JoNova

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


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

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



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

How many silent skeptics are there at NOAA? Dr. Rex Fleming speaks out after years of working there

Dr Rex Fleming has a PhD in Meteorology and spent years at NOAA, as he said involved with climate research from the beginning, and responsible for funding scientists who “pushed” the theory of man-made global warming. He’s written a book called The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change (2019) and has just done a podcast with James Delingpole.

When David Evans first spoke out as a skeptic we were contacted by someone inside NOAA who said there were many skeptics there, but none of them could speak. We know there are others out there, still silent.

h.t Climate Depot

NOAA Atmospheric scientist Dr. Rex Fleming


My rough notes: Dr Fleming did a PhD in uncertainty in climate and was involved in something called “The weather experiment in 1979.”. He talks about “people who fiddled with the data — ocean data, atmospheric data..”, and about how they “won’t admit they put their temperature sensors too close to cities.”

AAAS LogoJames Delingpole asks what motivates these researchers and Fleming replies along the lines of soft corruption, how people just want to keep the funds coming in. That people are just not willing to fight it. He repeats that Under Obama they would get sacked. So people don’t speak up until the retire. (@ 7 minutes)

A large part of the problem are the science organisations. Fleming talks about how there are three scientific organisations in the USA which will not allow discussion from any skeptical point of view and he points the finger at: American Meteorology Society (AMS), American Geophysical Union — AGU, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science — AAAS (which publishes “Science” supposedly one of the prestigious science journals in the world).

They will not support a “denier”, I could not get published.

Fleming talks about the missing hot spot (which I do harp on about). Obviously he also recognizes the key importance of that model failure.

I was a bit surprised he seems to think that most of the recent changes in the climate are due to the solar magnetic field changes and cosmic rays. 13 mins (Svensmark). While I think that is a real effect I just don’t see how it is the major or sole driver from the Sun. I thought he would mention the solar wind, or spectral changes, or at least leave the door open to other solar drivers. During the last magnetic field reversal on Earth there is some hint that cosmic rays increased and the world cooled, but it was only by 2 – 3 degrees. The solar effect is much more complex than just the cosmic ray theory, if it were that simple, it would be obvious in the data from the last 100 years.

Fleming talks about the history of the rise of the climate scare and how Margaret Thatcher played a role (17 mins) picked up on this theory because– she had her reasons — to work against the fossil fuel industry. (Coal miners, obviously).

Tom Nelson@tan123

Ex-NOAA bigwig Fleming: “the ‘deniers’ have so much evidence..[the warmists] bring nothing to the table of scientific proof. All they have is hearsay. All they have is media coverage. All they have is government people saying it’s true”. 37:20 https://twitter.com/JamesDelingpole/status/1155105025124945920 …

The book: The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change (2019)

Just another crackpot denier, eh?

Dr. Rex J. Fleming is a mathematician with a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Science from the U. of Michigan. He has over 50 years of experience as a scientist and manager in weather and climate research. He has published peer reviewed scientific papers from 1971 to 2018. He has represented the Unites States of America at several international science meetings, including as the Chief Delegate at the First United States Ocean Climate Delegation to the People’s Republic of China in 1982. He was awarded the Department of Commerce Gold Medal Award (1980) for outstanding achievement in directing the U.S. role in the Global Weather Experiment (FGGE). He was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences (1982) for contributions to atmospheric science. From his retired position as a consultant in the aerospace business he has used his own funds to carry out research on climate issues. He has an important paper on the chaos associated with the large scale instability of the atmosphere and a book on combining the Stochastic Dynamic Equations with the Monte Carlo approach to investigate nonlinear systems in more detail.

HONORS
The Department of Commerce Gold Medal Award (1980) for outstanding achievement in directing U.S. role in Global Weather Experiment (FGGE)
Elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences (1982) for contributions to atmospheric science
Elected as a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award (2019)

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (123 votes cast)
How many silent skeptics are there at NOAA? Dr. Rex Fleming speaks out after years of working there, 9.3 out of 10 based on 123 ratings

89 comments to How many silent skeptics are there at NOAA? Dr. Rex Fleming speaks out after years of working there

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    This appears to be the case around the world at all government funded research organsations and other science organisations. Toe the party line or be sacked.

    450

  • #
    Zane

    Too many vested interests are now on the climate gravy train. Scientists have mortgages, wives, career aspirations, bosses, and most seem to want to conform to consensus. Truth is not really a part of the mix. Go along with the lie and stay employed, or a future as an Uber driver beckons. Hmmm… tough choice.

    371

    • #
      Kratoklastes

      Scientists have mortgages, wives…

      I stopped reading there – mortgages I can believe, but wives? That’s crazy talk, man.

      Plus, climate ‘science’ is not science, any more than creation ‘science’. Science does not start with a conclusion and finagle a way to get data to support it.

      Science starts with an hypothesis, and

      In context: in good old fashioned hypothesis testing (1st year stats or Econometrics), what’s the null hypothesis? Good old H0 – is that the relevant parameter is zero… I.e., that the effect being hypothesised is not statistically significant.

      People forget that: t-tests, F-tests, Wald and so on, are not tests that accept a hypothesis. They are tests that reject the null. Tests with a different null (e.g., H0 that some vector of parameters has specific values at specific points) have statistical properties the diverge wildly from the standard null, the moment the data fails to fulfil the conditions required for whatever method is being used.

