his meager life savings but has made some headway with his escalating legal costs thanks to a fighting fund that is now past the $100,000 mark. But there’s a lot of lawyerly manouvering to go yet before Ball can be assured of victory.The corruption that is now pervading our universities is making many honest folk realize they need to stand shoulder to shoulder with principled scientists like Dr. Ball. In recent months I’ve worked hard to help promote Tim Ball’s Legal Defense Fund.But my efforts also made me a target for Michael Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, who didn’t hesitate in naming me as an accessory in his lawsuit. So as a yardstick of commitment to the case, yesterday I signed a binding legal agreement providing my full financial indemnity to Tim in case Mann wins his claim.

(Note: Ball’s law firm, Pearlman Lindholm are entrusted to administer the account. Donors contributing $10,000 or more will be reimbursed dependent on a favorable court ruling).

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.2/10 (88 votes cast)
John O'Sullivan puts his house on the line -- more than any skeptic ought to be asked to do, 9.2 out of 10 based on 88 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/87xxwoh

101 comments to John O’Sullivan puts his house on the line — more than any skeptic ought to be asked to do

  • #
    gnomish

    good luck john. glad you found the line where you make a stand. that, alone, is an achievement worthy of the name human.
    some day people will have to do this for liberty or lose the last of it. wish they’d cut to the chase.
    look what happens when you don’t have any spine! oz!


    Report this

    20

  • #
    Mark D.

    It’s tough work and we should be thankful that someone is willing to do it. Thank you Tim Ball, thank you John O’Sullivan.
    I’ll donate what I can.


    Report this

    20

  • #
    Skeptik

    As a true skeptic, I disagree strongly with Mr O’Sullivan (and, on occasion, with Dr Ball) on some matters. In this, however, they have my strong support, and I must commend Mr O’Sullivan for his bravery.


    Report this

    20

  • #
    Robert Austin

    Wow! And I thought I made a generous contribution to Dr. Ball’s defence fund.


    Report this

    20

  • #
    amcoz

    Thank you Jo for bringing this to the fore.

    To TB and JO’S, good luck.

    The link above doesn’t seem to work (for me at least) so how can I make a small donation?


    Report this

    20

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Just donated to the Tim Ball fund.

    Had trouble with a previous attempt to use this facility a few weeks ago.

    It seems the cause was a re-setting of the country code after I was sent back to put in the amount.

    Just in case anyone else gets stuck. I know only a minor detail but for old people its a victory to figure out some computer issues and make them work.

    :)


    Report this

    20

  • #
    AGOB

    John, Tim & Jo – thank you from the bottom of my heart for your immense courage in standing up for the fight, and helping to protect the future for our kids.

    I, too, would like to make a small donation.


    Report this

    20

  • #
    Siliggy

    From all of us who have donated to the Tim Ball fight and hoped that our $100 or so would not just go to waste..THANKYOU JOHN!
    Cannot help but think of the hockey team while listening to my favorite song of the moment.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWKEiW-haq0


    Report this

    10

  • #
    KeithH

    John O’Sullivan is to be applauded and admired for taking this principled stand. Whilst one could perhaps wish for a better actionable cause, I believe it is crucial to get those who have been complicit in perpetrating the CAGW scam into court where their particular brand of “settled science” can be properly tested.

    On the home front, I was incensed on receiving the taxpayer-funded November 2011 Denison Newsletter put out by the three Tasmanian Labour Senators. It contained the following unequivocal and patently false statements:

    “The Gillard Labor Government is proud to say that for the first time in Australia, we will have a law that cuts the carbon pollution that causes dangerous climate change.
    It’s a future where Australians will get a better deal because clean-green choices are cheaper and more competitive than polluting ones.

    The Newsletter carries no disclaimer such as that used by the CSIRO, BoM etc.

    Do we have any laws or rights in Australia under which these grossly deceptive falsehoods can be challenged?


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Neville

      Keith you should challenge those stupid senators and point out where they are wrong.

      We are doing zero to change the climate or the temp and coal costs only a fraction of the cost of useless renewables like solar and wind.

      So far there is zero evidence that AGW is dangerous and may even be a net benifit to the planet and humans as well.

      But please email these idiots info from this site that proves there is zero the OECD countries can achieve by reducing co2 emissions, just look at the numbers. OECD versus non OECD, 1990 to 2009.

      http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=90&pid=44&aid=8&cid=CG6,CG5,&syid=1990&eyid=2009&unit=MMTCD


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KeithH

        Thanks for your link and input Neville. I purposely didn’t specify what I felt was wrong to see if others saw the same blatant deceptions unsupported by any known evidence, that were obvious to me. You nailed it in your two sentences:

        “We are doing zero to change the climate or the temp and coal costs only a fraction of the cost of useless renewables like solar and wind.

        So far there is zero evidence that AGW is dangerous and may even be a net benifit to the planet and humans as well.”

        I would add that far from being a pollutant, CO2 is essential to all life on Earth!


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Coconutdog

      I’d report it to the ACCC. After all, they’re the ones who recentlty warned us not to over estimate the effects of the carbon dioxide tax on the rising costs of business.
      Surely they would stop the Gov’t from making such misleading assertions too?

      http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/807902


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KeithH

        Thanks for that ACCC link Coconutdog. I will be reporting it and making a submission based on similar wording as the ACCC suggest under their guidelines headed:

        “Carbon price claims: be accurate.

        The Australian Consumer Law protects Australians against misleading claims made in relation to goods or services.”

        We’ll see whether that applies to protection against misleading claims made by members of this unmandated, lying, spinning Green/Labor/Independent cabal posing as a government!


