Paths To Knowledge (dot Science)

What is actually real in Objective Reality? How do you know? Now, prove it's real!

Archive for the ‘Reality Based Environmentalism’ Category

There is a 100% chance that Al Gore will get it wrong again and again and again since he intentionally exaggerates, lies and distorts the science to promote his vested business interests in Blood & Gore (GIM)

Posted by pwl on December 17, 2009

“In the United States of America, unfortunately we [alarmists] still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate [for the ends to justify the means and thus] to have an over-representation of factual presentations [aka exaggerate aka lie aka ignore counter evidence aka commit fraud] on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore in an interview.”

I wonder if there will come a time when Al Gore is so marginalized for this cult of doom views that he’s stop spouting this nonsense. Maybe criminal charges against him for yelling fire (aka global warming) in crowded movie theaters world wide would be effective.

Of course it’s obvious now that Al Gore’s business interests in Generational Investment Management aka Blood & Gore (yes his business partner’s name is David Blood, really) are what is driving Al Gore’s continual doom and gloom marketing spin trip.

Blood and Gore.

Advertisements

Posted in Belief Stricken, Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Science over Propaganada, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Video, Waste Management | Leave a Comment »

How did you get to Copenhagen? How much CO2 did you create in the process?

Posted by pwl on December 16, 2009

What annoys me beyond the pure unadulterated hypocrisy of green advocates is that they are not informed.

First off CO2 is not a pollutant, it is an essential nutrient that plants need to live!

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Damn it!, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science over Propaganada | Leave a Comment »

Blood and Gore – Maximize Green Profits at All Costs Including Goring Science Integrity and Extracting Blood and Taxes from the Developed and Developing World

Posted by pwl on December 16, 2009

Blood & Gore, not it’s not a blood and gore horror movie, it is an all too real life nightmare for the world! From the I can’t make this stuff up file, Al Gore’s business partner in his Carbon Trading and Investment company, GIM, is named “Blood” thus we end up with “Blood & Gore”, a nickname they even use!

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Damn it!, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Green Religion, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Religion, Scams, Science over Propaganada, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, Yikes! | 6 Comments »

CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY

Posted by pwl on December 15, 2009

Let’s look at some of the reasons why climate change is natural. Original bullet points are from Jim McConalogue of the European Foundation, highlighting, links and commentary below the line in each point are by pwl. I’ll be updating this page to flush out the commentary for most of the items as the days go on. Whenever possible I will quote actual scientists who have expertise on a particular point or set of points, and even better I will post a video of them discussing the issues directly. If you have any additional points, counter points, corrections, better links, or additional links you’d like to have added please make a comment.

“100 Reasons why the ‘ Copenhagen ’ Governments and other proponents of “man-made” Global Warming theory of Climate Change are completely wrong.

In compiling this assessment, I am grateful to the real hard-working academic researchers and professors; the integrity and arguments of Roger Helmer MEP; the ‘Friends of Science’ organisation for providing facts and myths on climate change; the United States organisation, ‘No Cap-and-Trade Coalition’; for the detailed research by Dr. Singer in his editing of the report, ‘Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate’, (The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change), published by The Heartland Institute in 2008 and also his report with Dr. Idso, ‘Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)’, also published by the Heartland Institute in 2009, where many of the central arguments are drawn from. Also, the work and insights by Lord Monckton of Brenchley’s report ‘Climategate: Caught Green-handed! Cold facts about the hot topic of global temperature change after the Climategate Scandal’, Science & Public Policy Institute, 2009 have been useful. I have attempted to credit all other researchers and organisations in the content of the report. Other valuable papers include Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner in Executive Intelligence Review, 22 June 2007 and John McLean’s paper ‘The IPCC can’t count its “expert scientists”: Author and reviewer numbers are wrong’ in January 2009, all of which I have used to compile my pamphlet.” – Jim McConalogue

01) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.


Evidence is information, such as facts, coupled with principles of inference (the act or process of deriving a conclusion), that make information relevant to the support or disproof of a hypothesis. Scientific evidence is evidence where the dependence of the evidence on principles of inference is not conceded, enabling others to examine the background beliefs or assumptions employed to determine if facts are relevant to the support of or falsification of a hypothesis.

“A person’s assumptions or beliefs about the relationship between alleged facts and a hypothesis will determine if that person takes the facts as evidence. … A person’s assumptions or beliefs about the relationship between alleged facts and a hypothesis will also determine how a person utilizes the facts as evidence. … In summary, beliefs or assumptions about causal relationships are utilized to determine whether facts are evidence of a hypothesis.

Background beliefs differ. As a result, where observers operate under different paradigms, rational observers may find different meaning in scientific evidence from the same event. … Note that a causal relationship between the facts and hypothesis does not exist to cause the facts to be taken as evidence[1], but rather the causal relationship is provided by the person seeking to establish facts as evidence.

Popper provides that a scientist creatively develops a theory which may be falsified by testing the theory against evidence or known facts. Popper’s theory presents an asymmetry in that evidence can prove a theory wrong, by establishing facts that are inconsistent with the theory. In contrast, evidence cannot prove a theory correct because other evidence, yet to be discovered, may exist that is inconsistent with the theory.”

Many of these 100 Reasons provide alternative interpretations of the data or counter evidence that falsify the man made global warming climate change hypothesis.

02) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

03) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

04) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

05) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

06) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

07) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

08) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

09) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” – suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming.


The belief that the ends justifies the means may be the true root of all evil.” – Troy Brumley


Al Gore, First Emperor of the Moon, Head Authority on Mann-Made Climate Change

“In the United States of America, unfortunately we [alarmists] still live in a bubble of unreality [see photo above]. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate [for the ends to justify the means and thus] to have an over-representation of factual presentations [aka exaggerate aka lie aka ignore counter evidence aka commit fraud] on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore in an interview. ”

Al Gore above the law: Al Gore Illegally Assaulting, Harassing and Detaining People With his Security Goons With Guns To Avoid Any Questions on Climategate and AGW

Al Gore proves he doesn’t know science: “The interior of the earth is extremely hot, several millions of degrees.” – Al Gore!!! If that were true Al Gore the crust of the Earth would have already melted as in the epic disaster movie 2012!

Al Gore’s Movie Fortunetelling Frauds: Fortunetellers, Soothsayers, Doomsayers, Climate Forecasters, all illegal in Maryland

Al Gore believes it’s ok to lie and exaggerate about Global Warming; plus Belief Stricken Scientists: When scientists fail to present all the known facts including the ones that contract their hypothesis they become propagandists and bad scientists.

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.


Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen 2009, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Majestic Universe, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Ficition, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Video, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | 3 Comments »

The Power of Belief and Trust and Mass Propaganda are the Greatest Challenge In Continuing the Scientific Enlightenment

Posted by pwl on December 13, 2009

“So there is no need to invoke a complicated explanation for global warming involving disputed data on sunspots, cosmic rays and clouds, as some sceptics continue to do. The answer lies not in elaborate suppositions, but in the science and the data we can trust.” – Sun sets on sceptics’ case against climate change, Steve Connor,

The question is what is the science? How do you separate the wheat from the chaff? What happens when the data can’t be trusted due to the games that the alleged scientists involved played with it?

The climate debate seems to be less and less about the science than it does to be about people’s internal mental representation of their “beliefs” about the science that they “trust”.

Christopher Monckton proves to be an amazing interviewer.

“I’m most grateful to you for having giving me so much of your time. I do beg you not to believe either me or anyone else on this but do exactly what you just said and check for yourself and when you do I think you’ll find you’re addressing a non-problem. Thank you very much.” – Christopher Monckton

Cryosphere Today, University of Illinois

In the ideals of science “belief” and “trust” have no place as anyone would be able to “replicate” the science claims of any hypothesis on their own at any time.

For some hard sciences this is possible, for example with Newton’s gravity hypothesis just about anyone can do the experiments to confirm or refute the claims. Of course to test Einstein’s claims takes a bit more work and a lot more understanding as to grasp Relativity takes deeper comprehension.

What I wonder about is how can someone grasp what is going on in the global warming climate change debates without bring trust and belief into it? Is it even possible?

Many people I talk to find it difficult to accept that the raw temperature data from the scientists that collect it could be untrustworthy due to sloppy science or due to deliberate manipulation. They think that one couldn’t get away with it. Again it comes down to trust.

What is trust?

# have confidence or faith in; “We can trust in God”; “Rely on your friends”; “bank on your good education”; “I swear by my grandmother’s recipes”
# something (as property) held by one party (the trustee) for the benefit of another (the beneficiary); “he is the beneficiary of a generous trust …
# allow without fear
# reliance: certainty based on past experience; “he wrote the paper with considerable reliance on the work of other scientists”; “he put more trust in his own two legs than in the gun”
# believe: be confident about something; “I believe that he will come back from the war”
# the trait of believing in the honesty and reliability of others; “the experience destroyed his trust and personal dignity”
# hope: expect and wish; “I trust you will behave better from now on”; “I hope she understands that she cannot expect a raise”
# a consortium of independent organizations formed to limit competition by controlling the production and distribution of a product or service; “they set up the trust in the hope of gaining a monopoly”
# entrust: confer a trust upon; “The messenger was entrusted with the general’s secret”; “I commit my soul to God”
# faith: complete confidence in a person or plan etc; “he cherished the faith of a good woman”; “the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust”
# extend credit to; “don’t trust my ex-wife; I won’t pay her debts anymore”
# confidence: a trustful relationship; “he took me into his confidence”; “he betrayed their trust”

It seems that “trust” is replete with “belief and confidence being placed in” others. Here in lies the problem with such a complex discussion about climate science. It is complex and most people tune out when the math gets mentioned. As a result of eyes glazing over they revert to the basic human feeling of trusting another, often trusting the “experts with authority”. I suspect that in the global warming climate debates most people suffer from the belief stricken false argument of appealing to authority since they can’t deal with or won’t deal with the science involved.

Part of the reason is that people often want to simplify by distilling the options down to a simple decision. They don’t want to have to evaluate the thousands of details involved as it takes a considerable amount of time to comprehend each new detail.

I started this blog after a year or so following the debate. What happened was enlightening to me that the facade of “the truth as known by the consensus popular view of science” on many topics was shattered when I asked a couple of questions. It turned out that I simply wanted to comprehend the basic science behind the claims of man made global warming climate change. As someone dedicated to life long learning and a deep interest in science, I work as a systems scientist and with complex software and hardware systems, I thought it would be good to learn the basics by asking a few questions. So I was at a science blog and posted a couple of questions about an article that I’d seen come up in a Google search. The article was from a weather man in South America commenting on Darwin’s notes during his long voyage, the comments were about the climate. The article was suggesting that the climate hasn’t really changed all that much since then. Well not knowing the “veracity” of such claims I thought I’d ask a few questions of people who seemed to be knowledgeable about science and climate science.

The response was shocking indeed. Very quickly I was vilified for asking questions that hit at the assumption of man made global warming climate change. As I pointed out that they weren’t answering the questions but were simply engaging in ad hominem personal attacks and being unscientific in doing so it escalated to the point where I wasn’t just booted off their forums but was banned and all my comments were deleted in the process. Censorship was at work, and alive and well. At some point I might post the copies of the portions of the conversations from those postings that I had the fortitude to save. In any event the specific details aren’t the main point I’m making with this story of what happened.

What occurs to me is that each person makes a mental representation, a map if you will, of what they think is objective reality. Portions of this map are highly accurate. Other portions of the map aren’t so accurate. The key thing that people forget is that “The Map Isn’t the Territory.”