      For good old OLS – unfortunately easy to implement badly – regressor endogeneity violates the Gauss Markov conditions, and ‘alternative’ H0’s might have no asymptotic properties worth writing down. Most of the RHS variables in climate (and economic) models are not truly exogenous.

      40

  • #
    TdeF

    Good. Agree with it all. Especially Boondoggle and Gravy train. Denying man made Global Warming would have everyone in atmospheric science looking for jobs or funds for their computers and projects.

    He speaks though solely as a lifelong expert Atmospheric Scientist and about cosmic rays, earth’s magnetic field, induced low cloud cover. His specialities.
    Whatever the explanation for the patterns of warming and cooling there is no need for CO2 warming and no proof at all. He joins a long list of retired scientists who have called out this nonsense presented as settled science.

    At the same time there is this continuing presumption that the CO2 increase was a consequence of the Industrial revolution. Even the most senior scientists take this as a given and without any evidence at all. This is despite the fact that the amount of man made CO2 can be simply measured and there is very little. That should have been the end of this incredible hypothesis in 1988 before it even started.

    Even if the 50% increase in CO2 was in fact man made, most scientists then go on to conclude CO2 is irrelevant.

    My point is that most do not stop to consider they have tacitly accepted the hypothesis of man made CO2. This is the real swindle on which this whole massively expensive and destructive business relies. However each debunks it from their own field of expertise as unnecessary or simply not true.

    The only connection between increased CO2 and the industrial revolution is a suggestion of rough coincidence. Consider also that CO2 caused warming is harder to explain than that warming produces more CO2 in the air. What ties them together is that most of the world’s CO2 is dissolved under high pressure in the ocean but few upper atmospheric scientists care much about what is in the ocean. For them it’s cosmic rays and low cloud.
    For less specialized scientists is it Henry’s law which says if you heat the ocean surface, CO2 goes up. This does not explain the heating but does easily explain the higher CO2 and also explains the pause. Incidentally no one tries to explain how more CO2 heats the ocean, significant since increased CO2 is supposed to be responsible for bleaching parts of our Great Barrier Reef. Somehow.

    I would also suggest that most scientists never considered dating CO2 itself. Dating usually applies to wood and teeth and other organic matter. Anything in the biosphere carbon cycle. You can date it all. It takes some lateral thinking to consider dating CO2. That applies to methane too.

    So it’s a bit disappointing to hear such an eminent physicist ignoring this fact but otherwise he is speaking from immense senior experience. Who on earth would rather get their advice from science ignorant Al Gore?
    As for doddering septuagenarians Al Gore (71), Elizabeth Warren(70), Jeremy Corbyn(70) , Bernie Sanders(77), Nancy Pelosi(78), are comparable to Donald Trump(73). It’s interesting that no one attacks Donald Trump on his age or as a reason for him not to run for another term. In most professions they would be retired too.

    So why do politicians care about Climate Change? Because half of them are socialists and it is in their manual. These are people who work with instructions. On the left of politics, you are not allowed think for yourself. So in the Democratic candidates debate, they are only competing as to who is the most ‘Woke’ and who hates the Republicans and Donald Trump the most. It’s almost funny, except that it’s serious.

    530

    • #
      Latus_Dextro

      The trouble is that the CO2/global warming/UN climate change™ meme is, as you recurrently point out TdeF, so intellectually and scientifically bankrupt that as history has shown us several times since Marx and Engels spewed forth in 1848, the Left inevitably turn to the barrel of a gun.
      Then the litany of murder begins, if it hasn’t surreptitiously done so already, and joins its well established precedents of history, Stalin, Hitler, PolPot, Mao … and still the Chinese, the N.Koreans are hard at it … all doyens of the cursed commie /socialist Cult.
      What of now then? How long before the balloon goes up? The baby booming over indulged Left set us on this course, and the dumbed down, infantilised Gen X, Y, Z or whatever the suffixes are, glued to their braindead social media and FarceBook, Twattersphere and Instagratify suck the stuff up with what is left of their depleted, shrunken prefrontal cortices
      Because it damn well will go up unless it is met with a more than equal and opposite force.

      71

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Tip of the skeptic iceberg I would say…
    See ‘no warming’ speak ‘no warming’.

    171

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    He admits they fiddled the data. Who is getting prosecuted? US legal system is corrupt.

    170

  • #
    pat

    podcast approx 25min:

    31 Jul: Heartland: The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change (Guest: Rex Fleming)
    By H. Sterling Burnett
    AUDIO
    Former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist Rex Fleming, Ph.D. explains why carbon dioxide cannot be causing climate change, but the interaction between solar activity and cosmic rays do.
    Fossil fuels are critical to human flourishing and we must not stop using them in a misguided attempt to prevent climate change. Climate change is not caused by atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, but rather by an interaction of solar activity, and cosmic rays, neither of which we can control, but shifts in which we can and should plan for.
    https://www.heartland.org/multimedia/podcasts/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-carbon-dioxide-theory-of-climate-change-guest-rex-fleming