        Report this

        00

      • #
        John Trigge

        In a previous attempt to get the ACCC to do something about misleading Government propaganda, I received this:

        Thank you for your email complaint of 13 August 2008 to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). In your complaint you raise concerns in relation to current advertising of the Australian Government in relation to climate change. In particular, you consider the advertising is likely to mislead.

        As you are aware, the ACCC is charged with the responsibility of ensuring compliance with the fair trading and competition provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974. Generally speaking, the fair trading provisions of the Act only apply to entities when engaged in trade or commerce. The actions of a department in carrying out the functions of government such as communication of government policy are unlikely to be considered in trade or commerce and are therefore unlikely to be exposed to the fair trading provisions of the Act.

        While the provisions of the Act are unlikely to apply, you may wish to raise your concerns directly with the relevant department, the responsible Minister or your member of Federal Parliament.

        Thank you for contacting the ACCC with your concerns.

        It appears we have no way of stopping misleading advertising propaganda from them other than to vote them out (and probably get the same thing by a different party).


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Ellen

          I would have thought that such government actions have an enormous effect on trade and commerce – especially when it comes to the ‘fairness’ bit!


          Report this

          00

    • #
      cohenite

      Contact the AEC which deals with political advertising and false and misleading claims made in such material.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      John Brookes

      I think you’ll struggle KeithH. Because in the long run, clean green power may well be a lot cheaper than doing nothing on climate change. You’d have a hard time arguing otherwise.


      Report this

      00

      • #

        …..clean green power may well be a lot cheaper than doing nothing on climate change.

        Ho ho ho!

        John, I’m beginning to realise that you’re just saying ‘stuff’ like this as a ‘wind up’.

        Tony.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Otter

          His ‘wind ups’ are usually ‘let downs.’


          Report this

          00

        • #
          memoryvault

          John, I’m beginning to realise that you’re just saying ‘stuff’ like this as a ‘wind up’

          It’s taken you this long . . . .

          JB is a lonely, friendless little soul craving human attention.

          Like the kind of woman who deliberately seeks out abusive partners, John gravitates to where he knows he will be abused, and then goes out of his way to attract that abuse.

          It’s sad, really.


          Report this

          00

      • #
        KeithH

        Do you mean clean, green power like these examples John?

        http://www.thegwpf.org/uk-news/2339-the-true-cost-of-britains-green-obsession-pollution-on-a-disastrous-scale.html

        http://windenergygeneration.info/10-amazingly-abandoned-renewable-energy-plants

        Need more? Believe me, there’s no shortage (Solyndra anyone?)and that’s without even touching on the human rights and environmental abuses rife in the provision of dubious projects being set up to generate “carbon credits” for sale to assuage the consciences of gullible people like you who want to be seen to be “doing something” on climate change!

        Given that climate change has and always will be a fact of life to which all species have either adapted or perished, I don’t see that I’ll “have a hard time arguing otherwise”!

        What I do have a hard time understanding though, is that seemingly otherwise intelligent people such as you have been taken in so easily by what is so obviously and demonstrably a massive politically and financially motivated scam!


        Report this

        00

      • #
        1DandyTroll

        Isn’t it then rather ironic that for the so called green clean power to succeed the weather and climate has to be warmer and not sub zero degrees during the long winter months.

        This has become blatantly obvious for the stupid patrols of lefties of northern EU this winter. Although it took a month before the media outlets grasped the fact, but when they did, wouldn’t you know, all of a sudden, this mild winter is just weather again. :p


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Aussie

        what planet are you on?

        Alleged clean energy that provides those blightonthelandscape makers, will never have reduced costs.


        Report this

        00

      • #

        in the long run, clean green power may well be a lot cheaper than doing nothing on climate change.

        Indeed. And in the long run, Paul Erlich might get one right. /sarc


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Otter

    I fear I am in no position to help at this point… mattb? Johnny brookes? Care to help out?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    I totally agree with Jo ‘the burden should not be theirs alone’ and I’ll continue to donate what I can as I’m sure most of us will


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Louis Hissink

      Already did last year :)


      Report this

      00

      • #
        val majkus

        Yes, I did too Louis, but will do so again as it will be in my view a very time consuming case
        I don’t know much about defamation cases and this is in Canada but I believe that truth is a defence (one defence) and if this is so then I anticipate that Dr Ball will need expert witnesses
        Discovery, expert witnesses and a jury trial – that adds up to very expensive
        John says http://johnosullivan.livejournal.com/#post-johnosullivan-42475

        Dr. Ball famously declared that his adversary belongs “in the state pen, not Penn State.” For that Ball was summarily hit with a libel suit and Ball’s legal fees could exceed $300,000. But defiantly, the septuagenarian says, “if you think education is expensive – try ignorance.”

        I applaud Dr Ball and his supporters. Dr Ball needs the financial support of all climate realists in what must be for him an extremely stressful time


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Neville

        Louis I suppose you know already, but Luke had a snide go at you over at Jennifer’s blog a few days ago.

        Yuk, Yuk and Luke is such a temperate decent type of bloke isn’t he? sarc.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Athlete

    An honest jury will see from Ball’s evidence that Mann perpetrated a cynical and heinous crime by secretly doctoring proxy climate data from a handful of tree rings he took from a corner of California that was then claimed to represent a 1,000-year temperature record for the globe.

    Speaking of Michael Mann and fraud, I stumbled upon this the other day from the world of Psychology. Does this remind you of anything you know?

    Science and Nature, the world’s top chroniclers of science, were forced to retract papers that had received wide popular attention

    One of the great unanswered questions… is how he got away with such blatant number-fudging, especially in a discipline that claims to be chock full of intellectual safe-guards, from peer review to replication by competitive colleagues. How can proper science go so wrong?