Two important characteristics of maps should be noticed. A map is not the territory it represents, but, if correct, it has a similar structure to the territory, which accounts for its usefulness.” – Alfred Korzybski

This applies in science as scientists need – as a result of human biology and in particular as a result of human brain biology – to make a mental map of objective reality. By necessity this map will have its accurate portions and its inaccurate portions and parts everywhere in between. A main challenge in science, other than the complexities of technology and technical or theoretical knowledge, is ensuring that one’s map is accurate in as many places that matter and importantly in as many places as is necessary to support one’s science. The challenge rests is determining what is real in objective reality and what is just (as in only perceived to be) real in one’s map of objective reality. If it’s only real in ones map of objective reality and not actually real in objective reality then what we are dealing with is a belief and not objective reality.

In science the resolution of belief verses what is really real is supposed to be what can be proven to be real via tools such as the scientific method which uses experiment and observations to confirm or refute science claims from our maps of reality. Of course even when our maps of objective reality are confirmed to the Nth digit of precision they are still maps, although possibly highly accurate maps, and not objective reality itself.

Nature, the mother not the journal, is the final judge in all matters of science – not human judgments, not peer review consensus, not peer review refutations, not our opinions. Nature is the final judge, jury and executioner of all scientific knowledge and for what is real in objective reality. We only need adjust our maps to be as accurate as possible with Nature. This is of course harder said than done. Climate science is one such place where that is particularly difficult due to the high complexity of the many Natural Systems involved.

The deep challenge comes in when there are many differing views on what is being observed, theorized and concluded by human scientists. As humans scientists are also fallible. The scientific method and process is supposed to mitigate against this human bias towards our favorite maps of objective reality.

As the Climategate emails, documents and programs have confirmed the so called consensus and peer review process and even the very heart of the climate science itself has been deeply compromised. Humans it seems, yes even the previously trusted and venerated Climategate alleged scientists have fallen into the ancient patterns of our ancestors – belief stricken group think, thought control or thought management tactics, and politics.

One of the possible outcomes of the Climategate affair is that scientists involved in climate science might start speaking out about how their science research refutes the mainstream group think consensus views.

Any scientific hypothesis is supposed to rise or fail based upon the evidence. It’s coming on a year since I started this blog, Paths To Knowledge dot net, and I’ve yet to even begin to scratch the surface of comprehending the many thousands of issues and detailed points in climate science. No wonder the typical person gives up and takes up “trust in authorities”, as it’s a massive challenge just learning the issues let alone the much more difficult challenge in being able to evaluate these issues and make a determination that has anything to actually do with objective reality. Sure it’s easy to make choices and build up a map of the world that one thinks is reality, it’s quite another to be able to build up a map that can withstand the hard objective tests of the scientific method.

The more that I learn about the science of climate science the less and less the promoted map of man made global warming climate change makes any sense.

Some say there is a mountain of evidence. That may well be, and if so please bring it to me for I can’t see the mountain from where I currently stand.

Nature is the final judge of all science. It is not in the minds of men but in Nature where we test the mettle of any scientific claims.

In my journey to find out for myself what the actual science says and what the criticisms of that science say I’m not only learning about the climate science and other sciences but I’m learning a lot about human nature and the nature of “belief” and “trust” and “faith” and how these can be seriously dark forces when the masses of humanity take up a mental map of reality that doesn’t correspond to the objective reality of Nature itself.

One thing that constantly amazes me when talking to people about the climate is that most people cut off the discussion when it gets too detailed or when a point challenges a “belief” they have about it. For example, many people state that they north polar cap is melting and that that is serious evidence of man made global warming climate change. Ok, I say, what about the observed fact that the amount of ice on Earth is about constant with the southern hemisphere growing in ice about as much as the northern hemisphere loses ice? At this point many people loose their grasp on the conversation when they invoke appeals to authority. This is part of the challenge of science education but even deeper is the problem of how do you teach or educate people about a science that is in flux or that has so much controversy particularly when it’s denied that there is any controversy within the community of authorities on climate science?

How do people of reason comprehend the complexities of climate science let alone determine what is real and what is belief stricken dogma or bad science?

The interesting thing about belief stricken maps of objective reality is that they die with you while the objective reality of Nature keeps on going regardless of us or how we view it.

A real profound question is how are we being in the face of a global pandemic of belief stricken humans who have maps of objective reality that are so far from Nature that it has a serious impact upon society? How does one effectively communicate empowering people to actually grasp and most importantly test the notions of climate science themselves? Is it even possible? Will there always need to be trust and belief involved? How many does it take to shift the paradigm?

The climategate documents demonstrate that one or a few people dedicated to finding out the scientific truths can make a significant difference to the conversation as well as to the actual science involved. As the political shock waves of Climategate reverberate across the world and in the minds of key decision makers what are the next steps?

As I end this first year studying climate science and posting over 400 articles do I have any definitive answers on man made global warming climate science? No, what I’ve seen deeply and profoundly has shaken my own mental maps in the confidence of “science” especially that of what one reads in the popular media and online but even more so of “peer reviewed” articles. I’m much more skeptical of scientific claims in the sense that I’m continuing to ask basic questions of any science that I come across. The spirit of science is to ask questions and is to question all the basic assumptions. The spirit of science education is to allow those questions and to engage with those asking to spread scientific knowledge but also to vet the science. Anything less isn’t science but is something best left to our ancestors in the dark caves of history.

The enlightenment faces its greatest challenge, the power of belief, faith, trust and confidence to distort the best mental maps we have of objective reality into political propaganda tools.

What ever you do find out the science for yourself from a direct as possible a source. Never believe what science writers or science journalists say as their opinions are very often biased due to their own belief stricken conclusions already made. Be INDEPENDENT! Find out for yourself.

The other probably better caution is to not make a decision on man made global warming climate change unless you’ve done extensive research from direct sources and have learned the science and counter science. This point of view is based upon the reality that climate change is a very complex field of science and it’s not easily reducible to platitudes or simplistic beliefs. There are also many social and economic policies now being intertwined with the science mixing up the clarity with their political propaganda messages. Use extreme caution with anyone who says the science is settled or that consensus is science for as we know from basic science philosophy these are never the case as science is always the pursuit of the nature of objective reality.

[:)]

Posted in Charles Darwin, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Gravity, Green Religion, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Ontology of Being, Paradigm Shift, Philosophy, Politics, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown | 8 Comments »

Two Approaches to Debate and Free Public Speech: Prevent it or Seek it out and Engage

Posted by pwl on December 13, 2009

Protesters interrupting meetings blocking free speech.

Rational conversation from Christopher Monckton confronting the protesters who invaded his meeting.

Protester addressing Christopher Monckton in the convention hall, “We don’t really need to listen to your explanation or the background of what you believe because if it’s true then you should be going out and saying that and we should be seeing a scientific consensus leaning more towards what you’re believing.”

Christopher Monckton “It’s a great mistake to believe science is done by consensus, it isn’t.”

Protester: “I know it’s not”

What? You’re saying that the science should show the results by consensus but then you admit in your next statement that science isn’t done by consensus? A very confused protester.

The protesters were attempting to prevent public speech while Christopher Monckton was engaged in communicating his point of view, as the protesters advised him to do, they blocked him. Then Christopher Monckton found them and engaged them in debate however they were not receptive to hear actual facts of science as they have already made up their minds without knowing any of the science, nor being able to debate it.

Protesters: 0.

Christopher Monckton: 1.

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen 2009, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown | Leave a Comment »

Climate Change – Is CO2 the cause?

Posted by pwl on December 11, 2009

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Video | Leave a Comment »

AGW Alarmist Failing in Debate

Posted by pwl on December 11, 2009


AGW advocate journalist Nick Cohen fails miserably with his opinions on the Global Warming debate on the BBC programme ‘This Week’.

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Hard Science Required, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Video | Leave a Comment »

2nd International Climate Conference Berlin, Crimes of the Climategate Alleged Scientists

Posted by pwl on December 11, 2009

Christopher Monckton going through the list of a few of the crimes of the Climategate alleged scientists.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Video | 2 Comments »

NASA JPL Satellite Eyes On the Earth 3D – Gravity Balls and Friends

Posted by pwl on December 10, 2009

Very cool tool from visualizing data from NASA satellites in 3d in a web browser.

What I’m interested in is not just the visualization aspect but the actual data behind the visualizations since as we know from the Climategate confirmations of scientific fraud in climate science visual images can be highly misleading towards the alleged scientists point of view. Raw data please. All manipulations MUST be FULLY documented with the software source code that made the changes and detailed reasons listed for all adjustments.

If we are to raise our knowledge, skills and competence in using the scientific method to study the Earth, Moon, Sol and other relevant systems we must do some basic learning. Hard science requires making use of hard data without cheating and with showing ones data and any adjustments with justifications and open source code for auditing and proper open peer reviews!

Now let’s see what we can learn from this 3d puppy. My favorite is the GRACE Gravity satellites.

I’ve often wondered what impact the uneven gravity has on the Earth’s climate systems and if the gravity effects are taken into account in the so called climate models. As you can see from the above video the Earth isn’t even an oblate spheroid, it’s a really bumpy place when it comes to gravity. This must impact the weather and thus the climate systems as the atmosphere and water and ice move about.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adventure, Awesome, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Graphics, Gravity, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Learning about Science Organizations, Majestic Universe, Math, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Ficition, Science Missions, Science over Propaganada, SkyNet Battlefield Earth, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, WOW!!! | 4 Comments »

Strip Al Gore of his Oscar and Nobel Prize

Posted by pwl on December 9, 2009

Posted in Awesome, Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown | Leave a Comment »

The Climategate Rap: Gore vs Monckton

Posted by pwl on December 9, 2009

The creativity of videos on Climategate are amazing.

What we need is verifiable and auditable open climate science, not points of view by media manipulators.

Monckton’s criticisms are valid. Al Gore is a serious problem for the planet.

In case we forget their crimes against science and humanity:

Posted in Awesome, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Violent | 1 Comment »

Climatic Seasons Greeting, Burning Raw Data on an Open Fire, Skeptics Hounding On Your Door, Al Gore is Coming To Your Town, He’s Making A List, Whose Carbon Neutral Or Not

Posted by pwl on December 9, 2009

“It’s … a very serious breach of how true science is done. … Scientists worldwide will begin to realize how prosecuting authorities are beginning to move in on them and particularly those who have profited, or profiteered rather, by peddling false and exaggerated science whether they are scientists themselves, politicians or people in the environmental movement who have been exaggerating the supposed threat of climate change in the way that we now know that the University of East Anglia (UEA/CRU Climategate, Phil Jones, Mann, et. al.) was doing. If that is a widespread problem then the fraud authorities are also going to be moving in on the UEA and on the scientists linked with them in what looks like a small tightly controlled conspiracy to bend, falsify and exaggerate the supposed problem of climate change.” – Christopher Monckton

Christopher Monckton has been asking Al Gore to debate him, Al has been silent to these requests.

Al Gore, Monckton is coming for yeah and it won’t be to debate anymore, he’s coming for you Al with a pair of bracelets. What you gonna do when they come for you Al baby?

Christopher Monckton has suggested that anyone financially benefiting from the “global warming fraud” financially, such as Al Gore who stands to become a “first billionaire from carbon“, be gone after with “racketeering laws” in the USA and the new “fraud laws” in England. It is interesting to note that Al Gore does have a sizable stake (reportedly 16 million shares) in Camco International Limited (CAMIN.L) (London Stock Exchange), a carbon credit trading company out of England, which happens to be Monckton’s home turf.