    130

  • #
    pat

    31 Jul: Facebook: Craig Kelly, MP
    MEN GO MAD IN HERDS, BUT REGAIN THEIR SENSES ONE AT TIME

    Former warmest and NOAA Award-Winning Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Rex Fleming is the latest regain his senses, joining many former UN IPCC and U.S. government scientists publicly dissenting on man-made climate change, with Dr. Fleming declaring that ETC
    LINKS TO CLIMATE DEPOT

    FROM 54 COMMENTS AT TIME OF POSTING:
    Louis St John: One would think the ABC would be all over this, in the interests of good journalism. – 5 REPLIES ETC
    https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=117871478407495&story_fbid=1244822852379013

    160

    • #
      Bill in Oz

      Pat, one would think that the ABC would be ‘all over”
      Ken’s posts about the failed & inaccurate BOM
      SA weather stations.
      But no that would undermine the masses faith in the BOM
      And make clear the nature of the Global warming scam.

      PS : I’ve already provided info about these faulty
      SA BOM stations
      To two local papers here in the Adelaide Hills
      So far not a tickle of interest.

      They are too busy with climate change
      Propaganda as well

      280

  • #
    pat

    the more it spreads the better:

    31 Jul: LifesiteNews: Rich and famous flock to Google Camp on ‘climate change’ using hundreds of private jets
    by Martin M. Barillas
    The controversy over global climate change within academic and media circles continues. However, retired NOAA scientist Rex Fleming Ph.D told interviewer James Delingpole in a podcast that he has joined former United Nations and U.S. government scientists who dissent from the theory of man-made climate change.
    “CO2 has no impact on climate change,” Fleming said. “Past climates have been warm and cold and warm and cold with no changes in carbon dioxide. How can that be a cause when there’s no correlation.”

    In addition, he said several American scientific organizations will not support any scientist who casts doubt on the theory of man-made climate change. He told Delingpole that he had to go to Europe (LINK CLIMATE DEPOT) to publish a peer-reviewed article on the subject…
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/rich-and-famous-flock-to-google-camp-on-climate-change-using-hundreds-of-private-jets

    140

  • #
    RoHa

    Thatcher didn’t just “pick up on” the idea, at the UN she actively peddled it to the rest of the world.

    (Later, after the damage was done, and she had no power, she changed her mind. I bet Pol Pot did, too.)

    120

    • #
      NigelW

      RoHa, you need to read what Lord Monckton has to say about that (he being Thatcher’s science advisor at the time).

      Essentially, she threw her considerable political weight behind the idea, so she could use it as a lever to break the power of the coal unions…(probably believing that the notion would die out when the true facts came out…but sadly, once the political class has a lever they can use, they’ll throw everything they can at it, to keep it working)

      220

      • #
        nightspore

        Thatcher came into the picture well after the AGW had picked up a strong head of steam. The Thatcher connection is a red herring.

        I’ve been reading a lot of the early conference proceedings and reports, that begin in earnest in 1970. Thatcher didn’t come into the picture until 1989, giving a talk at the 2nd World Climate Conference (along with other political leaders). This was 4 years after a critical conference held in Villach.

        40

        • #
          Ben Vorlich

          Margaret Thatcher became UK PM in 1979,the stand off Arthur Scargill and the NUM was 1984/5 so she was preaching AGW in the late 1970s early 1980s. By 1989 she was on the way out being ousted in 1990. She was saved by the Falklands War going from least popular PM to unassailable, when she should have resigned for incompetence for letting it happen in the first place.

          00

    • #
      Latus_Dextro

      That was her big disappointment and an enduring legacy. She really should have seen the light earlier.
      Was Margaret Thatcher the first climate sceptic?

      She found equally persuasive the views of a third prominent convert to the cause, Dr John Houghton, then head of the UK Met Office. She backed him in the setting up of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988, and promised the Met Office lavish funding for its Hadley Centre, which she opened in 1990, as a world authority on “human-induced climate change”.

      Hadley then linked up with East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) to become custodians of the most prestigious of the world’s surface temperature records (alongside another compiled by Dr Hansen). This became the central nexus of influence driving a worldwide scare over global warming; and so it remains to this day – not least thanks to the key role of Houghton (now Sir John) in shaping the first three mammoth reports which established the IPCC’s unequalled authority on the subject.

      It is not widely appreciated, however, that there was a dramatic twist to her story. In 2003, towards the end of her last book, Statecraft, in a passage headed “Hot Air and Global Warming”, she issued what amounts to an almost complete recantation of her earlier views.

      50

  • #
    Turtle

    Great podcast that.

    100

  • #
    pat

    don’t want to spoil the fun, but:

    1 Aug: ABC: Julie Bishop announced as next chancellor of Australian National University
    Ms Bishop will replace another former foreign minister, Gareth Evans, who has been chancellor of the university since 2010.
    The former federal MP for the WA seat of Curtin will commence the role in 2020…
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-01/julie-bishop-announced-as-next-chancellor-of-anu/11374212

    71

  • #

    Recent studies show that 97% of scientists know their job is toast if they go off-script on climate. (Mosomoso et al, 2019)

    350

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    I attach much importance to senior scientists who declare their stances, especially ones who are sceptical of Establishment climate change hypotheses.
    If you examine previous Government science scams like a non-event cancer epidemic from man-made chemicals in the 1980s, you will find that crossing over and declaring a stance have been markers for the end of the scare. The end, that is, apart from the overkill Acts and Regs created for the scare, but not repealed. Geoff S

    230

    • #
      el gordo

      Flu vaccines are reaching the end of the road, effort is now going into treating the inflammation.