    The answer, according to a growing number of statistical skeptics, is that without release of raw data and methodology, this kind of research amounts to little more than “‘trust me’ science,” in which intentional fraud and unintentional bias remain hidden behind the numbers. Only the illusion of significance remains.

    “These results are published in peer-reviewed journals, and frequently make news headlines as well. They seem solid. They are based on observation, on scientific method, and on statistics. But something is going wrong. There is now enough evidence to say what many have long thought: that any claim coming from an observational study is most likely to be wrong – wrong in the sense that it will not replicate if tested rigorously.”


    Critics point to the prevalence of data dredging, in which computers look for any effect in a massive pool of data, rather than testing a specific hypothesis. But another important factor is the role of the media in hyping counter-intuitive studies, coupled with the academic imperative of “publish or perish,” and the natural human bias toward positive findings — to show an effect rather than confirm its absence.

    Even in the Stapel case, his exposure as a fraud was covered less extensively than some of his bogus claims.

    Hmmm, it does remind me of another hockey stick.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      val majkus

      Athlete thank you for that informative link

      this is instructive:

      Victor Ivrii, a University of Toronto math professor, described the problem similarly on his blog: “While Theoretical Statistics is (mainly) a decent albeit rather boring mathematical discipline (Probability Theory is much more exciting), so called Applied Statistics is in its big part a whore. Finding dependence (true or false) opens exciting financing opportunities and since the true dependence is a rare commodity many “scientists” investigate the false ones.”

      “If jumping to wrong conclusions brings a scorn of colleagues and a shame, they will be cautious. But this does not happen these days,” Prof. Ivrii said in an email. “Finding that eating cereals does not affect your cardio [for example] brings neither fame nor money, but discovering that there is some connection allows you to apply for a grant to investigate this dependence.”

      or in other words ‘follow the money’

      and the last sentence is worth keeping (talking about debunking of false positives)

      It might not be the most exciting topic for the faculty lounge, and reporters might ignore it, but at the end of the day, a debunked false claim remains one of the highest achievements in science.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        handjive

        Ms.Val M, if you are not aware of, you might be interested in this:

        Global Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination
        Jason Scott Johnston
        UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

        “A cross-examination of global warming science conducted by Jason Scott Johnston, Professor and Director of the Program on Law, Environment and Economy at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, has concluded that virtually every claim advanced by global warming proponents fails to stand up to scrutiny, says this article by Lawrence Solomon.”

        http://www.probeinternational.org/UPennCross.pdf

        The link is from comments section in this link re: UPenn-Climate Ethics:

        Ethical Analysis of the Climate Change Disinformation Campaign: Introduction to A Series.

        Over the next few weeks, ClimateEthics will take a deeper look at what has been referred to as the “climate change disinformation campaign” through an ethical lens.
        Yet, ideologically based disinformation is ethically abhorrent particularly in regard to behaviors about which there is credible scientific support for the conclusion that human activities threaten life and the ecological systems on which life depend.

        Via Real Science


        Report this

        00

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Ten years ago I did a BSc made up of the first three years of the Psychology degree.

      One of our lecturers had obviously grown a little inbred in his assessment of reality.

      This was evident in the Meta Analyses (similar to the data trawling you mention) frequently quoted in lectures.

      I can recall being astonished at the accuracy of this fellows work which frequently we were referred to in peer reviewed journals. The results were often shown to up to 10 significant figures. And an Associate Prof.

      Never-the-less, there were some brilliant and dedicated teachers there and they were much appreciated.

      :)


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Brendan

        KinkyKeith

        As part of a Statistics unit of my BEd, we were required to find examples where statistics had been used incorrectly in a published paper. This caused some consternation amongst us students as we couldn’t for the life of us think how we would find such a thing in a mathematics book. Wouldn’t such a misuse be immediately torn apart by fellow mathemticians? How could it even get to print?

        The answer from our lecturer was to follow these simple steps.

        Go to the Library
        Go to the Psychology section
        close your eyes
        reach out and grab a book
        Incorrect application of stats found !

        It worked to a T


        Report this

        00

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Hi Brendan,

          Funny.

          I’d never heard that before.

          All of the psych stats we did was interesting and really the only way to address the “measurement” requirements of the science.

          Having said that, I was mainly doing Neuroscience, Memory and Psychobiology where measurements were dispassionate observations of a system under stimulus. No problem.

          Then there were the more social things were were forced to experience , like making up questionnaires to assess the opinions of shoppers and the effectiveness of advertising.
          This is where psychology (of Advertising?) starts to drift from science to “expediency”.

          There is much good in the science of psychology. I’m not sure that advertising should be considered a part of that science.

          :)


          Report this

          00

  • #
    Lawrie

    These scientists, the AGW mob, remind me of sheep with footrot. Until every last one of them has been sent to the slaughter house there will be the danger of re-infection. But you will be happy to know that we have largely rid ourselves of footrot in Aus and iradicated TB in the beef herd. It can be done but requires ruthless testing and culling. When this scam has finally been exposed to Joe public the academics, the CSIRO and BoM who perpetuated the scam must be sacked and never re-employed.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Tristan

    Ball’s defense will need to be a bit more competent than his attack was.

    In a Statement of Defence filed with the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, the Herald dismissed Ball’s “credibility and credentials as an expert on the issue of global warming,” saying: “The Plantiff (Dr. Ball) is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist.”

    In the face of this rebuff, and of the earlier Statement of Defence filed by Dan Johnson, Ball discontinued his lawsuit.