The belief that the ends justifies the means may be the true root of all evil.” – Troy Brumley


Al Gore, First Emperor of the Moon, Head Authority on Mann-Made Climate Change

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Hard Science Required, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Scams, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Terrorfying, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

The new sport of serious alleged scientists (Jones, Mann, Santer, et. al.) is “Beating the Crap Out of Climate Scientist Pat Michaels”

Posted by pwl on December 8, 2009

I didn’t realize that this email (1255100876.txt) was just a two months ago! Wow! How brazen! Making threats with impunity, or so they thought. The paradigm has sifted for sure.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

Nature Falsifies the ManN-Made Global Warming Climate Change Hypothesis with a Decade of Climate Cooling

Posted by pwl on December 7, 2009

Wow, my brain hurts from the spectacle of insanity beyond insanity of today’s events.

Our work shows that there can be cold periods, but that does not mean the end of global warming.

Yeah, the planet is either cooling, staying the same or warming. Dah.

What amazes me is that they think they can find the causes in such a complex system and assign with any accuracy the percentage warming from each of their selected causes of warming or cooling or staying the same.

December 7th, 2009, a day that will go down in infamy! Not allowed to exhale anymore. You can inhale but no exhaling anymore. No running. No exercise. No mice that roar! Nope, can’t have CO2. Grrr… Arrrgg…

Scientific hypotheses are supposed to fall when they fail to make predictions and another hypothesis comes along that can predict better.

The AGW Hypothesis has failed to predict the cooling trend and now they are looking to explain it after their hypothesis was falsified by Mother Nature.

The Solar Weather Technique gets better results! Sometimes as accurate as 85% a year or so into the future! Now that’s impressive. What’s even more impressive is that he tracks his successes and failures to learn from them! Wait? A scientist learning from his failures? Seriously wow, epic!

As it stands the Solar Weather Technique is doing better than AGW!

Furthermore, “Bad explanations are easy to vary while good explanations are hard to vary.” – David Deutsch, a physicist at the University of Oxford.

The fact that the AGW Hypothesis Alarmist crowd keeps having varying explanations indicates that they hypothesis has once again failed as it shows little if any predictive powers beyond soothsaying with dead tree entrails!


It’s “manN made ” since Michael Mann, one of the primary Climategate alleged scientists, invented the hockey stick graph used in Al Gore’s science fiction film used to cry wolf and fire in crowded theaters everywhere. When we say he “invented” the graph that is saying he “made it up” as in faked the data with his fellow alleged climate scientists, Phil Jones, et. al.. They cooked the data books! They falsified the data which also happens to falsifies their hypothesis as well.

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Religion, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

EPA MOVES TO CUT OFF ESSENTIAL NUTRIENT FOR PLANTS and Wants You To STOP BREATHING

Posted by pwl on December 7, 2009

FACT: CO2 is an essential nutrient for plants.

FACT: When you exhale you emit CO2!

FACT: EPA MOVED Today to regulate CO2 based upon dubious scientific basis.

FACT: CO2 is LIFE FOR PLANTS.

FACT: Limiting CO2 is limiting an essential nutrient for plants!

FACT: The EPA is against plants which we need to survive!

These are cold hard facts of objective reality. The EPA is ignoring these facts of Nature and playing politics based upon false and unproven anti-CO2 science. Take them to court! Sue the EPA!

Insanity beyond insane. This says it best:

“If all this madness is too much for anyone to bear and you are wondering how did we ever get to this ridiculous point then I highly recommend this documentary, which explains the origin of idioting and how idiots have played a vital role in society for centuries. While many idiots are self taught, this documentary confirms that they have been formally teaching idiocy at the University of East Anglia since at least the 70’s (when the documentary was made).”

“Mr Phil Jones [one of the main Climategate alleged climate scientists who cooked the temperature data and graphs] is no ordinary idiot. He is a lecturer in idiocy at the University of East Anglia. After 3 years of study.. these apprentice idiots receive a diploma of idiocy, a handful of mud and a kick on the face.”

Jeremy

We need real science over the EPA political propaganda!

Since the biggest greenhouse gas in the atmosphere (>85%) is “water vapor” and “clouds” it means that the EPA is going to regulate water vapor and clouds! Insanity.

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Green Religion, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Insanity beyond Insanity, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science over Propaganada | 5 Comments »

Excellent Summary of Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen Climate Conference 2009

Posted by pwl on December 7, 2009

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen 2009, Energy, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Green Religion, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Paradigm Shift, Philosophy, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Missions, Science over Propaganada, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen 2009 Conference Begins with Fear Mongering Propaganda

Posted by pwl on December 7, 2009

George Orwell never imagined that the Mad Men of Madison Avenue would get involved in masterful media manipulation.

Don’t fall for their end of the world propaganda. Water World is a fictional film as is An Inconvenient Truth.

Nullis in verba. Take no one’s word for it.” – Motto of the Royal Society since 1660!

Ask, no demand, to be shown the evidence for AGW. Take no one’s word for Mann-Made Global Warming Climate Change! Ask for the hard factual verifiable (that’s always the part that is missing) evidence! Where is the proof? Don’t just tell us that there are mountains of evidence, that isn’t acceptable since it’s just your word for it. SHOW the evidence. Show the mountain of proof. Show the data. Show the calculations. Open the climate science to public scrutiny. Prove it don’t attempt to sell it! I need proof and evidence that the soothsayers of climatic doom are actually have a predictive science rather than just readings of dead tree entrails!

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science Attitude, Climategate, Damn it!, Double Yikes!!, Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen 2009, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Politics, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Religion, Science over Propaganada, The Sky Is Falling, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Zombie Environmentalists | Leave a Comment »

Climate Science Needs a Reset Button as The Stink of Intellectual Corruption is Overpowering

Posted by pwl on December 4, 2009

An amazing editorial by the CBC’s Rex Murphy. Stunning in it’s clarity. Absolutely stunning. Breathtaking in it’s scope. A video that everyone interested in their planet must see.

Here is the Rex Murphy transcript interspersed with memorable quotes including an expanded quote from Clive Crook.

“When Jon Stewart the bantum rooster of conventional wisdom makes jokes about it you know Climategate has reached critical mass. Said Stewart: ‘Poor Al Gore, Global Warming completely debunked via the very internet he [you] invented.‘.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Definition of Terms, Double Yikes!!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Paradigm Shift, Philosophy, Politics, Proofs Needed, Quotations, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, The End is Nigh, Video, Yikes! | 2 Comments »

Shaping the News Masterfully, Jon Stewart Frames Climategate

Posted by pwl on December 2, 2009

We have seen Noam Chomsky’s principle of “Manufacturing Consent” working with the Climategate criminals Jones, Mann, et. al.. A conspiracy of “values and beliefs”, an elitist clique that thought that they were above the rest of the people they worked for, us. Other scientists have this “academic” elitist bias or shared value, that says that you need not just the “qualifications” but the “right attitude” otherwise you’re “outside the group”. Einstein broke the mold as have McIntyre and others, Einstein was a “patent clerk” when he worked on his famous breakthroughs.

Now we see it with Jon Stewart. While making light of the Climategate in a really funny way he reveals his bias in that he “believes” in “global warming” when he says “does it [Climategate] disprove global warming, no”. Unfortunately it’s much more complex than Jon Stewart realizes and that his shared values and beliefs in “global warming” blind him from deeper inquiry. OR, as a masterful media perception shaper he’s doing his job of making people laugh with short segments and the Climategate is way too much to get into and his demographic also shares his values in “global warming”.

In any event the science will clearly demonstrate what’s going on as time unfolds and Nature does what she does.

What’s interesting in Jon Stewart’s masterful media play is really how good he is at it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Politics, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Respect Nature or Else, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Video, WOW!!! | 2 Comments »

Shaping the News? A conspiracy of Values? A conspiracy of Belief in AGW? A Google Al Gore Rythm?

Posted by pwl on December 2, 2009

Following on the Watts Up With That article on Google Trends I was curious. Naturally.

Spending a few minutes with Google Trends I typed in “Monckton” and the graph of searches goes up with time while the new reports go down with time. They, the mainstream news, seems to be avoiding Christopher Monckton like the plague.

As this Google Trend (link at bottom) shows this trend graph is troubling for a number of possible reasons.

For starters it is obvious that Christopher Monckton is having an impact through Al Gore’s Intertubes and alternative sources.

It’s also clear that Monckton is being avoided by the mainstream press, at least those that are included in the Google Trends.

Could it be the “manufacturing of consent” that Noam Chomsky talks about at length where it is “shared values and beliefs” that creates the “conspiracy” to subvert certain ideas, thoughts, and people or groups, and not an explicit phone call such as Al Gore calling up his fellow board members at Google and other friends at news companies and saying “down with Monckton” in the news?

Alas it’s not a question that is likely to be answered, although we did think that before the revelations of the Climategate emails, data and programs were released which confirmed the long suspected criminal behavior of Jones, Mann, et. al. and of the fraudulent activities of AGW promoters such as Al Gore.

I do wonder though what it will take for Christopher Monckton to breakout into the mainstream news media. Maybe his attendance at the up coming Copenhagen Climate Conference (of global domination) will enable him access to the mainstream press in ways that they can’t ignore? We’ll see. It certainly will enable one to see the “shared values” of the mainstream news media in a new light.

We have seen Noam Chomsky’s principle of “Manufacturing Consent” working with the Climategate criminals Jones, Mann, et. al.. A conspiracy of “values and beliefs”, an elitist clique that thought that they were above the rest of the people they worked for, us. Other scientists have this “academic” elitist bias or shared value, that says that you need not just the “qualifications” but the “right attitude” otherwise you’re “outside the group”. Einstein broke the mold as have McIntyre and others, Einstein was a “patent clerk” when he worked on his famous breakthroughs.

But wait there more of interest at the Google Trends.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Ignorance to Knowledge, Noam Chomsky, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scam?, Science Education, Science Smackdown | Leave a Comment »

Political Climate Chains

Posted by pwl on December 2, 2009

Caught Green Handed (pdf).

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Energy, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Film, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Politics, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown | Leave a Comment »

In Science There Are No Dumb or Bad Questions

Posted by pwl on December 2, 2009

I started Paths To Knowledge dot NET because I asked what seemed to me to be basic questions of the Man Made Global Warming Climate Change and instead of educating me with informative answers all I got was (1) to be vilified with personal attacks for asking the questions, and (2) told there was a mountain of research proving it.

Well, the first set of personal attack responses to basic questions to prove AGW showed me that the people weren’t being scientific but that they were “belief stricken” with beliefs that AGW was true and how dare anyone ask any questions that might question that belief. Sounded like they got AGW religion to me.

As for the mountain of evidence, people are still telling me there is a mountain of evidence but when I ask those that say that for that evidence they don’t have any. So if you have a mountain of evidence please point to it.

The purpose of asking questions is to find out.

The Climategate whistle blower sure pointed out some serious problems with the alleged mountain of evidence.

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Smackdown, Video, WOW!!! | Leave a Comment »

Too late for resignations in Climategate as Investigations get underway and Requests for various Criminal Charges are being Filed

Posted by pwl on December 1, 2009

Updated 20091202.

The paradigm has sifted.

Scientists who had been suppressed by the Climategate cabal (Jones, Mann, et. al. including Gore) are now beginning to speak out and make known the transgressions done to them and how their papers and work were suppressed.

Alleged scientist Phil Jones has stepped down and is being investigated.

Mann is being investigated.

It is now once again safe for scientists to express criticism of the rigid and alarmist view of mann-made global warming climate change impending doom.

Legal authorities are beginning to take notice that there might be something to this Climategate after all.

“Lord Monckton of Brenchley joins The Corbett Report once again to discuss the report that he has filed jointly with Professor Fred Singer against the scientists connected to the ongoing climategate scandal. We discuss the basis of the report, what is likely to happen from this point, a timeframe for the possible criminal investigation stemming from this report and how people can stay up to date with this issue.”