      With climate change we need a major breakthrough, but after the JCU / Peter Ridd legal battle it won’t be coming from that direction. In the same way we shouldn’t expect a BoM audit.

      So it will have to be an inexplicable climatic shift to gain the attention of the MSM.

      160

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Geoff:
      I will always (barring Alheimer’s) remember the Safety Label on a drum of chemical which ended “KNOWN TO CAUSE CANCER IN THE STATE of CALIFORNIA”.
      It wasn’t that pleasant but I couldn’t find any evidence that it caused cancer anywhere else.

      220

      • #
        Deano

        I have a MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) for pure water. It advises that googles, gloves, face mask and overalls should be worn when handling it. Best of all, it advises that should any come in contact with bare skin, it should be immediately washed off with….wait for it…..WATER!

        180

        • #
          Annie

          You definitely need googles to protect you from H2O!

          100

        • #
          Gee aye

          share the link as I’ve seen lots of water SDS’s (not MSDS any more) and none state what you wrote. Apart from joke ones.

          Labeling is important as how else can you exclude it from being dangerous. Cleaning spills is important so people don’t slip and fall.

          If you pour boiling water on yourself, the first treatment is cold water

          41

        • #
          Graeme#4

          Dihydrogonous Monoxide is very dangerous stuff, so it should have a MSDS. Just ask the Greens.

          60

  • #
    yarpos

    I cant get to bitter about the way Scientists behave, I used to see the same thing in corporate life. People parroting and feigning ethusiasm more the latest fad mantra handed down from above as senior positions turned over and the new occupant tried to make their mark. Anything to protect salary , bonuses and to position for the next promotion or overseas posting.

    Sadly what these people are doing actually matters. Rather than just spraying a few corporate dollars about we are misallocating trillions of dollars at great opportunity cost to humanity.

    180

  • #
    Peter C

    Fleming: “the ‘deniers’ have so much evidence..[the warmists] bring nothing to the table of scientific proof. All they have is hearsay. All they have is media coverage. All they have is government people saying it’s true”.

    All they have means a lot in the court of Public Opinion, unfortunately. Especially the backing of Government and Media.

    We need a lot more Fleming’s to turn the Tide. Right now the Leaders of most of the Western World are in the Thrall of an child idiot savant, who suffers from Asperger’s, Autism and Anxiety disorders [snip]. It amounts to a Cult belief with a the child as High Priestess. The Tide is still going out as far as I can see.

    300

    • #
      Peter C

      The moderator snips my comment (for the best), then gives me a thumb! That was nice.

      30

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Peter C:

      I refer back through many scientific delusions to the Phlogiston theory of the eighteenth century.

      it claimed that metals (as elements) were pure and when they corroded it was because of the loss of phlogiston, which they had to accept as colourless and odourless. When it was pointed out that corroding metals GAINed weight, it was explained that phlogiston, besides being invisible & odourless, had NEGATIVE weight.
      Anybody who dissented was subjected to abuse; e.g. Priestly who pointed out that the gain in weight by rusting iron was the same as the weight of oxygen that could be recovered by reversing the reaction.
      It was only Lavoisier who used a closed system and proved that the wt. of oxygen absorbed equalled the wt. lost from air (as shown by the loss of volume) so phlogiston had to have no odour, no colour, negative weight AND negatve volume before belief faded away.
      Much the same applies to AGW / Climate Change / Climate Disruption etc. except it would be impossible to believe that it was odourless.

      170

    • #
      nightspore

      Now, you’ve got me worried. It simply isn’t true that there is “no evidence”. The evidence can be found in JASON reports from the 80s, from National Research Council reports in the 70s and 80s, from SCOPE reports, as well as in journal articles.

      I’m afraid it’s all a bit more complicated than many people here want to believe. It appears that too many skeptics suffer from their own forms of complacency.

      13

      • #
        nightspore

        I should have said “journal articles going back to the 50s at least”.

        02

      • #
        Doubting Rich

        Evidence of what?

        The dispute is not over whether there is some warming. It is not over whether heat-trapping gases have some role in causing this, nor even whether human activity has a role in increasing the atmospheric fraction of such gases. It is over whether man-made heat-trapping gases are causing such a high degree of warming that it is likely to be a serious hazard to the world, and in particular significantly more harmful than the steps that would reduce the release of such gases enough to prevent that hazard.

        That last is most aptly described as the CAGW hypothesis. There is no evidence whatever to support that hypothesis, and considerable evidence against it.

        40

  • #
    Phoenix44

    I’m sure most scientists in all disciplines “toe the line” – they are working on a small area of something that interests them and like most of us, just want to keep their heads down and get on with life. That allows the small number of zealots to commandeer disciplines and push their agendas – look at nutrition and the claims about fats or salt and the whole DDT nonsense.

    Even in disciplines without moral corruption, it takes decades to undo the damage done by a handful of scientists on a mission. What is inexplicable is why we, public and politicians, keep falling for it? I read a great comment on Twitter last week in a discussion about the Blank Slate claims, one everybody should understand:

    All science is provisional.