    You know, that lawsuit where he claimed defamation due to his fake credentials being displayed for all to see.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    It is a yes/no answer………

    On the other hand, people in denial are oft lacking in skills of perception.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    BBBaz

    I would not be surprised to see Mann drop his case on the steps of the court house, so to speak. I hope that my donation among many others gave Tim the added courage to take up Mann’s challenge. Well done John O’Sullivan another case of the individual fighting this monstrous deception with courage and their own money, hardly the backing of skeptics from oil and coal companies, as espoused by the AGW mob.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] realist puts his house on the line in a legal case against the hockey stick evidence hiders. John O’Sullivan is putting in above [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #

    good luck john. glad you found the line where you make a stand.One of our lecturers had obviously grown a little inbred in his assessment of reality.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Hi Solar Arrow Board

      “One of our lecturers …” ??

      Sometimes some people get so confident that they know everything that they stop “refreshing” their work and stop expanding their skills.

      They continue to use what they have, but then get lazy and start to “invent” little “face savers” like the extra significant figures in papers.

      It takes a lot of effort for the average person to assess and cut through the AGW BS and poor university performance/integrity doesn’t help anybody but politicians.

      ?????

      :)


      Report this

      00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Its sad reading all these comments by people totally committed to the cause of disproving AGW. All those scientists are either stupid, or corrupt, or both. Now you get an old guy so hoodwinked that he thinks promising his house to an annoying tool of oil & coal interests is a noble thing to do. If Tim Ball has a shred of decency, he’d ring the old bloke up and say, “Look, I don’t want your money. I was just shit stirring and went a bit far – but it was all my fault, so I’ll cop it sweet. Thanks for the offer though.”.

    The old guy, for his part, might consider his children, if he has any.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Neville

      JB I don’t know why we bother because alas you can’t even understand simple kindy maths.

      There is zero Oz can do to change the climate or temp by a whisker by bringing in a co2 tax. But some how you still think it’s a good idea.

      This isn’t my opinion or point of view but simple maths. We will spend billions of dollars wrecking our economy and exporting our jobs and industry to our overseas competitors and the climate and temp won’t change at all.

      So why do it, I mean even you can’t be that stupid? Perhaps you should listen to Lomborg in this interview with Jones and you might start to wake up.
      Remember this isn’t a point of view but simple kindy maths.

      http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=10793


      Report this

      00

      • #
        John Brookes

        Neville, of course Oz can’t achieve anything on its own. I think we do our part for the rest of this decade. If at that time the rest of the world hasn’t joined in, we ditch the price on carbon and focus on mitigation. Until then, we show good faith and commence action in a small way, and hope that everyone joins in.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          NMeville

          Thanks JB for conceding the bloody obvious. Now please go and look at co2 emissions per year of China, India etc and what they increase by year on year.

          Then just using kindy maths again you should understand the stupidity of Oz going it alone with a co2 tax. If you can’t understand this simple logic and reason then there is no hope for you.

          You are left with no excuse at all, but just a resort to fantasy. What is it about wasting billions $ for a zero return that always attracts fools from the left?


          Report this

          00

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            I’m not sure, NM, just what the population growth of either India or China would be but: I would be very surprised if they could not each produce additional annual population equivalent to our piddling 20,000,000.

            IF CO2 was an issue, and it’s not, then the obvious places to go looking for cuts is in those two large countries then followed by South America.


            Report this

            00

    • #
      Otter

      I’ll take that as a ‘no’ to my earlier question. Good luck in the world you want, johnny… and remember a certain episode of The Twilight Zone… ‘Obsolete.’


      Report this

      00

    • #
      KeithH

      When was the theory or hypothesis of CO2 driven AGW proven John? I must have missed it as I thought the null hypothesis of natural variability was still current. As to being committed I thought that the the Climategate 2.0 emails made it clear that members of the ‘Hockey Team’ were committed to a ‘Cause’ though it’s never quite explained just what it is.

      Could I suggest to you without any rancour at all that perhaps you might consider your children if you have any. I feel sure you and MattB do believe in the AGW theory and that those beliefs must rub off on your children. I do feel genuinely sorry that they are growing up with such a jaundiced and frightened view of their future engendered by alarmist predictions of doom and gloom from people who should know better and based mainly on flimsy politically motivated and UN/government funded pseudo-science.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Tristan

        Jo

        John said ‘Its sad reading all these comments by people totally committed to the cause of disproving AGW’. I wouldn’t assume he was referring to you.


        Report this

        00

    • #

      John,

      whatever made you think I’m trying to disprove AGW? I believed it for years, and I’ve been searching for evidence since 2007 that shows the IPCC assumptions are right… have you got some?

      Jo


      Report this

      00

      • #
        davidR

        [SNIP Rennie / rogertheloger, no more ad homs, pathetic attempts to reason. 1.2 degrees C is not 3.5C. You still need to apologize for your behaviour on the MWP thread. -- JN]


        Report this

        00

      • #
        John Brookes

        There is a lot of evidence Jo. Quite convincing really. Certainly convincing enough to do something about it.

        It is easy to find things about AGW that don’t look right, or don’t seem to make sense. But these things are nit picking.

        You could easily take a natural phenomena which is well understood, and find a few superficially compelling reasons why our understanding is flawed. Of course these “reasons” would be wrong. So it is with global warming. People have come up with so many flawed reasons why AGW is wrong that John Cook has a web site explaining why each one is wrong.

        If you are looking for evidence Jo, I suspect the only sort that you will accept will simply take time. Like me, you’ll have to wait and see how it all pans out.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          BobC

          John Brookes

          January 6, 2012 at 12:37 am · People have come up with so many flawed reasons why AGW is wrong that John Cook has a web site explaining why each one is wrong.