Christopher is on the war path.

“It’s also a very serious breach of how true science is done. … Scientists worldwide will begin to realize how prosecuting authorities are beginning to move in on them and particularly those who have profited, or profiteered rather, by peddling false and exaggerated science whether they are scientists themselves, politicians or people in the environmental movement who have been exaggerating the supposed threat of climate change in the way that we now know that the University of East Anglia (UEA/CRU Climategate, Phil Jones, Mann, et. al.) was doing. If that is a widespread problem then the fraud authorities are also going to be moving in on the UEA and on the scientists linked with them in what looks like a small tightly controlled conspiracy to bend, falsify and exaggerate the supposed problem of climate change.” – Christopher Monckton

Christopher Monckton has been asking Al Gore to debate him, Al has been silent to these requests.

Al Gore, Monckton is coming for yeah and it won’t be to debate anymore, he’s coming for you Al with a pair of bracelets. What you gonna do when they come for you Al baby?

Christopher Monckton has suggested that anyone financially benefiting from the “global warming fraud” financially, such as Al Gore who stands to become a “first billionaire from carbon“, be gone after with “racketeering laws” in the USA and the new “fraud laws” in England. It is interesting to note that Al Gore does have a sizable stake (reportedly 16 million shares) in Camco International Limited (CAMIN.L) (London Stock Exchange), a carbon credit trading company out of England, which happens to be Monckton’s home turf.

The belief that the ends justifies the means may be the true root of all evil.” – Troy Brumley


Al Gore, First Emperor of the Moon, Head Authority on Mann-Made Climate Change

“In the United States of America, unfortunately we [alarmists] still live in a bubble of unreality [see photo above]. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate [for the ends to justify the means and thus] to have an over-representation of factual presentations [aka exaggerate aka lie aka ignore counter evidence aka commit fraud] on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore in an interview. ”

Al Gore above the law: Al Gore Illegally Assaulting, Harassing and Detaining People With his Security Goons With Guns To Avoid Any Questions on Climategate and AGW

Al Gore proves he doesn’t know science: “The interior of the earth is extremely hot, several millions of degrees.” – Al Gore!!! If that were true Al Gore the crust of the Earth would have already melted as in the epic disaster movie 2012!

Al Gore’s Movie Fortunetelling Frauds: Fortunetellers, Soothsayers, Doomsayers, Climate Forecasters, all illegal in Maryland

Al Gore believes it’s ok to lie and exaggerate about Global Warming; plus Belief Stricken Scientists: When scientists fail to present all the known facts including the ones that contract their hypothesis they become propagandists and bad scientists.

Additional calls for Climategate Investigations

Penn State University has announced that it has begun an investigation of the work of Michael Mann, the director of its Earth System Science Center, following revelations contained in the Climategate documents that have emerged from East Anglia University in the UK. This decision follows close on the heels of a decision Saturday at East Anglia University to release climate change related data, a reversal of its previous stance. In addition, according to East Anglia’s press office, it will soon be announcing details of its own investigation.” – National Post

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Caustic Scientists, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Learning about Science Organizations, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Video | 7 Comments »

Selected Alleged Climate Data and Programs posted by Real Climate

Posted by pwl on November 30, 2009

Extracting all of one’s teeth would have been preferable than what the alleged scientists of the Climategate scandal have done dragging their feet to post the data and code for their alleged ManN Caused Global Warming Climate Change (AGW Hypothesis).

Of course one must be suspicious of the data they have posted since their proven track record of doctoring the data leads many to consider their integrity.

The Real Climate web site is RUN by the Climategate alleged scientists who are now known to have doctored the data. A full audit is required of this new posting by them.

If only they had done their scientific duty when first asked YEARS ago!

The video summarized the details of the alleged crimes of the alleged scientists of Climategate who control Real Climate dot org (Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, et. al..

The data and code page need to be taken with suspicion due to the alleged crimes which the Climategate files show. The burden of proof is now squarely upon these Climategate alleged scientists to PROVE that this data is unprocessed RAW and that it was processed the way they claim. In science the burden of proof is upon those making the claims, and that is ten times the case when those alleged scientists have been shown to be unethical (which is being generous to them).

“This page is a catalogue that will be kept up to date pointing to selected sources of code and data related to climate science.”
Alleged Climate Science Data at Real Climate

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Bad Science Attitude, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Hard Science Required, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada | Leave a Comment »

Al Gore Illegally Assaulting, Harassing and Detaining People With his Security Goons With Guns To Avoid Any Questions on Climategate and AGW

Posted by pwl on November 30, 2009

Three men assaulted by goons under orders from Al Gore.

Does Al Gore still think he has sovereign powers as an ex-president? Where does Al Gore get off illegally forcibly assaulting people who ask him questions he doesn’t like? I know of nothing in the US Constitution that would permit a private citizen to use force as was done here multiple times.

The evidence shows that Al Gore considers questions on Climategate and AGW from non-violent people to be an imminent security threat as he orders his (secret service?) security detail to forcibly remove three people who ask inconvenient questions Mr Gore doesn’t like.

“CHICAGO IL – On Tuesday, November 24th 2009, We Are Change Chicago attended a book signing with former vice president Al Gore, at the Borders Bookstore on 150 N. State Street.

First up was Saad Ali. As he approached Gore, he peacefully and respectably asked, “Sir, can you comment on the emails and documents that were hacked [ClimateGate] that reveal… that the research was a fraud and that it was all manipulated?” Gore, with an evil smirk, claimed that “he never read them.” By the look on his face and his stutter, it became quite clear that Gore was extremely uncomfortable with the question, so he quickly glared towards his security. The agents grabbed and assaulted Saad, escorting him away from Gore for merely asking a simple question. The press took notice and started filming and snapping pictures of what was going on. One of which appeared the next day in the Chicago Sun Times.”

Quotes, image and video from Al Gore Confronted On Climategate in Chicago

This of course isn’t the first time that Al Gore has used intimidation and assault to stifle free debate and free speech of his critics as these following videos testify to.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Police State Insanity, Politics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Stifling Dissent with Force, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, Video | 1 Comment »

When Soothsaying, ahem, Predicting, the Future Weather and Climate, Accuracy Matters and as such the AGW Hypothesis fails while the Solar Weather Technique succeeds!

Posted by pwl on November 29, 2009

What is the difference between a soothsayer and an accurate prediction and forecasting foretelling the future weather and climate? Methodology and accuracy of results. First let’s define the terms.

A prediction is a statement or claim that a particular event will occur in the future in more certain terms than a forecast. The etymology of the word is Latin (præ-, “before,” and dicere, “to say“). Howard H. Stevenson writes: “Prediction is at least two things: Important and hard.” Important, because we have to act, and hard because we have to realize the future we want, and what is the best way to get there.

In a scientific context, a prediction is a rigorous, (often quantitative), statement forecasting what will happen under specific conditions, typically expressed in the form If A is true, then B will also be true. The scientific method is built on testing assertions which are logical consequences of scientific theories. This is done through repeatable experiments or observational studies.

A scientific theory whose assertions are not in accordance with observations and evidence will probably be rejected. Theories that make no testable predictions remain protosciences until testable predictions become known to the community.

Additionally, if new theories generate many new predictions, they are often highly valued, for they can be quickly and easily confirmed or falsified (see predictive power). In many scientific fields, desirable theories are those which predict a large number of events from relatively few underlying principles.


A soothsayer is a person who claims to speak sooth (truth or reality, smooth (political savy, gift of the gaff, able to smoothly con), or soft (the soft sell)): specifically one who predicts the future based upon personal, political, spiritual, mental, or religious beliefs rather than scientific facts.

Making up scientific facts or playing “tricks” with them to fit your theory disqualifies one from being a scientist as one is “soothsaying” and very likely committing fraud especially when claims are made that people act upon or when money is involved.

As we are learning from Climategate, clearly the AGW alarmist crowd would rather fudge the data than let the chips fall where they may. Phil Jones, Michael Mann et. al. have a lot to learn from those who accurately predict the weather and climate!

What is their [Phil Jones Climate Research Unit’s] success rate [at predicting the climate using their hypothesis of Anthropogenic Global Warming Climate Change (AGW)]?” – Corbyn

Let’s see. Here below is their infamous hockey stick graph and as the graph below it shows the actual data their success rate is, oh dear worse than zero since they faked the data… as proven with the Climategate revelations.

Fälschung (German) – forgery, forging, faking, counterfeiting, counterfeit, phoney, phony, falsification, fake.

It seems clear that the CRU forecasts of extreme climate warming of ten years ago have been falsified (i.e. they failed) due to the FACT that the last decade has seen a decline in temperatures. When predicting weather or climate it’s not just your “hypothesis” that is important it’s the actual predictions that you make that succeed or fail to predict the future. You’ve got it wrong Phil Jones, Michael Mann et. al. as anyone can see by looking at the temperatures, and you admit it privately in the Climategate emails, have the guts to be men and publicly admit that your AGW predictions have failed!

The purple line is the rising CO2 levels and as you can see from the blue temperature graph the last decade has declined and not followed the rise in CO2. Funny that. Oh wait, that's direct evidence that the AGW hypothesis failed to predict the last decade and thus falsifies the hypothesis. Oops, darn Nature not cooperating with the hypothesis.

Well it’s the evidence shows it’s conclusive, Phil Jones, Michael Mann et. al. are soothsayers as their Hockey Stick AGW forecasts failed to predict accurately the last ten years.

It’s conclusive Piers Corbyn is on to something significant using the Solar Weather Technique to with high accuracy predict the future weather and climate. Not a soothsayer but a true scientist working his craft.

Let’s explore the Solar Weather Technique of Weather and Climate Forecasting that seems to achieve remarkable results.

“Early Weather Action (Solar Weather Technique) skill was independently verified in a peer-reviewed paper by Dr Dennis Wheeler, University of Sunderland, in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol 63 (2001) p29-34.”

A verification of UK gale forecasts by the ‘solar weather technique’: October 1995–September 1997
In recent years the ‘solar weather’ technique of weather forecasting which takes into account of the influence of the sun has received much attention. No attempt has hitherto been made to determine the success, or otherwise, of elements of these forecasts, which include solar predictors and are prepared 6–11 months in advance of the events they predict. This paper conducts an evaluation of these forecasts but confines attention to the prediction of gales. Skill levels are assessed over different seasons. The results, whilst differing greatly between the seasons, reveal a degree of success that cannot readily be accounted for by chance and suggest that this system of forecasting continues to be assessed over a longer time period to further investigate these findings.

Further detailed successful results are found on the linked page above.

[Piers] Corbyn’s predictions are based on what is called “The Solar Weather Technique.”[8] The technique “combines statistical analysis of over a century of historical weather patterns with clues derived from solar observations.”[1] He considers past weather patterns and solar observations and sun-earth magnetic connectivity. Conventional meteorology claims that such influences cause minimal impact on the Earth’s atmosphere[9].

The Solar Weather Technique explained

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, History, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Video | 2 Comments »

Growing calls for Climategate alledged scientists to resign

Posted by pwl on November 29, 2009

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

Without this one thing there would be no Global Warming at all and we’d all freeze to death!

Posted by pwl on November 28, 2009

The Sun Sol

It matters, especially in modern times, what the Sun is doing.” – Neil deGrasse Tyson

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Double Yikes!!, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Philosophy, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, Video, WOW!!! | Leave a Comment »

Human Caused Global Warming Climate Change Doomsday Called Off due to the alleged science of the Climategate alleged Scietists

Posted by pwl on November 28, 2009

The amazing CBC documentary Doomsday Called Off.