    140

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Four more years of President Trump will make the atmosphere more friendlier for bullied folk to speak up.

    Reckon President Trump will have fun reminding them of their failed 18 month prediction?

    We don’t have 12 years to save the climate. We have 14 months.

    https://thinkprogress.org/we-dont-have-12-years-to-save-the-climate-we-have-14-months-71401316dbc4/

    KAG!

    130

    • #
      Peter C

      The prediction was made a few days ago./ How did 14 months turn into 18 months?

      20

      • #
        AndyG55

        “How did 14 months turn into 18 months?”

        DESPERATION !!

        80

      • #
        PeterPetrum

        Until the next presidential election -which Trump will win. MAGA!

        90

        • #

          I prithee, Trump, prevail, or
          we are down the gurgle hole,
          circa 1984 Distopia
          for evah more, or at least
          another round of Dark Ages
          deja vu.

          60

          • #
            Latus_Dextro

            There will always be an Unter Kultur that will eventually overturn the order.
            The order always grows korrupt and stale … it is now. It loses its way to power and hedonism. Look at the jet-A crowd in Sicily. A couple of generations down the track and they’re inbred dolts increasingly reliant on the barrel, or in the case of the communist Chinese in China, the shackles of Party police, millions of CCTVs and a social credit score.
            Denying humanity liberty and prosperity, the opportunity to be and do, ALWAYS ends in tears.
            What part of that don’t the LEFTist inspired corporatist globalists get?

            Trouble is it is happening all over the World, even in Whangarei, New Zealand. First the UN “local council police” then the NZ metropolitan police.

            NZ Police Officer Threatens Whangarei Street Preacher With Arrest For Quoting Bible Verses

            Northland Police officer stops free speech and threatened street preacher with arrest, the first time he has been threatened with arrest in 19 years of preaching on the streets of New Zealand. Police clearly breached the NZ Bill of Rights 1990 s14 and s15
            “I was shocked that I didn’t have the support of the police which I have always had in 19 years of street witnessing; My message has not changed in all that time: We are all sinners, I named a few sins so people know what they are guilty of in God’s eyes and then showed them how to avoid His judgment and eternal punishment in hell. One Council security guard took offence and made false accusations to police about my preaching content. When officers arrived the one officer who stopped my free speech and threatened me with arrest if I continued, based on hearsay”. No written complaint, no evidence, just biased hearsay. I wouldn’t mind betting the security guards told the police I was making racist comments, which would be false.
            http://legislation.govt.nz/act/public

            30

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Yeah, yeah yeah. For how many years have we had only months, weeks, days or maybe centuries left to save the world? If Donald Trump; is so powerful that he can so effectively destroy civilization, then promote him to general and set him to work on all the little “big men” who trouble the world and let him save us from some real problems. But Trump ain’t that guy. AOC is a fool with a big mouth and an ignorant mind. And, well, they have been braying like jackasses for so long I wonder that anyone pays attention.

      Today things are at the point where stupid is debating with ignorant to see who is the wiser. They never notice that no matter what they decide, all they have is ignorant or stupid.

      161

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Roy:

        You are closer than me, but AOC has a mind? She should apply for a new one under warranty.

        100

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          AOC has something in there. It keeps her mouth moving so it at least mimics brain function. But I like the idea of changing her mind under warranty. Perhaps she could be given the mind of, say a 60 year old, one with some experience to back up all those words. Real experience in the world tends to increase ones capacity in the direction of wisdom. It’s no guarantee but it might offer some improvement.

          Way back when the voting age was stupidly lowered to 18 I thought it ought to have been raised to about 35 instead. Same phenomenon…you gather experience that makes you a better voter, mainly that you have by then achieved some position in life that you want to protect. It’s amazing how much better decisions I made in the voting booth after I had a family and a career going and didn’t want to lose what I had worked for.

          In AOC’s case, maybe we want to raise the minimum age for public office to 50 or 60??? Or for her, just dump her behind some rock where she can’t be seen or heard because she’s hopeless all the way around. I’ll get criticized for that but what other idea looks better? Politics is a zoo these days.

          120

          • #
            Lionell Griffith

            You insult zoos by comparing them to politics and politicians. The inhabitants of a zoo do the best they can do to survive. The inhabitants of politics are doing their best to destroy the possibility of humans being able to live.

            50

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              The questions is, are the inhabitants of politics not also doing the best they can with what they have?

              I’ll leave you to answer as you see it. But maybe the difference between the world of politics or human affairs more generally and the world at the local zoo is just a difference in degree, not a difference in kind.

              20

              • #
                Lionell Griffith

                If the politicians are doing the best they can with what they have, why do we need politicians?

                I agree that some of them (painfully few) are trying to do good but the vast majority aren’t doing good by my definition of good. Many of them are working to take more to do harm that is the absolute opposite of good. Why else would we have 22 trillion of immediate debt and over 200 trillion of unfunded liabilities. What do we have for all that debt? Not much but a pathetic bunch of parasites having huge fortunes for which they did nothing of productive value.

                50

              • #
                The Depraved and MOST Deplorable Vlad the Impaler

                “Politics is show biz for the ugly.” — – — Rush Limbaugh

                20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                If the politicians are doing the best they can with what they have, why do we need politicians?