          Why don’t you take a look at Lubos Motl’s analysis of Cook’s arguments from the point of view of logic and science?

          It’s pretty easy to see that Cook’s site is simply propaganda — he is only right by accident, as everything there is filtered by an ideological bias.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          Tristan

          Bob’s comment is a testament to the human mind’s ability to preserve one’s identity.

          A conservative blogger becomes the ‘point of view of logic and science’.

          whereas

          A site that consists almost entirely of material sourced from peer-reviewed and extensively examined scientific literature becomes ‘propaganda’.

          I invite BobC to regurgitate Motl’s comments at Skeptical Science and observe the results. They aren’t afraid to play.


          Report this

          00

        • #

          Well, that’s it then John. I’m convinced. Why didn’t you just say that before?

          But I’m confused about “waiting for things to pan out” in the search for evidence. See I used to think CO2 had dangerous effects. Then I asked for evidence…


          Report this

          00

          • #
            John Brookes

            The main evidence, Jo, is that the world is getting warmer, and its very difficult to explain it without invoking CO2. Of course that doesn’t stop people trying. Its not warming. Cosmic rays are doing it. Its the sun (even though its not). Etc etc.

            Occam’s razor says you should go for the most obvious explanation. CO2. But feel free to continue to have others…


            Report this

            00

    • #
      davidR

      [ snip ad hom, baseless namecalling... - JN ]


      Report this

      00

  • #
    pat

    Iran has neither threatened us nor attacked us, yet we threaten them daily, year after year, tightening sanctions,etc. THE INTENDED CONSEQUENCE: so that the oil price will rise and make the CAGW scam more economically viable. nothing else makes sense.

    if we don’t wake up and stop this madness, we will most definitely pay big-time. Iran is a member of the NPT and inspectors are in Iran all the time. we don’t have to like Iran to stand up and say “enough is enough”. it’s time to curb our lust for war porn:

    ***how utterly perfect that there is an EU spokesman called “Michael Mann” commenting on the EU/US insanity over Iran & the oil price.

    5 Jan: Bloomberg: Ben Sharples and Ramsey Al-Rikabi: Oil Trades Near 8-Month High as Iran Tension Counters Europe Debt Crisis
    EU foreign ministers aim to announce harsher sanctions on Iran’s energy and banking industries at their next meeting on Jan. 30, EU spokesman ***Michael Mann*** said by telephone in Brussels yesterday. Greece lifted its objections to an embargo Jan. 3.
    Such a move would require about 600,000 barrels a day of replacement supply from Saudi Arabia, depleting the country’s spare capacity, according to Mike Wittner, Societe Generale’s head of oil market research for the Americas…
    The head of Iran’s army Ataollah Selhi on Jan. 3 warned the U.S. against sending an aircraft carrier back to the Persian Gulf after the USS John C. Stennis traveled through the Strait of Hormuz…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-04/oil-trades-near-eight-month-high-on-shrinking-crude-supplies-iran-tension.html

    have purposely not excerpted AFP’s many attempts to portray Iran as the “threatening” party in this piece:

    5 Jan: AFP: Mark Burleigh: EU, US tighten sanctions noose on Iran
    The European Union and the United States tightened the sanctions noose around Iran, with diplomats in Brussels saying a preliminary agreement had been reached on an EU embargo of Iranian oil.
    Washington hailed the agreement, saying it was “the result of lots of consultations” with its EU allies. It announced that US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was to go to China next week to discuss “coordination” over new US sanctions against Iran’s central bank…
    “I don’t think Iran is going to do anything. But… the potential impact would be so large that people have to price it in to the market,” said Jason Schenker, a US analyst with Prestige Economics.
    “The consequences of any military action in the Middle East will be enormous. A spike in crude prices will kill off any recovery in the US,” said Nick Trevethan, a senior commodities strategist at ANZ Research in Asia.
    Iran is already trying to find ways to cope with existing Western economic sanctions, and four sets of UN sanctions, that have curtailed foreign investment and already complicated payments for its oil…
    The West is attempting to deal harder blows to Iran by blocking much of its oil exports and stopping other nations dealing with Iran’s central bank, which processes most oil sales.
    Oil revenues account for 80 percent of Iran’s foreign currency earnings.
    Although Tehran has said it will have no trouble to continue selling its oil, mainly to China, India and other Asian clients, the West intends to see those sales made riskier and subject to hefty discounts…
    French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said: “It’s at this occasion (the ministers’ meeting) I hope that we can adopt this embargo on Iranian oil exports.”
    He said some EU nations buying significant amounts of Iranian oil — mainly Spain, Greece and Italy — needed to be provided with “alternative solutions”.
    “These alternative solutions exist and I think we can attain the objective by the end of January,” he said.
    US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Washington hoped the sanctions would be backed by more nations…
    “We do believe that this is consistent with tightening the noose on Iran economically,” she said. “We think that the place to get Iran’s attention is with regard to its oil sector.”
    Geithner’s trip to China was part of that US push.
    Earlier on Wednesday, China said it opposed “unilateral” sanctions against Iran, after US President Barack Obama signed into law the new measures targeting the Iran’s central bank.
    The building pressure on Tehran coincided with preparations for elections in several key countries this year, sharpening the rhetoric coming from the capitals.
    France and the United States are to have presidential polls, in April and November, respectively…
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gxWKZCy739n1WAKm2QsAER39oalA?docId=CNG.d51c8f72e4f271b23c418b2f3b7a68e4.191


    Report this

    00

    • #

      Pat. This sites view of the world may be of interest to you.

      http://pakdefenceunit.wordpress.com/


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Otter

      Iran threatens the world every day; they have their fingers in every muslim terrorist organization; they declared war on the US in 1979, thanks to peanut-brain carter helped the ayatollah and his mad mullahs get back into power.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        memoryvault

        Otter @ 20.2,

        Iran threatens the world every day; they have their fingers in every muslim terrorist organization; they declared war on the US in 1979, thanks to peanut-brain carter helped the ayatollah and his mad mullahs get back into power.