This following summary updates the above documentary with the Climategate revelations.

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Reality Based Environmentalism, Respect Nature or Else, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Terrorfying, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

Climategate has been ongoing for a very long time with Mosquitos in the Arctic telling the tale

Posted by pwl on November 28, 2009

Part Seven of this acclaimed documentary is highly relevant to the Climategate.

In this case of AGW the precautionary principle will cause more harm than good especially to people in developing countries who need the energy the most to survive.

A real application of the precautionary principle is to ensure that the claims of Human Caused Global Warming Climate Change are put through the toughest criticisms possible in science and that the conclusions are verifiable though a rigorous and OPEN process.

The full documentary:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eaten Alive, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Learning about Science Organizations, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, Video | Leave a Comment »

The Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE) Satellite Results Recently Proved That When The Earth Heats Up It Emits More Radiation Thus Falsifying the Simplistic Greenhouse Models used in AGW Hypothesis

Posted by pwl on November 27, 2009

Two streams of videos. First the series with Christopher Monckton interviewed by Michael Coren in Toronto, Canada and then the second series with Professor Lindzen. We also link to the professors new paper showing the new results on heat escaping from the Earth being ~1/6 that the IPCC guessed it was.

Here’s what you won’t hear on the CBC!

~”As the Earth warms it radiates more heat into space. Why is that important? The entire case of the AGW Alarmists is based on one false assumption that is built into all models is that as the world warms then less outgoing radiation will escape into space. That is contrary to reason and elementary physics. The computer models are told this wrong assumption. The Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE) Satellite measured that more radiation gets out into space when the Earth warms. We now know that more radiation escapes and if it escapes it’s not heating the Earth.” – Christopher Monckton (paraphrased).

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Video | 4 Comments »

Mainstream Media Ignoring Climategate?

Posted by pwl on November 27, 2009

Posted in Climate Science, Climategate, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Video | Leave a Comment »

The Ice is Melting, The Sea is Rising, Hurricanes are Blowing, and it’s all YOUR FAULT!

Posted by pwl on November 26, 2009

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Respect Nature or Else, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Splish Splash Taking a Bath, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

Ed Beg(ley)s the Question, circular reasoning, logical falisies and appeals to authority abound in the Blinded by Green Cult

Posted by pwl on November 26, 2009

Well obviously it “Beg(ley)s the Question” (sorry I couldn’t resist) about why Ed Begley hasn’t read or seen the part of Climategate that shows that the so called “peer review” was hijacked and stacked and thus can’t be trusted! Oops! Obviously Ed’s not up on the latest developments or is choosing to ignore the evidence of the Very Serious Climategate Peer Review Process Corruption that has taken place!

Begging the question (or petitio principii, “assuming the initial point”) is a logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premise. Begging the question is related to circular argument, circulus in probando (Latin for “circle in proving”) or circular reasoning but they are considered absolutely different by Aristotle.[1] The first known definition in the West is by the Greek philosopher Aristotle around 350 BC, in his book Prior Analytics, where he classified it as a material fallacy.

Worse than “Begging the Question” Begley uses the “Appeal to Authority” argument for constructing his belief based view of reality. In the video Ed Begley goes on and on literally yelling to control the interviewer with intimidation spouting “peer review” repeatedly in so many ways thus making an appeal to authorities. Unfortunately it fails for him due to the fraudulent representations of the Climategate alleged scientists. Regardless appeals to authority are not substantive in science, what is substantive in science is the cold hard verifiable evidence that either proves or refutes a hypothesis!

For intelligent people who require actual factual evidence of a claim in question the appeal to authority holds no value. What hold value to evidence based people is the actual factual verifiable and repeatable evidence! Prove your hypothesis conclusively with review by anyone with the skills to peer review it! Basing one’s important decisions on appeals to authority in science is just asking for serious trouble and invites cult style belief systems of thought. Verifiable Open Evidence is the knife that separates the facts from the fiction in science.

Argument from authority or appeal to authority is a logical fallacy, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative. The most general structure of this argument is:

Source A says that p.
Source A is authoritative.
Therefore, p is true.

This is a fallacy because the truth or falsity of the claim is not necessarily related to the personal qualities of the claimant, and because the premises can be true, and the conclusion false (an authoritative claim can turn out to be false). It is also known as argumentum ad verecundiam (Latin: argument to respect) or ipse dixit (Latin: he himself said it). [1]

The Journals must be quivering under the Climategate revelations of peer review corruption. I wonder how many will crumble as a result? Or will they get their footing back and survive? I wonder how peer review journals will adapt their policies to correct for this pernicious corruption of the scientific process?

By Ed’s reasoning, excluding everyone who is “not a degreed climate scientist” that rather puts Dr. James Hansen out of the picture, and many others, including Al Gore.” – Anthony Watts

So yes, according to Ed Begley no one without a PhD in “climate science” can be trusted. Not even Al Gore!. Not even Ed Begley himself who is giving advice! Oh wait, if Ed Begley can’t be trusted then neither can his advice about people having a climate science PhD after their name! Oh the hypocrisy abounds as does the lack of understanding of the scientific process!
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science Attitude, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Green Religion, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Ignorance to Knowledge, Live Brains!, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Religion, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Violent, WOW!!!, Yikes!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling!, Zombie Environmentalists, Zombies | 2 Comments »

Call for Resignation of Phil Jones, Michael Mann, et. al. (Gavin Schmidt, Eugene Wahl, Caspar Ammann, …) for their role in Climategate

Posted by pwl on November 24, 2009

The alleged Climategate science criminals and the alleged crimes and unethical acts they committed.

If all you do is watch this one video this is the one video to watch to get a summary of what Climategate is all about.

If you’ve not heard the shocking news, the key scientists behind the main proof for human caused global warming (AGW) have had their internal emails and computer programs exposed by a whistle-blower revealing that they cooked the books to make it seem like the planet it warming.

They faked their data and committed other crimes such as deleting data when presented with a Freedom of Information Request which is a crime in Great Brittan. They are also the key players on the UN’s IPCC. The infamous Hockey Stick Graph is Al Gore’s film has now been unequivocally proven to be not just wrong but criminally faked!

The video in the article is an excellent summary of the key players and their specific crimes identified so far.

Mann’s work doesn’t meet that definition [of science], and those who use Mann’s curve in their arguments are not making a scientific argument. One of Pournelle’s Laws states “You can prove anything if you can make up your data.” I will now add another Pournelle’s Law: “You can prove anything if you can keep your algorithms secret.”
–Jerry Pournelle, 18 February 2005
East Anglia Emails, 1109021312.txt

“It’s getting pretty clear what happened. These academics, who were influential in framing the UN climate report on which most of the political decisions on what to do about man-made global warming depend, became alarmed when the data over the past few years didn’t support the predictions of their models. At this point they had a choice: to accept the new data and see what that did to the theory, or simply to cover it up because they were convinced the basic theory was correct and the issue was too important to allow the theory to come under serious doubt.” – Jerry Pournell, 24 November 2009

Guess what they chose? Did they choose honoring the scientific method and follow the data where it lead? NOPE! They actually choose the Dark Side of the Forcings and the results are now revealed to all to see. As a direct result they choose to not be scientists anymore as the evidence illuminates so clearly. They choose to be political activists with a cause ignoring the actual data rather than scientists respecting the actual data. They choose alarmism rather than to properly consider the facts as they are.

“It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker [editor note: an alleged hacker although it could may well have been an internal whistle-blower with integrity and a conscience to clear – pwl] from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging (1). I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.

Yes, the messages were obtained illegally [editor note: that has yet to be determined in a court of law -pwl]. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released (2,3), and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request (4).

Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics (5,6), or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (7). I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.” – George Monbiot, Humann Caused Global Warming Alarmist Science Writer and Activist, published in the Guardian, 23rd November 2009

Unfortunately I concur with Jerry Pournelle’s assessment and with the above portion of George Monboit’s comments. This is a very sad episode in the annals of science.

UPDATE 20091128: Now even members of the IPCC itself are calling to BAN these alleged Climategate science criminals from the IPCC! WOW!

Why I think that Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process.
Eduardo Zorita, November 2009

Short answer: because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.

A longer answer: My voice is not very important. I belong to the climate-research infantry, publishing a few papers per year, reviewing a few manuscript per year and participating in a few research projects. I do not form part of important committees, nor I pursue a public awareness of my activities. My very minor task in the public arena was to participate as a contributing author in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC.

By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication. [Editor’s Note: Fear of reprisals from the Climategate criminals voiced in public! A paradigm shift has occurred!] My area of research happens to be the climate of the past millennia, where I think I am appreciated by other climate-research ‘soldiers’. And it happens that some of my mail exchange with Keith Briffa and Timothy Osborn can be found in the CRU-files made public recently on the internet.

I may confirm what has been written in other places: research in some areas of climate science has been and is full of machination, conspiracies, and collusion, as any reader can interpret from the CRU-files.The scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas.

I am also aware that in this thick atmosphere -and I am not speaking of greenhouse gases now- editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations,even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed. In this atmosphere, Ph D students are often tempted to tweak their data so as to fit the ‘politically correct picture’. Some, or many issues, about climate change are still not well known. Policy makers should be aware of the attempts to hide these uncertainties under a unified picture. I had the ‘pleasure’ to experience all this in my area of research.

… I feel myself entitled to read how some researchers tried to influence reviewers to scupper the publication of our work on the ‘hockey stick graph’ or to read how some IPCC authors tried to exclude this work from the IPCC Report on very dubious reasons. … They are an account of many dull daily activities of typical climatologists, together with a realistic account of very troubling professional behavior.

How long will it be before the resignations begin?

Phil Jones and Micheal E. Mann indite themselves in these emails. Here is one egregious sample. See the references below for the raw email files and read them for yourself.

“From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann
Subject: IPCC & FOI:04:11 2008
Date: Thu May 29 11
Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise.
He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
Cheers
Phil

1212073451.txt

“AR4” referrers to the fourth UN IPCC Climate Assessment Report.

“According to Hazel Moffatt, a partner in the litigation and regulatory department at the law firm DLA Piper in London, deleting emails subject to a FOI request is a criminal offense in the United Kingdom, punishable with a fine. “It’s quite naughty to do that,” said Ms. Moffatt.” – As Serious As Crime.

The Climate Research Unit released a couple of press releases here and here to cover their asses in the Pernicious Climategate Scandal that is rocking their tidy deceptive world. Nice try but you fail. The very serious allegations against your group are shocking and invalidate and bring into disrepute all of your works and all works based upon your works.

As a result of the Climategate allegations in the CRU Files FOI 2009 Philip D. Jones, Michael E. Mann, et. al. (Gavin Schmidt, Keith Briffa, Eugene Wahl, Caspar Ammann, Stephen H Schneider, Myles Allen, Peter Stott, Benjamin Santer, Tom Wigley, Thomas R Karl, James Hansen, Michael Oppenheimer, Eystein Jansen, Tim Osborn, …) how about your resignation today
(1) for Scientific Fraud, and
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Total Control Over Our Lives, Watching the Watchers | Leave a Comment »

Mannian Global Warming Climate Scientists Exposed as Scientific Fraud Artists? | Climategate

Posted by pwl on November 22, 2009

Homerian Wisdom tells the tale of the shifting perception.

That’s a subtle way of putting it Homer. The inside tip of course are the Climate Research Unit (CRU)’s released emails. They were either released by (1) a hacker, (2) incompetence leaving the internally collected Freedom of Information (FOI) Requested information on a public server, or (3) a whistler blower intentionally leaving it on a public server.