                Instead of trying to answer that question I would be willing to do a little real world experiment and simply lock away all the politicians for, say a month and see what happens. But I fear the result would be bad.

                So far I’ll stick with my theory that they’re all doing the best they can with what they have. Some of them don’t have much, that’s all.

                21

        • #
          sophocles

          AOC’s mind will no longer be under warranty.

          It’s been exposed to Congress.

          10

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Now if Delingpole was just broadcast on all the major networks. But what a bomb this must be. Thrown into the climate change camp it must be raising some temperatures.

    200

  • #
    PeterPetrum

    I have just checked Amazon. His book “The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change“ is not available until 9 August, but it will be a “must have’ for me.

    160

  • #
    StephenP

    We have 18 months to prevent the CAGWers from ruining our economy and the planet.
    Heaven help us if Trump loses the next election.

    120

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      StephenP:

      I think we can safely leave losing the next election to the Democrats. They are doing a great job so far.

      140

  • #
    george1st:)

    The Ipcc and the Paris agreement is so obviously a complete farce .
    I cannot understand how it it has so much momentum in devastating human development .
    The simple fact of China,India and others being free to multiply while we extinct ourselves is beyond comprehension .
    A high school student (pre brainwashing) would realise how ridiculous the situation is .
    Seriously , all the climate models have failed , all the fears are exaggerated or false .
    Yet we are doomed in 10 years or is it 18 months unless the western world shuts down .
    Meanwhile China etc will expand far greater than our existence ever measured .
    How our governments can force this onto people without accountability is a shocking insight to the public’s gullibility .

    90

  • #
    pat

    heard a report on this on BBC World Sce radio. an NHK Japan reporter was asked if people in Japan are linking the recent heat to CAGW. reporter said yes, but immediately added they were talking about the urban heat island effect blah blah

    BBC reporter agreed that Japan’s cities were substantially larger than they were 100 years ago.

    31 Jul: BBC: Japan heatwave: Mascot one of 11 deaths during high temperatures
    A man dressed in a mascot costume at an amusement park is one of least 11 people who have died as a result of a heatwave sweeping Japan.
    The 28-year-old died from heatstroke on Sunday evening in Hirakata Park, Osaka, after dancing for 20 minutes while wearing a 16kg (35lb) outfit.
    In response, the park has cancelled all events using mascot costumes.

    Official figures revealed more than 5,000 people sought hospital treatment due to the heatwave in the last week.
    According to Kyodo news agency, more than 50% of those hospitalised were aged 65 and over.
    Temperatures are expected to remain higher than average for the next week…

    The part-time worker at Hirakata Park was dressed in an outfit to play the role of a fairy character who lives in the park, police were quoted by the Asahi Shimbun newspaper as saying.
    He had been rehearsing on stage with other staff members when he fell ill at around 19.30 (10:30 GMT) on 28 July. The highest temperature in Hirakata that day was 33.2C (91.76F), and by 20:00 it was 28.7C, the newspaper added.
    The worker lost consciousness and was rushed to hospital where he died…

    The highest temperatures, of around 37C, on Monday were recorded in Gifu Prefecture, central Japan, and Iwate Prefecture in the north of the country, the newspaper also reports. Some 80% of the country’s 926 temperature monitoring posts marked 30C or above, according to Japan’s meteorology agency.
    It’s not the first time Japan has been gripped by a deadly heatwave. In July last year, the country’s weather agency declared a heatwave a natural disaster after 65 people died from heat-related deaths within one week.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49173879

    worth noting, before reading, who has written the following:

    13 Jul: Japan Times: Effects will become more obvious as Japan’s climate changes
    by Rowan Hooper
    (Rowan Hooper is the News Editor of New Scientist magazine)
    Residents of Japan’s big cities, and of Tokyo in particular, are well aware of the heat-island effect — especially now with the onset of summer. The effect occurs because concrete and asphalt retain radiant energy, making the whole city a vast absorber and then emitter of convected heat, which creates powerful thermals that trigger sudden “guerrilla storms” — and renders the nights barely more agreeable than the stifling, claggy days. And if you think summers have been getting worse — you’re right.

    Figures from the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) show that annual average air temperatures nationwide rose by a rate equivalent to 1.15°C per century between 1898 and 2010. This is considerably higher than the global average temperature rise of 0.74°C over the last century (according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s “Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers”).

    Not only have temperatures been rising in Japan, but they’ve been rising faster here than they have elsewhere — with some of that difference accounted for by the heat-island effect found in cities and dense urban areas…

    I’ve just been looking at the first comprehensive report into the impacts of climate change in Japan. A few points jump out: Plants are flowering earlier each spring and, counterintuitively, insects are appearing later — perhaps because their pupal stages need a certain period of chilling in order to develop, so with winters getting warmer they take longer to develop. In addition, species’ ranges — the physical areas they inhabit — are expanding northward by between 18 km and 140 km per decade.

    That report’s lead author is Yuko Ogawa-Onishi, who works at my old research base, the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Tsukuba, Ibaraki Prefecture, and at the University of Oxford. Ogawa-Onishi, with colleague Pam Berry at Oxford, reviewed as many publications as they could about observed and projected impacts of climate change in Japan, using both local and international publications.