        You and I may be on the same side of the fence most of the time, but in this you need to go study a bit of history.

        In the 1950′s (from memory) in free and fair elections (monitored), the Iranian people democratically elected a democratic socialist government (fools, but THEIR choice).

        This government nationalised the oil industry, thereby removing the controlling influence of certain U.S. based oil corporations, and directing the profits instead to the benefit of the Iranian people. Much as Gadalfi did in Libya, and Saddam did in Iraq.

        In response, the U.S., through its agency the CIA fomented and financially supported terrorist dissidents in Iran. Much the same as they did in Libya, and are now doing in Syria.

        As a result, the democratically elected government of Iran was overthrown and the Shar of Iran was installed as Ruler in Iran. The Shar was supported by a secret police unit – the SLAVAK – who were trained in the USA in terror, interrogation, torture and murder.

        Feel free to google “Iran slavak atrocities” if you like. Even on this mouthpiece of American corporate interests (google) the truth is impossible to hide.

        The SLAVAK had a favourite method of instilling fear into the population at large. Anybody suspected of the slightest level of insubordination, a gang from the SLAVAK would go around to his house, drag him out into the street, and belt the living daylights out of him with lengths of steel pipe.

        They would take special care to smash his knees and his elbows, thereby turning him into a permanent cripple. From breadwinner to permanently crippled, dependent basketcase in ten minutes. This had the added advantage of instantly turning his wife and daughters into prostitutes of necessity to the “tourist” trade from Israel, which the SLAVAK also controlled.

        By 1979 there probably wasn’t a family in Iran who had not witnessed this happening, or been directly affected by it.

        Then in 1979 an interesting thing happened. There was a soccer game. The Iranians take their soccer seriously. A team lost, and a team won. As the elated or disappointed fans left the stadium, a group of them came across a gang of the SLAVAK doing their “business” on some poor, hapless soul.

        Something snapped in one of the soccer fans and he took to one of the SLAVAK. The madness spread. Inside of a week every member of the SLAVAK had been been beaten to death or had fled the country. The Shar fled to the USA.

        The Iranian people knew who had inflicted the Shar and the SLAVAK on them, so having run out of SLAVAK to vent their anger on, they captured the American Embassy.

        And now this is the really important bit. It was at this stage, and only at this stage, that the religious leaders stepped in, like any good politicians, and claimed credit for all that had gone before.

        The Yanks, being what they are, had foreseen the possibility of something like this happening, which is why the CIA had similarly financed and helped bring to power, another Dictator – Saddam in Iraq.

        So then the USA (along with the UK, France and Germany) financed, equipped and trained both Iraqis and Iranians to go out and kill each other, which they did. Two million died.

        This is not my opinion of what happened, it is the recorded history. Why is it so hard to understand why both the Iraqis and the Iranians hate us “Western outsiders”.

        You state that:

        Iran threatens the world every day;

        Could you give just one example?

        Compared to the fact that the US, the UK, and Australia, collectively are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people every day in in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Pakistan?


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Mark D.

          Do you mean SAVAK?


          Report this

          00

        • #
          Cookster

          Memoryvault, Can you link to some evidence of the ‘CIA fomenting and financially supporting terrorist dissidents in Iran’? If true and still happening in Syria it seems the US never learns which as an Australian I find extremely deflating. A person I work with of Chinese origin recently mentioned to me that China deliberately conducts a non interventionist foreign policy as it isolates the USA who historically adopts the opposite.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Hi MV

          A great outline of the unpleasant side of the US.

          I have a great admiration for a lot of what the USA does, but draw the line at its rulers, whose main aim is to make money.

          Wars give good turnover for munitions manufacturers and so are encouraged by most presidents to “help” friends and backers keep up their income.

          Wars are terrible. In Australia we are lucky to be so physically isolated from most other countries and so less liable to enter conflict.

          Although the CIA didn’t exist at the start of the Vietnam war, its’ precursor did, and it worked with Ho Chi Minh until the relationship fell apart.

          The rest is history but Russia was not innocent in this war despite obvious American stupidity in the conflict.

          The US ruling class has graduated from War to Bankesterism, as witnessed by the GFC.

          They took all our money and it is probably sitting close to New York Central Park enjoying the view.

          I despise thieves and banksters and the latest group: “Climate Change Bloodsuckers:.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          neill

          “In response, the U.S., through its agency the CIA fomented and financially supported terrorist dissidents in Iran. Much the same as they did in Libya, and are now doing in Syria.”

          MV, conflating current events in Libya and Syria related to the ‘arab spring’ with US dealings in Iran of the 50s is just ridiculous on its face.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          neill

          Any truth to the rumors it was a CIA-contracted sharpshooter took out that girl Neda on the streets of Tehran?
          Of course, it’s a foregone conclusion that Evin Prison and its myriad personal invasions are merely a product of its being a CIA ‘black’ site.


          Report this

          00

    • #
      John Brookes

      Pat, this is extremely far fetched. If there was an interruption to the supply of oil, the price increases would ensure that governments around the world would get thrown out. Idealogical the governments may be, but they are not so idealogical that they are prepared to lose elections.