Of course Al’s still at his game setting up his corporate pieces to position himself so that he can make billions in various ventures such as Carbon Credit Trading and other investments opened due to his propaganda now shown to have been based upon falsified and “mannipulated” techniques.

The entire basis for Al Gore’s claims using the infamous hockey stick graph has suspected of being based upon fraudulent science for some time. NOW there is evidence to back up these suspicions. As close to a smoking gun as you can get!

This is not a smoking gun, this is a mushroom cloud.” – Climatologist Patrick J. Michaels on the CRU Files.

To quote the immortal word of Homer Simpson, “Doh!”.

This is a potentially a very serious issue should these charges be proven. Should criminal charges be laid against Dr. Mann and members his close inbred network of 40 or more climate scientists who very possibly manipulated the data to achieve political and career ends and in the process distorted science with fraudulent activities? Certainly it’s unethical science that has been conducted. Time will tell who goes to jail or has their career in science ended for their role in doing the alleged fraudulent climate science of Dr. Mann and his cohorts.

“This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.

Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics’ research was unwelcome: We “will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday.”
Wall Street Journal

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science Attitude, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, WOW!!! | 3 Comments »

“The interior of the earth is extremely hot, several millions of degrees.” – Al Gore!!!

Posted by pwl on November 16, 2009

2012 SPOILER ALERT for the movie 2012!!!!

The interior of the earth is extremely hot, several millions of degrees.” – Al Gore!!! on The Tonight Show, 12th November 2009!

After all these years claiming to know the facts Al Gore get’s it SO EMBARRASSINGLY WRONG! This “mistake” of Gore’s is likely the result of Al Gore’s stated strategic tactic to exaggerate the facts regardless of how much he distorts them! The amazing thing is that he gets away with it even when it’s pointed out that he is blatantly exaggerating beyond any reasonable scale and thus lying.

“In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore in an interview.

This is mind blowing ignorance on the part of Al Gore. … Watching Gore make a complete scientific idiot of himself on national TV: priceless.” – Anthony Watts

Al Gore proves that he can’t be trusted on Scientific Information! We knew that but now it’s abundantly clear, he can’t even get the facts straight!

“There is no way to measure the temperature at the Earth’s core directly. We know from mines and drill holes that, near the surface of the Earth, the temperature increases by about 1 degree Fahrenheit for every 60 feet in depth. If this temperature increase continued to the center of the Earth, the Earth’s core would be 100,000 degrees Celsius!

But nobody believes the Earth is that hot [except evidently Al Gore]; the temperature increase must slow down with depth and the core is probably about 3000 to 5000 degrees Celsius.

This estimate of the temperature is derived from theoretical modeling and laboratory experiments. This work is very difficult (and speculative) since nobody can reproduce in a laboratory the high temperatures and pressures that exist in the core. Also it is not known exactly what the core is made of.”
Ask A Scientist

Either Al Gore is a priceless idiot or he’s warning us about 2012!!!! This is what would happen if the Earth’s Core was “several million degrees! Get to your airplanes fast folks!”

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Energy, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, TerrorForming Earth, The End is Nigh, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 3 Comments »

When scientists fail to present all the known facts including the ones that contradict their hypothesis they become propagandists and bad scientists

Posted by pwl on November 8, 2009

The belief that the ends justifies the means may be the true root of all evil. – Troy Brumley

A prime example of how science is distorted by – likely well meaning – scientists or science educators. Deliberately or not this video is a masterful piece of propaganda pretending to be science. Credits are due to Greg Craven, the master propagandist who appears in the video.

Greg Craven: falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus?
Greg Craven: false in one thing, false in everything?

Neither risk presented in the video is acceptable because they are a false choice and Greg Craven knows it [or he should know it as a science teacher]! His logic is flawed since he presents a “binary choice” and that is his mistake, black and white thinking. His second mistake is presenting a false dilemma when he knows the facts much better [or should know them better as a science teacher]! There are so many other choices one can choose that it’s not funny. It’s typical of many people trained in the sciences and technology, as well as the general public, to think in black and white binary terms. The universe is fuzzy people. It’s about time we realized that.

The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix “di” in “dilemma” means “two”. When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses.

False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice (“If you are not with us, you are against us.”) But the fallacy can arise simply by accidental omission—possibly through a form of wishful thinking or ignorance—rather than by deliberate deception (“I thought we were friends, but all my friends were at my apartment last night and you weren’t there.”)

When two alternatives are presented, they are often, though not always, two extreme points on some spectrum of possibilities. This can lend credence to the larger argument by giving the impression that the options are mutually exclusive, even though they need not be. Furthermore, the options are typically presented as being collectively exhaustive, in which case the fallacy can be overcome, or at least weakened, by considering other possibilities, or perhaps by considering a whole spectrum of possibilities, as in fuzzy logic.

Furthermore the dark vision of doom and gloom presented by the human caused global warming alarmists is exaggerated! Even Al Gore admits that he exaggerates – lies outright – just to get people to act! It’s clear that the alarmist views are not on the same footing as a rational scientific view that can be audited and examined fully in the public eyes.

Al Gore admits that he deliberately lies to and scares people for political gain on the topic of human caused global warming climate change. His lying is so blatant that he arrogantly brags about it! Wow, mastery of propaganda is certainly a strong suit for Al Gore.

“In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore in an interview.

Steven Schneider [now deceased], [was] an alleged climate scientist who also advocates [advocated] lying to people and scaring them with outright lies for political gain. Wow what a one man propaganda machine.

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.” – Steven Schneider, National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), (Quoted in Discover, pp. 45–48, Oct. 1989; for the original, together with Schneider’s commentary on it misrepresentation see also American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996.

Schneider has been publicly criticized by fellow atmospheric scientist, Craig Bohren, for his history of self-promotion using contradictory climate scares:

“…some of the prominent global warmers of today were global coolers of not so long ago. In particular, Steven Schneider, now at Stanford, previously at NCAR, about 30 years ago was sounding the alarm about an imminent ice age. The culprit then was particles belched into the atmosphere by human activities. No matter how the climate changes he can correctly say that he predicted it. No one in the atmospheric science community has been more successful at getting publicity. NCAR used to send my department clippings from newspaper and magazine articles in which NCAR researchers were named. We’d get thick wads of clippings, almost all of which were devoted to Schneider. Perhaps global warming is bad for the rest of us, but for Schneider and others [such as Al Gore] it has been a godsend.

More scare mongers with a deliberate lying bent where the end justifies the means, scientists, politicians and eco-warriors alike admitting they are willing to lie through their teeth to get the job done even if it’s global warming is false! Wow.

“What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
— Timothy Wirth, former U.S. Senator (D-Colorado)

Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are.” (Petr Chylek, Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, commenting on reports that Greenland’s glaciers are melting. Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001)

We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing”
(Tim Wirth 1990, former US Senator) as quoted in NCPA Brief 213; September 6, 1996

A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect
(Richard Benedict, US Conservation Foundation)

We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age, where we might live like Indians in our valley, with our localism, our appropriate technology, our gardens, our homemade religion — guilt-free at last!
— Stewart Brand (writing in the Whole Earth Catalogue)

Taking action can cause much worse problems for humans by rushing and taking the wrong actions. It’s very possible that the huge economic upheaval that is being caused by the rush to judgment by the alarmists will actually cause more harm than any real amount of actual warming.

Will Greg Craven, the guy in the video, take personal responsibility for all those that die in the economic turmoil of the implementation of useless “carbon solutions” for his role in presenting false dilemmas? Will he be responsible for those that die as the planet it terrorformed by his advocacy? I doubt it.

Besides the facts now show that the last ten years have been getting colder. Cold is the new warming. What? Yup. It’s getting colder which means the planet is warming. Weird, but that is what the alarmists claim.

Having an accurate assessment of the risks is crucial for any decision making process. This guy presents the situation in binary thinking and aims you towards his forgone conclusion revealing his bias. More propaganda based upon false reasoning steps and a very crude method of risk management. Since we already know that the alarmists claims are false (even they admit it) this guy is presenting a false choice on the alarmist side of the ledger.

Overall Greg Craven fails as a scientist to present the full set of known facts but passes as an effective and craven propagandist. As such Greg Craven gets a failing grade.

One Richard Feynman has this to say about falsification and full disclosure and it should be a lesson to Greg Craven and the others quoted above as Greg and the others are being schooled by Feynman indeed:

“But this long history of learning how not to fool ourselves–of having utter scientific integrity–is, I’m sorry to say, something that we haven’t specifically included in any particular course that I know of. We just hope you’ve caught on by osmosis.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself–and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that.

I would like to add something that’s not essential to the science, but something I kind of believe, which is that you should not fool the layman when you’re talking as a scientist. I am not trying to tell you what to do about cheating on your wife, or fooling your girlfriend, or something like that, when you’re not trying to be a scientist, but just trying to be an ordinary human being. We’ll leave those problems up to you and your rabbi. I’m talking about a specific, extra type of integrity that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how you are maybe wrong, that you ought to have when acting as a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.

For example, I was a little surprised when I was talking to a friend who was going to go on the radio. He does work on cosmology and astronomy, and he wondered how he would explain what the applications of this work were. “Well,” I said, “there aren’t any.” He said, “Yes, but then we won’t get support for more research of this kind.” I think that’s kind of dishonest. If you’re representing yourself as a scientist, then you should explain to the layman what you’re doing–and if they don’t want to support you under those circumstances, then that’s their decision.

One example of the principle is this: If you’ve made up your mind to test a theory, or you want to explain some idea, you should always decide to publish it whichever way it comes out. If we only publish results of a certain kind, we can make the argument look good. We must publish both kinds of results.

I say that’s also important in giving certain types of government advice. Supposing a senator asked you for advice about whether drilling a hole should be done in his state; and you decide it would be better in some other state. If you don’t publish such a result, it seems to me you’re not giving scientific advice. You’re being used. If your answer happens to come out in the direction the government or the politicians like, they can use it as an argument in their favor; if it comes out the other way, they don’t publish it at all. That’s not giving scientific advice.

But not paying attention to experiments like that is a characteristic of cargo cult science.

And now you find a man saying that it is an irrelevant demand to expect a repeatable experiment. This is science?

So I have just one wish for you–the good luck to be somewhere where you are free to maintain the kind of integrity I have described, and where you do not feel forced by a need to maintain your position in the organization, or financial support, or so on, to lose your integrity. May you have that freedom. ” – Richard Feynman, Cargo Cult Science, A Lesson From Richard Feynman For Scientists of Today to Learn

Sounds like Greg Craven needs to go back to grade ten science class and relearn the basics as long as his science teacher is someone like Richard Feynman and very unlike Greg Craven.


 

A detailed analysis of Greg Craven’s video “How the World Ends” (which have the same false dilemma argument) is illuminating of Greg Craven’s craven attitude towards factual science presentations.

Now a more rational video presentation on climate science.

What is Normal Climate?

 


 

All we can do is adapt, it is the sun that does it, not man.


Article updated 20101230.

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Video | 2 Comments »

Climate is a mathematical abstraction, Weather is what is real and happening now and now and now, now being the only time that exists in reality

Posted by pwl on November 7, 2009

Now is the only moment of time that actually exists in reality. The past is but a memory. The future an illusion. Tomorrow never comes for when it does it is today and there is always another tomorrow. Now is the Time! This moment, now! Now. Now. Now. The Time is Now and never any other!

That time is NOW! Save us from Mann Caused Global Warming Climate Change Alarmists and their Soothsaying Hysteria! Save US NOW and bring Justice to Science so that Science can Prevail over Soothsaying Alarmist Propaganda!