    By reviewing JMA weather-station data, the pair found evidence that the heat-island effect also occurs in relatively small cities. However, they point out that urban and industrial areas of Japan cover only 5 percent of the land area, while mountains, forests and agricultural regions account for more than 80 percent — so heating due to urbanization can only have a limited effect…READ ON
    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/07/13/national/science-health/effects-will-become-more-obvious-as-japans-climate-changes/#.XUIydeR7nIU

    12

  • #
    pat

    1 Aug: Daily Mail: Backlash at barefoot Prince Harry and ‘hypocrite Greenerati’: Eco-warrior elite who turned up at secret climate change Google camp in 114 private jets, helicopters and mega yachts are mocked for leaving their own carbon footprint
    •Prince Harry is understood to have given a passionate, barefoot speech at the secretive Sicily climate event
    •Buckingham Palace has today refused to say whether the Duke of Sussex travelled to Italy on a private jet
    by Tim Stickings and Dianne Apen-sadler
    A host of A-list celebrities faced an angry backlash today after they travelled to a climate change conference in Italy in a fleet of supercars, expensive yachts and more than 100 private jets.
    Guests at the secretive Google Camp were accused of hypocrisy after they gathered this week to discuss the environment while leaving a considerable carbon footprint of their own.
    Prince Harry is understood to have given a passionate barefoot speech about saving the planet, although Buckingham Palace has refused to confirm his attendance or whether he too travelled by private jet.
    ‘This is not something we are commenting on,’ a spokeswoman told MailOnline…

    BBC presenter Andrew Neil was among those to point out the irony, saying: ‘Scores of celebrities and the rich have arrived in Sicily for a Google conference. They came in 114 private jets and a flotilla of super yachts. The conference is on global warming.’…
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7309805/Backlash-barefoot-Prince-Harry-hypocrite-celebrities.html

    70

  • #
    pat

    Anthony Watts has a piece at American Thinker:

    1 Aug: American Thinker: The Reports of Iceland’s Glacial Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated
    by Anthony Watts
    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/the_reports_of_icelands_glacial_death_have_been_greatly_exaggerated.html

    40

  • #
    Don B

    Jo, what is the status of David Evans’ book?

    20

  • #
    Greg W

    Great Interview!
    Thank you James and thank you Rex.
    Keep up the fight!!!!!

    10

  • #
    Reasonable Skeptic

    This same social dynamic is what is driving the Democratic Candidates to propose such foolish policies like open borders and free medical for illegals.

    The radical voices are so dominating that they have forced the majority to remain totally silent. They do this by attacking their adversaries with moral outrage and vicious emotional attacks, thus their former allies (the silent majority) have chosen to keep quiet rather than be singled out for punishment by opposing the nonsense.

    I assume that radical jihad was born out of this same social dynamic as it fits the same pattern, though the drivers were quite different.

    Surely some sociologist has been able to study this repeating pattern because it seems so clear to me and I am just a moron with a keyboard on the internet :)

    50

  • #
    tom0mason

    The climate models are NOT run on basic physics as many cAGW advocates claim, the are run on assumptions and ‘tuned’ parameters. They are run like this for two reason —
    1. The underlying physics is unknown — hows and whys of atmospheric of water — humidity changes, clouds, precipitation, snow and ice volumes and changes — is almost a complete mystery to the modelers, as too is the physics of the driving force(s) of the ocean cycles, and the how/what/why particulates, dust, and VOC change the climate is also very uncertain.

    2. Assumptions are made based on the idea that rising atmospheric CO2 will warm the planet. This assumption has never been validated, it is not evident in the real world. Sure the planet has warmed since the end of the LIA but should we not expect that?

    These ‘climate models™’ are PURE HOKUM, they are a method by which the UN-IPCC assumption that CO2 is detrimental to life on the planet is subjected by confirmation bias, and not honest, objective and disinterested scientists working at honest science.
    Real science understand its limitations, real science knows that a theory is only as good as the observation evidence that supports it, real science recognizes it is a flawed processes and that tomorrow new discoveries can overturn what is accepted today. Real science recognizes that repeatable measurements to very high accuracy and high resolution are need for good, worthy science, and not averaged means, or approximate guesses.
    Elementary math today may conclude that 2+2=4, only to find later that the due to unknown factors, that the 4 result was only one of many number of loci around which a chaotic system cycles. And that averaging loosely coupled feedback factors in a chaotic system does not reveal any true meaning or worth.
    Our climate is a chaotic system with many loosely coupled factors buried within many feedback subsystems.

    90

    • #
      Kinky Keith

      :-)
      Show us the core mechanism for the models!
      There is only the junk you have described.
      An important, crucial point.

      KK

      70

    • #
      tom0mason

      As one of the top climate scientists in the world, Kevin Trenberth said in journal Nature (“Predictions of Climate”) about climate models in 2007:

      None of the models used by the IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice and soil moisture has no relationship to the obsered state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Nino sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus oceanic currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forest for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in serveral of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.
      ¯

      ¯
      Therefore the problem of overcoming this shortcoming, and facing up to initializing climate models means not only obtaining sufficiently reliable observations of all aspects of the climate system, but also overcoming model biases. So this is a major challenge.