      It is more likely that the US would like to invade Iran and secure its oil now, because once Iran has nuclear weapons it would no longer be possible.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        BobC

        John Brookes
        January 5, 2012 at 8:48 pm

        It is more likely that the US would like to invade Iran and secure its oil now, because once Iran has nuclear weapons it would no longer be possible.

        Like the way we “secured” Iraq’s oil, right? (Actually, China got more out of it that we did.)

        Apparently John, your beliefs are impervious to evidence — of course, this is evident from your continued support for CAGW.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Tristan

    JB, you might as well be trying to climb K2 in clogs.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    DougS

    I’ve just made a donation – feels a bit pathetic though when you look at John O’Sullivan’s commitment – a truly breathtaking level of support.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    davidR

    If you accept the opinions of this web site you should commit all your wealth to supporting this absurd defence. Michael Mann has never been shown to have committed an academically reprehensible act let alone a criminal act so please feel free to throw away your money on this assured loser. Mann has been subjected to absurd accusations over many years but he has chosen to restrain his defence to attacking a claim that is completely unsustainable.

    Give your chocolates and cigarettes to the defence fund, they won’t win but you may learn something about the value of throwing away your money on unwinnable cases

    Ball should acknowledge his error and minimise his losses not pursue his indefensible position.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Numberwang

    I’d be more optimistic if the case was not being heard in British Columbia, home to David Suzuki and Canada’s biggest resident cashed-up hippie colonies.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    klem

    This is going to be tough. BC is considered California North, Canadians call BC Lotus Land. It gets lots of influence from California and generaly tends toward climate alarmism. It is the only province in Canada with a carbon tax in place, it might be one of the few places in the world with a directly climate related carbon tax (like Oz). And yes, David Suzuki is treated like a God there, unlike the rest of Canada. I sure would like to have seen this trial almost anywhree else other than Lotus Land.

    And they can’t play hockey to save their lives.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    klem

    In all probability the parties will settle on the court house steps. About 90% of all law suits are settled before trial.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    @JBrooks… You’re made of carbon. Thanks to carbon dioxide you exist. Should you struggle against carbon? That’s nonsense.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Treeman

    John Brooks

    Your comments are mostly laughable but the bit about John OSullivan being old and hoodwinked really takes the cake. He looks a fair bit younger than you and on the face of it is possessed of a brain with far greater analytical capacity than your own. He’s anything but hoodwinked because what he writes makes a lot more sense than anything you’ve ever posted here.

    Its sad reading comments by people people like you, totally committed to the cause of AGW when many of those scientists have been proven to be corrupt and the science is further from settled as time goes by. Now an old bureaucrat like you must surely be hoodwinked to think that a legal analyst would idly promise his house. His profile suggests otherwise and his many publications suggest he and Tim Ball are on a winner. Besides that Michael Mann is copping it on other fronts as well. Mann’s credibility is at an all time low. Now who is really the annoying tool?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    here’s an informative article ——————————————————————————–

    Michael Mann vs. Tim Ball & Frontier

    http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/3931
    a bit of cut and paste

    Dr. Ball had poked fun at Dr. Mann, playing word games that suggest the computer guy should not be at Penn State, but in a similarly named state institution. Unfortunately, Mann is not easily amused, as Dr. Ball should have known from the PSU professor’s testy reaction to the “Hide the decline” animation and other spoofs that various AGW “deniers” posted online.

    Mann insisted that Dr. Ball’s little joke was libelous and took him to court. Mann’s legal principle seems to be that libel is fine only when he and Hansen practice the craft, albeit with far less good humor than others display. More importantly, Dr. Ball does not live or work in the United States.

    US libel cases are governed by the First Amendment, “public figure” rules and other safeguards that ensure open, robust debate, and make it difficult and expensive to sue people over slights, affronts, insults, disagreements and jokes.

    Canada, unfortunately, has more limited free speech protections. So Dr. Mike sued Dr. Tim in Canada, assuming victory would be rapid and sweet. Surprise! Dr. Ball decided to slug it out.

    In Canada, the principal defenses against libel claims are that the alleged defamation constitutes “fair comment” or was in fact “the truth.” Ball chose the latter defense.

    Doing so means the penalty for losing could be higher than under “fair comment” rules. But arguing that his statement was based on truth allows Dr. Ball to seek “discovery” of evidence that Dr. Mann’s actions reflect a use of public funds to alter or falsify scientific data, present highly speculative results as solid facts, or otherwise engage in something that a reasonable person would conclude constitutes dishonest activity or criminal culpability, undertaken moreover through the use of taxpayer funds.

    Proving that will not be easy, especially since Mann has steadfastly refused to provide such potential evidence to anyone, including Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. That evidence might include Climategate emails; computer codes and data used, misused or used selectively to generate global warming spikes in historical graphs; and questionable research or proposals used to secure additional government grants, misinform citizens or lawmakers, or promote costly or harmful public policies.

    The US government alone spent an estimated $79 billion on climate, renewable energy and related research between 1989 and 2009 – and many billions more since then. Obviously, there is a lot at stake for scientists, universities, government agencies and other institutions engaged in trying to demonstrate a link between human greenhouse gas emissions and climate, weather, agricultural, sea level and other “disasters.” The reputations and credibility of researchers and their institutions are likewise at stake.

    Keeping people alarmed, insisting that numerous disasters will soon result from carbon dioxide emissions and a few degrees of planetary warming – and silencing anyone who questions climate chaos claims – are essential if this money train is to be kept on the tracks.

    Dr. Mann is likely aided by Penn State lawyers, largely paid for with climate research taxpayer dollars the university wants to safeguard, by preventing criticism or scientific disclosure and transparency.