So it’s fine for the endangered human caused global warming climate change alarmists to yell “look it’s Ida, extreme weather” caused by human caused global warming climate change yet when it’s pointed out that October 2009 is the 3rd coldest in 115 years on record it’s just weather and not climate? Double standards on the “it’s weather no it’s climate vs. it’s climate no it’s just weather”?

Climate extremes cause weather extremes! Is that a fair statement? Or is it that weather extremes cause climate extremes?

Climate is weather averaged over decade long times scales… extreme climate depends on your time window and your statistical prowess poker face.

Climate is weather. Without weather there would be no climate. Two sides of the same coin flipping about with randomness generated internally within the system. (See Wolfram’s A New Kind of Science, chapter 2 for how this newly discovered form of randomness operates for even very simple systems to show highly complex and extremely unpredictable behaviors).

Climate is weather. Extremes in weather are just the planet going about it’s business. As such extremes in weather mathematically show up in the decade long time scales to varying amounts.

How do we really know where each change in climate really comes from? Assigning this fraction of a degree to that cause and that fraction of a degree to this other cause ad infinitum makes no sense as that isn’t how Nature plans it out not that Nature plans it out.

Now it seems that it’s a heat budget thing with heat into a system (the planet) and heat out (of the planet) by various means. We have various forms of light and electromagnetic radiation touching and being absorbed by the planet with some reflecting off or changing and reflecting off. We have movement of the planet in it’s ever changing always unique orbit of Sol, not to mention other gravitational influences such as the moon and even other planetary bodies. We have cosmic rays and other high energy particle streams impacting the planet or going right on through. Cosmic rays from near and distant stars as we orbit the galaxy so close. We have chemical reactions and volcanoes and oceans mixing and moving and we have the hot and molten inner layers plus the rotating core providing our magnetic fields fluctuating always churning and interacting. Not to mention the bizarre lumpy gravity fields that distort the seemingly squashed spheroid of the planet into what can best be described as a total gravity mess beaten up all bent out of it’s idealized shape we can see from space. We’ve got so many processes and forces at work that we think we can apportion a fraction of a degree to this or that.

It would be really funny if it wasn’t so serious a conversation about doom and gloom. The climate change soothsayers have taking a bite out of sanity and are running a con game that has at it’s core irrational correlations that are weak at best and fraudulent at worse and outright lies in the extreme.

I would love to see an article by one of the major scientists on ALL the elements impacting the climate summarized, glossarized and indexed by the various “fractions of degrees” that they allegedly contribute and how to the climate and to the all important weather.

Climate is a mathematical abstraction. Weather is real and is happening now, the only moment in time that actually exists. The past gone. The future is an illusion and never exists. Tomorrow never comes as there is always another tomorrow when today shows up now. It’s an important aspect of comprehending time that now is all that is real. All there ever is is now and that means weather rules the climate not the other way around.

This is what we really need to be protecting against: The Real Threat to Humanity – other than ourselves – are Asteroid Impacts! We missed being hit two days ago and a month ago our atmosphere protected us from an asteroid with enough punch to product an 50 Kiloton detonation high up in the atmosphere. Ouch!

Actually it would be more like this but the above video has a better sound track!

This one is the bomb, literally an Extinction Level Event (ELE)!

Posted in Climate Science, Complex Systems, Definition of Terms, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Humbled by Nature, Philosophy, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about | Leave a Comment »

All belief is religion as belief isn’t based upon verifiable knowledge

Posted by pwl on November 5, 2009

All belief is religion as belief isn’t based upon verifiable knowledge.

“A United Kingdom court has ruled that a man can take his employer to court on the grounds that he was discriminated against because of his views on climate change. …

Mr Nicholson successfully argued that his moral values about the environment should be recognised under the same laws that protect religious beliefs.

In the landmark ruling, Justice Michael Burton said that a belief in man-made climate change is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the religion and belief regulations.” Beliefs on climate like Religion, court rules

The word “belief” is a problematic word with so many definitions that you have to pretty much define what you mean either by the context or by direction definition.

Generally when I’m down on the word belief I specifically mean “religious belief” or “supernatural belief” and not a belief that my car is still parked where it is.

I don’t think it’s responsible to say that “I believe in Newton’s Gravity Theory” as to use the word belief to talk about facts mis-communicates to the masses of people out there without scientific training. It’s better to use other words. Your “belief” that letting go of a stone has nothing to do with whether or not the stone falls.

Common uses of belief basically mean that you don’t know or don’t have evidence and that you assume it is true anyway. Since you do have evidence that dropping a stone on earth will have it fall (unless it’s otherwise supported or blocked) using the word belief is a mistake. One instead should say “I know that when I let go of a stone at chest level, it will fall (assuming that it’s not supported or blocked in some other manner).” This has clarity.

It is a big mistake for Richard Dawkins to be using the word belief the way he does with regards to scientific knowledge. He should be more careful and define his terms more precisely when talking about scientific knowledge and what is know and what isn’t since the religious masses use the word belief differently.

Sure people have a “belief” that X person will be a good political leader, but that is an entirely different category and meaning of belief than “belief that god exists” which is a statement that has no evidence and will never have any evidence in all probability not even mentioning all the evidence against the possibility of any gods existing.

As for climate change caused by man the science isn’t settled and if you think it is that is your “belief” and not a valid scientific statement. The more I learn the more I learn that we don’t yet have conclusive answers and that politics of extreme environmentalism started it and now that mainstream politicians have gotten into the act it’s now even more highly suspect. So I’d say show the evidence in a context where it can be audited by anyone which means showing all the data, raw and manipulated, detailed and comprehensive explanations for the manipulations, the statistics methods involved and why they were chosen, the software and the data used to create the graphs, all the scientists notes, photographs, and other materials used in the preparation of all the science papers. It’s clear that climate scientists (and others) have not been up to the standards of other fields and that all publically funded science needs to have it’s standards of openness and auditability raised.

I’m a very strong show me the hard evidence guy. Belief has no place in science nor in the communication of science nor in the science education process unless it specifically means “we think it could be true or false but we don’t just know yet”.

Believing that murder is wrong is a statement of one’s moral values and the word belief is often used although I’d question it’s use there. I’d not say it that way. I’d rather be more specific and say that “Murder is wrong because human life is valuable.”

Is saying “gravity sucks” a statement of “belief” or is it a succinct statement of the known laws of Gravity? I pick the latter.

“The relationship between belief and knowledge is that a belief is knowledge if the belief is true, and if the believer has a justification (reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance) for believing it is true. … Later epistemologists have questioned the “justified true belief” definition, and some philosophers have questioned whether “belief” is a useful notion at all.” – wikipedia

So “belief” is shaky ground at best, and as such it’s best to avoid using it when speaking generally about science or anything that is a statement of objective reality or it’s nature. I also use it carefully. My main use is in talking about the belief and faith stricken members of society.

Is that my belief? No, it’s a precautionary guidance principle based on knowledge gained from far too many conversations with the belief stricken who set well placed linguistic and philosophical traps.

Posted in Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Gravity, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Philosophy, Politics, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada | 1 Comment »

Belief in Man-Made (aka Mann-Made) Climate Change is Now Officially Recognized as a Nutter Religion

Posted by pwl on November 3, 2009

Climate change belief given same legal status as religion
In a landmark ruling, Mr Justice Michael Burton said that “a belief in man-made climate change … is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the 2003 Religion and Belief Regulations“.

An executive has won the right to sue his employer on the basis that he was unfairly dismissed for his green views after a judge ruled that environmentalism had the same weight in law as religious and philosophical beliefs.

Facts do not matter anymore as belief in global warming is now officially recognized as a nutter religion!

(All religions are anti-scientific since they require faith above facts of Nature and Nature always wins thus the supernatural religions are false).

The Religion of Climate Change

He’s close “belief in human caused climate change is a religion” but it’s not that they’ll believe in anything its’ that they put “belief” above reason and facts and they’ve been convinced by the likes of Al Gore. It is not the lack of a belief in god that is the problem it is belief itself that is the problem, belief in god, belief in climate change caused by man (aka Mann) that is the real problem. When you are willing to “believe” rather that use reason to examine the facts of Nature that is when you take the irresponsible “leap of faith” into the land of being belief stricken with something that is more likely simply wrong than even having a hint of being right. Critical thinking and reason and the scientific method and open science with peer review by anyone are the tools we need to move forward as a society. Not belief in something. Belief and faith are the great mind killers and possibly the death of civilization as well.

The Religion of Climate Change, UN Ki Moon Cult

Yes indeed, sober scientific based discussion still has it’s place. No science is ever settled. If you think climate science is settled then you don’t know about the facts of climate science as much as you think you do. Not only that, but you also don’t understand the scientific method nor science eduction. Questions are essential of all science at all stages. To suppress discussion is anti-scientific.

To make scientific questions such as “mann made climate change” into a religion based upon belief is the height of insanity and irresponsible governance by the court and anyone else.

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Believe it Denier, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Police State Insanity, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, Video | 1 Comment »

Trees Cause Global Warming by emitting H2O aka Water Vapor!

Posted by pwl on October 18, 2009

Posted in Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, TerrorForming Earth, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Video | Leave a Comment »

Gilligan’s Island Sinking due to Global Warming (AGW)? The condemned will eat a hearty meal.

Posted by pwl on October 9, 2009

The condemned will eat a hearty meal.

Anthropomorphic Global Warming Hits Gilligan’s Island with a vengeance.

“Just like in real life with Anthropomorphic Global Warming the professors hypothesis of the island sinking is proven false due to bad data collection, misinterpretation, and above all fear based soothsaying of the future when it’s not prudent nor scientifically possible.

Fear NOT, CO2 is life as it’s an essential plant nutrient needed for our friends the plants to grow strong and lush. CO2 is needed to feed the ever growing human population.

If you want to save the environment stop REAL pollution like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.”

UPDATE:

Gilligan’s Island Sinking due to Global Warming (AGW)?
From: MountThor | October 09, 2009 | 291 views
Unfortunately Warner Brothers chose to prevent even a fair use of Gilligan’s island from occurring. There are 98 episodes of Gilligan’s Island of about 25 minutes each for a total of about 2450 minutes. The video which was deleted was about 8 minutes and 40 seconds, say 9 minutes… that’s less than 0.37% of the total footage ever shot and broadcast which makes the amount I used fair use under international copyright laws. The copyrights were left intact as were the shot titles and a thank you for usage was added to this descriptive note (not that that is necessary for fair use situations). The footage was ONLY used since it provides a public commentary on the politics of global warming and how the data the so called science is based upon is flawed as was the science the professor used in his conclusion that the island is sinking was flawed.

I refer you to: http://www-sul.stanford.edu/cpyright.html where you’ll see that this limited in size video expert for non-profit review and critique and commentary meets all the criteria for fair use.

I subscribe to the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video.
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/publication…

I kindly request the permission of Warner Brothers to use this limited extract for not for profit political commentary.

Posted in Awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Eeek!, Fun, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Scams, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Splish Splash Taking a Bath, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 1 Comment »

Green House Conspiracy

Posted by pwl on September 20, 2009

This documentary is a good companion to the latest documentary,”The Great Global Warming Swindle” recently shown on CH 4 UK and is available on Google video. The hoax of Global Warming / Green House was exposed 19 years ago by CH 4 UK in this documentary entitled Green House Conspiracy. Those who subscribe to the rubbish trotted out by Al Gore and his mindless followers are not new they were the same arse clowns who were telling us we were all going to freeze to death 30 years ago.

What The FUCK? Almost every aspect of this video from 19 years ago is exactly the same as it is today!!!! Wow, nothing has changed. The warmies are still crying wolf. I wonder who let them out of the asylum?