      From https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAiiEExUIAAkDLD.jpg via Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. twitter feed.

      The models working method have changed little since then.

      40

    • #
      Independent_George

      If you can model climate/weather, then weather is not a chaotic system.

      20

  • #
    Stefan Russell

    I’ve no doubt Dr. Fleming is correct in saying funding has to be maintained at all costs, including scientific subterfuge and outright distortion and lying on the part of the receivers..

    What I can’t get my head around is one layer above all this disgraceful shenanigans. Why exactly are the funders pouring money into this fakery? What are their objectives?

    Since I’m guessing most of this funding comes out of taxation revenue – i.e. OUR hard-earned money – don’t we have a legal right to sue for deliberately [snip legal] misuse of the public purse.

    40

  • #
    R.B.

    Fleming talks about the missing hot spot (which I do harp on about). Obviously he also recognizes the key importance of that model failure.

    Not just it not showing up but having a less uniform effective TOA is going to mean a lower mean temperature of the TOA and the surface. It shouldn’t turn up in a warming world, according to the models.

    30

  • #
    Kinky Keith

    The stifling of free speech under the cover of science is contrary to the best intentions of our Democratic? system.

    The fact that it occurs means that there’s another level of government operating for the benefit of a special group and this must be illegal.

    KK

    60

  • #
    Joe

    The Club of Rome invented the idea of “Climate Change,” as the excuse to tax mankind. Purely invented for no other purpose. Instead of discussing that, we get lost on fake science.

    40

  • #
    Stefan Russell

    I was at a meeting of astrophysicists, all of whom had been taught the Big Bang theory as undergraduates and had been working within the theory all their working lives. The guy giving the presentation was offering a radically different proposition, one that essentially threw the Big Bang under the bus in favour of a continuous state theory with new evidencem newly developed.

    Nobody shouted him down, nobody called him a denier. Nobody implied he was a pathetic crank. After he finished, the room had a number of questions, each of which, it seemed to me, was designed to elicit understanding of some part of his talk that had confused the questioner.

    Now… can ANYONE imagine this scenario in a room full of ‘global warming climate scientists’???

    Assuming you answered ‘No’ to that question…. why is that?

    My answer is that the ‘global warming climate scientists’ are not scientists at all in terms of ‘seekers of truth’. They certainly don’t listen to anything I have to say that contradicts their precious belief system, and I’ve never once experienced a genuinely quizzical question that asks me to clarify something, instead I get pelted with insults and scorn as though I was preaching witchcraft. That’s not the science I learned at the feet of Feynman.

    91

    • #
      Howie from Indiana

      It has never been about the science. Carbon dioxide was chosen as a scapegoat. Most people don’t know
      enough about the science so they believe what they are told by the experts. The so-called experts are mostly activists who themselves know little about the science or, if they do, know that carbon dioxide is really not a problem.

      40

    • #
      Peter C

      Wow,

      According to Hoyle is back. Fred Hoyle coined the “Big Bang Theory” as a parody. Some how it stuck.

      The deficiencies of the “Big Bang Theory” have been ignored for decades. The thing I find difficult is that it violates the principles of Conservation (Energy and Mass).
      It is a Creation Theory invented by atheists. How bizarre.

      Any reference for your speaker Stefan?

      30

    • #
      sophocles

      Back in 1974 AD, all those years and years ago, there was a cooling. The Press went silly and ran articles about “Are we heading into a new Ice Age?” The CIA got involved (or so rumour has it …).

      The reason for the cooling, or its cause was: “the burning of fossil fuels.
      Yep. That’s the great thing about using fossil fuels: it creates cooling, then warming and everyone gets all excited by what is purely propaganda. Not science, not fact: propaganda.

      The meteorological upsets of the early 1970s ran the world’s larder of grain reserves almost bare. In 1974, floods in the wheatfields of Canada, spring droughts across much of northern Europe and in the Soviet grainlands, and summer drought in the US Midwest threatened the loss of more harvests.

      Nigel Calder “ The Weather Machine and the Threat of Ice.” The BBC, 1974.
      ISBN 0 563 12646 9.

      So it must be about to cool radically again. The last three or four Northern Hemisphere winters have been notable for crop losses … cold and ice persisting into planting times and arriving early to ruin and wreck harvests …

      20

  • #
    Charles shoemaker

    Simple observation shows climate change. !!!!

    11

  • #
    David Brewer

    Just as the Glossary of IPCC terms explains:

    Mainstream scientist: A scientist receiving greenhouse funding.

    Skeptic: A mainstream scientist stricken by conscience in retirement.

    60

  • #
    Stefan Russell

    >tom0mason
    August 2, 2019 at 1:51 pm · Reply
    As one of the top climate scientists in the world, Kevin Trenberth said in journal Nature (“Predictions of Climate”) about climate models in 2007:

    Please do not refer to Trenberth as ‘one of the top climate scientists in the world’. He is no such thing.

    Here’s another of his statements, picked at random.. there are hundreds like this:

    ‘Trenberth appealed to authority in order to convince readers that man-made climate change was a threat to mankind.
    “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has spoken: ‘Warming of the climate system is unequivocal’ and it is ‘very likely’ due to human activities,” Trenberth asserted.

    10

  • #