    A judge and jury will decide the Mann vs. Ball case, after carefully weighing all the evidence on whether Dr. Ball’s allegations and insinuations were factual, accurate and truthful.

    Dr. Mann’s research was conducted primarily with public money. It is being presented as valid, peer-reviewed science. It is also being used to champion and justify major policy recommendations at state, national and international levels. And those recommendations call for carbon taxes and other penalties for using hydrocarbon energy; the replacement of affordable, dependable fossil fuel energy with expensive, unreliable wind and solar facilities; a roll-back of living standards in rich developed nations; and limited or minimal energy and economic development in poor countries.

    Therefore, as I have argued previously, the public has a right to demand that Mann & Comrades show their work, not merely their answers and policy demands. Thus far, serious questions about Mann’s research remain unanswered. The public also has a right to require that Mann, Penn State & Company provide their source material, not just their results – along with anything else that may be relevant to gauging the validity, accuracy and honesty of the work and its conclusions and policy recommendations.

    We the People have a further right, duty and obligation to protect free speech, robust debate, the integrity of the scientific method, our personal freedoms, and our access to the reliable, affordable energy that makes our jobs and living standards possible. One way you can do this is by supporting The FRONTIER CENTRE and Dr. Tim Ball BY CLICKING HERE and choosing the Defense Against Michael Mann fund.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    so where did the MSM get the story from yesterday?

    6 Jan: XinhuaNet, China: EU denies agreement over ban on Iranian oil
    A spokesman of the European Union (EU) on Thursday denied reports that the EU member states have reached agreement over import ban on Iranian oil.
    “It’s not true,” Michael Mann, the spokesman of EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, told Xinhua over telephone.
    “We are still discussing potential sanctions, we are hoping to reach a decision before the next foreign affairs council at the end of the month,” he added.
    It was reported on Wednesday that European governments have agreed in principle to ban imports of Iranian crude oil to enhance pressure on the country over its nuclear program.
    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-01/06/c_122542427.htm


    Report this

    00

  • #
    gallopingcamel

    John Brookes
    January 5, 2012 at 6:19 pm
    “Its sad reading all these comments by people totally committed to the cause of disproving AGW.”

    Your host let you down gently. I will be more direct. The IPCC has sold the idea that mankind can prevent a catastrophe by reducing its emissions of CO2. This notion is absurd given that there is overwhelming scientific evidence refuting it.

    The IPCC’s Assessment Report #5 (AR5) “Zero Order Drafts” have been leaked. You can read them here: http://www.gallopingcamel.info/IPCC.htm

    Let’s just look at just one of the technical reports (WG1 chapter 5), “Paleo Climate”. To get a feel for the “Confirmation Bias” in this chapter consider the fact that Baliunas, Soon, Lindzen, Shariv, Kirky and Loehle get a total of one citation while Michael Mann gets over 100.
    http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2011/12/23/a-blaze-of-unwelcome-light/


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Bruce of Newcastle

      John’s just being his usual self…he already knows most of us already accept AGW.

      Lindzen & Choi 2011 gives 2XCO2 at 0.7 C. Other calcs are in the same ballpark including mine. That is AGW, just not of the variety that fries Earth. Though it appears sufficient to boil John’s brains.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Hi Bruce

        I’m not sure that the 2>< CO2 thing has any reasonable basis in physics.

        It is an interesting "THEORETICAL" modeling calculation and nothing else.

        There are many issues with the continual use of this term and the ongoing argument about what size it should be just hides the main problem.

        If you don't know what I'm talking about you might start with path length of re- radiated ground IR. There's something else too, but I,m not going to put it all up now.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Speaking of people putting their money where their mouth is… it looks like Peter Laux’s $10,000 global warming challenge still has not been claimed (either by agreement or court settlement) after 13 months in the public sphere.

    I’m sure our “special friends” of the warm persuasion could do with some extra cash to pay for a new air conditioner or a southerly relocation. One wonders why only two or three people in the entire world have had a go at claiming the prize, with one of them getting quite close according to Denis Rancourt, but still no empirical evidence unfortunately.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    This is very brave of John. Hope it works out for them both.

    I did a very detailed study of the relative work of Mann and Lamb during my reconstruction of CET back to 1538

    http://judithcurry.com/2011/12/01/the-long-slow-thaw/

    There are numerous graphs here that demonstrate that Lamb was much closer to reality with his early graphics than Dr Mann was. It is difficult to see that additional co2 has had any great impact on the earths temperature if one looks at the broader sweep of historical records.

    tonyb


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Heystoopidone

    “What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself.
    - Abraham Lincoln”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Snapple

    Snip Does John O’Sullivan evenXXXXXXXX? What’s the address of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX?
    Dr. Mann is #########w Tim Ball and a certain “John Doe” XXXXXXXXX. I wonder who John Doe is.
    O’Sullivan has claimed he is an attorney. O’Sullivan compared Dr. Mann to a########. Although O’Sullivan was acquitted xxofxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ————————————————————————————–
    - heavily snipped to avoid possible legal action. If you have a verified reference it is better to post a link to the reference and talk about that reference – Mod

    ——————————
    [Don't publish these ad hom allegations from an anonymous source that have no supporting material. -- Jo]


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] To reiterate previous public statements: I have called Skolnick out as a fraud and a liar but he hasn’t followed up on his threat to sue me for libel. Thus we can safely say Demelle and Littlemore’s article is mere grandstanding built on fluff to distract from the real issue at hand: Mann’s impending demise in the science trial of the century. [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] Dr Ball for my own actions in the event Mann won the case.  Respected Aussie climate commentator, Jo Nova was one of the few to commend my unparalled commitment to Ball’s cause.  Continue reading [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #