STATISTICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE: LET THE TRUTH BE KNOWN: THE GREATEST HOAX OF THE 20th AND 21rst CENTURY

Author, Chuck Frank

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back in 2009 the United Nations Climate Change Conference was held in Copenhagen, Denmark.  At that time there were 5 key leaked emails from the UEA’s Climatic Research Unit.  The Guardian and its investigative journalists published an online edition about the climate science emails stolen from the University of East Anglia, which revealed apparent attempts to cover up flawed climate data that would negate prevailing climate theory.  The incident at that time was coined Climate Gate which showed that even though certain scientists were not fully coming up with statistics that supported climate change, they would, in effect, not share any of their findings with others who had requested to see their climate research records.  What was being hidden?  Now then, this is the back story which preceded the latest event which was a court case between two prominent climatologists, Michael Mann and Dr. Tim Ball from Penn State.

The breaking news which just transpired last week follows from a legal case at the Supreme Court of British Columbia  where a defamation multi-million dollar lawsuit by Michael Mann against climate change skeptic Dr. Tim Ball didn’t’t turn out so well for Michael Mann.  Tim Ball walked away with his full legal costs being paid by Michael Mann.

“The Canadian court issued its final ruling in favor of the Dismissal motion that was filed May 2019 by Dr. Tim Ball’s libel lawyers.  Mann’s famous “hockey stick” graph, first published in 1998, was featured prominently in the U.N. IPCC 200l climate report.  The graph showed a spike in global average temperature in the 20th Century after about 500
years of stability.”

Empirical and credible scientific evidence conversely shows in a Canadian study that the “hockey stick” curve” is primarily an artifact of poor data handling, obsolete data and an incorrect calculation of principal components.  When the data was corrected it showed a warm period in the 15th Century that exceeded the warmth of the 20th Century.  And the hypothesis that a 425% increase in CO2 emissions has caused “catastrophic” Man made global warming along with climate change has now been proven to be incredibly false.


https://climatechangedispatch.com/tim-ball-defeats-michael-mann-lawsuit/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+ClimateChangeDispatch+(Climate+Change+Dispatch+Latest+NewThe Climate Change fiasco became a money train for all of those corporate, colliegent and government players who stood to benefit immensely from a concocted worldwide agenda. More on this subject can be found in the link given above in this article but also in a book titled “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science” written by the climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball.

Interrupting the Zombie-Robot Monotribe

Joseph A Olson, PE | 01 March 2012

Slayingtheskydragon.com
________________________________________________________________________________

Recently a fervent supporter of the ‘human Carbon Dioxide controls the climate hypothesis’ admitted to several potential criminal activities. Historically, human thought has been restricted to view everything as a “two sides to every story” false didactic. Often there are multiple sides to every story, but if there is money to be made by only two sides, then the full range of options is often not permitted.

A perfect example of this is the two faced, single party American political system. Locking debate into Republican-Democrat, or Conservative-Liberal leaves no room for wider alternatives, but provides the delusion of democracy, with no need of a ‘third’ party. The climate science debate is in fact a three sided debate, but with only two sides funded, you would be hard pressed to notice.

This well known, now confessed criminal Warmist supporter, obtained opposition documents that he felt would be very damaging and released them to his fellow Warmists. The greatest damage seems to be self inflicted as this advocate has been removed for board positions at the Pacific Institute, the National Center of Science Education and as Chairman of the American Geophysical Union Task Force on Scientific Ethics. Sometimes advocacy becomes uncontrollable zealotry, a frequent occurrence in the eco-movement. Dr Michael McPhaden, President of AGU has posted the societies position on this man’s behavior at their website, which reads in part:

“In doing so he compromised AGU’s credibility as a scientific society, weakened the public’s trust in scientists, and produced fresh fuel for the unproductive and seemingly endless ideological firestorm surrounding the reality of Earth’s changing climate.” Posted 27 Feb 2012

Dr McPhaden has an impressive resume in Oceanography and includes a Citation for Excellence in Refereeing. Objective refereeing should require a through examination of all of the opposing points of view. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine has an online petition with over 31, 487 scientists, including 9,029 with PhD’s that disagree with Warmist orthodoxy. To label this legitimate dissent as unproductive ideological firestorm is not the expected treatment for scientific debate.