Posted in Awesome, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Exercise For the Reader, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Religion, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

Death from the skys, the real serious threat to Earth and it’s critters including humans

Posted by pwl on September 17, 2009

Unlike theories such as Anthropogenic Global Warming aka Climate Change, there is ZERO doubt about this very real serious threat.

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Disasters, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Energy, Film, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, Vaporizing Earth!, Video, WOW!!! | Leave a Comment »

Solaranite Theory of Rapid Anthropomorphic Climate Change

Posted by pwl on September 17, 2009

The Solaranite Theory of Climate Change starts around 3:00 into the flick.

Solaranite Theory of Rapid Anthropomorphic Climate Change: “Take a can of your gasoline. Say this can of gasoline is the sun. Now, you spread a thin line of it to a ball, representing the earth. Now, the gasoline represents the sunlight, the sun particles. Here we saturate the ball with the gasoline, the sunlight. Then we put a flame to the ball. The flame will speedily travel around the earth, back along the line of gasoline to the can, or the sun itself. It will explode this source and spread to every place that gasoline, our sunlight, touches. Explode the sunlight here, gentlemen, you explode the universe. Explode the sunlight here and a chain reaction will occur direct to the sun itself and to all the planets that sunlight touches, to every planet in the universe.

The details of the Solaranite Climate Change Theory come to light in this following riveting conversation. Pun intended.

Eros, the leader, confronts a group of skeptical earthlings with the true nature of his plan. The scientific minds of Earth are on a treacherous course of weapons discovery that will eventually lead to a bomb that could explode the whole universe, the “Solaranite Bomb”.

Colonel Edwards: Why is it so important that you want to contact the governments of our earth?

Eros: Because of death. Because all you of Earth are idiots!

Jeff Trent: Now you just hold on, Buster.

Eros: No, you hold on! First was your firecracker, a harmless explosive. Then your hand grenade: you began to kill your own people, a few at a time. Then the bomb. Then a larger bomb: many people are killed at one time. Then your scientists stumbled upon the atom bomb, split the atom. Then the hydrogen bomb, where you actually explode the air itself. Now you can arrange the total destruction of the entire universe served by our sun: The only explosion left is the Solaranite.

Colonel Tom Edwards: Why, there’s no such thing! Why, a particle of sunlight can’t even be seen or measured.

Eros: Can you see or measure an atom? Yet you can explode one! A ray of sunlight is made up of many atoms.

Jeff Trent: So what if we do develop this Solaranite bomb? We’d be even a stronger nation than now.

Eros: “Stronger.” You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!

The impassioned plea continues with an appeal to intelligence and metaphor.

Colonel Edwards: You speak of Solaranite. But just what is it?

Eros: Take a can of your gasoline. Say this can of gasoline is the sun. Now, you spread a thin line of it to a ball, representing the earth. Now, the gasoline represents the sunlight, the sun particles. Here we saturate the ball with the gasoline, the sunlight. Then we put a flame to the ball. The flame will speedily travel around the earth, back along the line of gasoline to the can, or the sun itself. It will explode this source and spread to every place that gasoline, our sunlight, touches. Explode the sunlight here, gentlemen, you explode the universe. Explode the sunlight here and a chain reaction will occur direct to the sun itself and to all the planets that sunlight touches, to every planet in the universe. This is why you must be stopped. This is why any means must be used to stop you. In a friendly manner or as (it seems) you want it.

Plan 9

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Eeek!, Energy, Entertainment, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Science Education, Science Ficition, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Vaporizing Earth!, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 1 Comment »

Fortunetellers, Soothsayers, Doomsayers, Climate Forecasters, all illegal in Maryland

Posted by pwl on August 28, 2009

Climate Soothsayers Predict Doom crying wolf aka FIRE aka Anthropomorphic Global Warming and get away with it without sufficient EVIDENCE of a verifiable scientific nature!

Al Gore Fortunetelling and doom-saying our future warming the planet with his actual hands waving across the big silver screen in the fantasy science fiction documentary An Inconvenient Truth and in the process breaking the anti-fortuneteller law in Maryland!

A Maryland man [Nick Nefedro] who refers to himself as a Gypsy is claiming discrimination in the case of a Bethesda, Maryland law that forbids “foretelling the future.”

Montgomery County Map

In Montgomery County, Maryland, it is … illegal to accept money forforecasting or foretelling or for pretending to forecast or foretell the future by cards, palm reading or any other scheme, practice or device.” Although the law has been on the books since the 1950’s, it is being challenged in court by Nick Nefedro, a man who claims gypsy ancestry and who wants to run a business selling his services as a fortuneteller. Nefedro was denied a business permit, and he says banning his predictions is discriminatory against his heritage. The ACLU is backing his claim.

A possibility that no one has discussed, however, is that Montgomery County prosecutors might insist that Mr. Nefedro prove his fortunetelling abilities. Courts have an understandable and desirable bias toward protecting free speech, but Mr. Nefedro’s free speech rights are not in danger, only his ability to take money for making predictions. If his ability is real, it should stand up to scientific testing. If it does not stand up to such testing, than it is, in simple terms, fraud.

In reality, fortunetelling should not be protected free speech any more than yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. Whenever someone claims to make supernatural [or scientific] predictions, those claims should be subject to testing or at least subject to later review for accuracy.” – Fortunetelling Should Not Be Protected Speech

“I don’t think it’s strange for us to have laws that protect against fraud,” said Clifford Royalty, zoning division chief in the Montgomery County attorney’s office, adding that “religion [or science] has nothing to do with it. He’s not made that allegation in the lawsuit.”

“The practice is fraudulent,” Royalty said, “because no one can forecast the future.”

Nefedro insists that he can.” – The Washington Post

As do climate scientists in Maryland and elsewhere. Oh dear, that means that this group, STWG: Scientific and Technical Working Group, Maryland Commission on Climate Change, is illegal in Maryland since they are foretelling of AGW doom.

it is … illegal to accept money for “forecasting or foretelling or for pretending to forecast or foretell the future by … any … scheme, practice or device.

So this applies to ALL people claiming to FORETELL the future including weather forecasters and climate scientists who use any “scheme, practice or device” known as climate science and a computer and software to do their dirty deeds of forecasting, soothsaying and doom-saying about the end of the world scenarios brought on by Mann, oops, man, with Anthropomorphic Global Warming! Very interesting.

The underlying purpose is to prevent people from being taken advantage of, because it’s a scam,” Clifford Royalty, a lawyer in the Montgomery County State’s Attorney’s Office, said.

A federal judge upheld a similar ban in Harford County in 2002, deferring to the county’s assessment of fortunetelling as “inherently deceptive” and citing a 1976 Supreme Court decision, albeit not in a fortunetelling case, that said “untruthful speech” is not protected.” – Washington Examiner

I view the matter in a simple, direct way. If someone wants to sell their services as a fortuneteller (or any other name which means the same thing [such as climatologist or climate scientist or Al Gore]) then they should have to prove them adequate to the task. Plumbers must be able to plumb. Mechanics have to be able to fix your car. Carpenters who build your house have to be able to do the job. If they do a shoddy job, the consumer has recourse.

This means that fortunetellers [, soothsayers, doomsayers, climate scientists, weathermen, movie makers, and others predicting the future] who sell their services as genuine must be able to pass some sort of test showing that they can actually do it. Otherwise they must have a massive sign that says “WE ARE NOT REAL. THIS IS FOR ENTERTAINMENT VALUE ONLY. YOU WILL GET JUST AS GOOD ADVICE THROWING A DART AT THE PAPER.”

I have no problem with those who claim they can see the future, talk to the dead, read your aura, and so on. I merely state that in the interest of consumer protection, they must prove their competency the moment they start charging for it.Gypsy Bad Fortune.

[W]e already have laws to protect us against fortune telling. The crime is very specific: it’s called fraud. Now we just need to get some law enforcement folks interested in prosecuting it.

So how many climate scientists are working in this part of Maryland (and by precedent potentially all of Maryland)? They are all breaking the law because they don’t hang out a sign on their door or write in their scientific papers “WE ARE NOT REAL. THIS IS FOR ENTERTAINMENT VALUE ONLY. YOU WILL GET JUST AS GOOD ADVICE THROWING A DART AT THE PAPER!”

I think that climate scientists have proven with their bad science that they are not up to the task. I wonder if Pennsylvania has a similar law to address Dr. Mann’s scientific shenanigans:?

The hockey stick debate is about two things. At a technical level it concerns a well-known study that characterized the state of the Earth’s climate over the past thousand years and seemed to prove a recent and unprecedented global warming. I will explain how the study got the results it did, examine some key flaws in the methodology and explain why the conclusions are unsupported by the data. At the political level the emerging debate is about whether the enormous international trust that has been placed in the IPCC was betrayed. The hockey stick story reveals that the IPCC allowed a deeply flawed study to dominate the Third Assessment Report, which suggests the possibility of bias in the Report-writing process. In view of the massive global influence of IPCC Reports, there is an urgent need to bias-proof future assessments in order to put climate policy onto a new foundation that will better serve the public interest.

So are there any people in Maryland who want to make a list of all climate scientists in the State and charge them with “fortunetelling” under the existing Maryland law?

In fact Al Gore’s fantasy film fortunetelling the future of the Earth FORETELLING DOOM and DESTRUCTION as if it really will happen was shown in Bethesda, Maryland, and the lines were very long for many months; in fact I saw it there in Montgomery County myself of all places! These quotes sum up the case against Al Gore nicely: “In Montgomery County it is … illegal to accept money for forecasting or foretelling or for pretending to forecast or foretell the future by … any … scheme, practice or device.” + “In reality, fortunetelling should not be protected free speech any more than yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.” + “The practice is fraudulent because no one can forecast the future.” I trust that the staggering irony of Al Gore yelling mann caused Anthropomorphic Global Warming (AGW), aka FIRE, in a movie theater is not lost on you. Who wants to charge Al Gore under this law? Let’s see guesstimating 50,000 people (we need the actual statistics on this but for the sake of making this point we’ll use this guesstimate of how many) saw the movie An Inconvenient Truth in Montgomery Country in theaters and on DVD that would be 50,000 times the USD$250 fine for Al Gore violating this soothsaying aka fortunetelling law so the fine could potentially be in the range of a whopping USD$12,500,000.00. That might send a message to doomsayers, soothsayers, and climate scientists who predict the future crying wolf repeatedly without verifiable science. It also might take back some of the lucrative profits Al Gore is making by selling “carbon credits”!

Anytime science (papers in particular) is done without SHOWING ALL THE STEPS and providing all the data there is always the chance that some magic steps are involved. By magic we mean fraudulent.

I was about to start this paragraph by saying “To be serious …” but then I realized that this is actually a serious article and not a joke at all, so I’ll start it this way:

The serious nature of fraudulent claims in Climate Science MUST be addressed and those that make claims about the future that turn out to not be correct MUST be held to account for their fraudulent claims especially those that receive money for making said claims. Honest and forthrightness and the highest possible standards MUST BE achieved in Climate Science (and all other sciences) in order to protect the public from those making false claims for personal gain or out of their “beliefs” rather than out of verifiable and Open Source Science that can be vetted and tested by ANY outside party at will.

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome beyond awesome, Believe it or you are a Nazi!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Learning about Science Organizations, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Science over Propaganada, The End is Nigh | Leave a Comment »

When otherwise good math goes wrong especially in parallel or massively parallel programs

Posted by pwl on July 31, 2009

Sometimes we forget that not all numbers are the same. This becomes very apparent in dealing with floating point numbers in parallel computing.Floating numbers are not associative or distributive. … The more cores programmers run their parallelized code on, the more ways operations can be interleaved and the more challenges programmers face.” – Tim Mattson and Ken Strandberg, Intel

As if it’s climate science is not bad enough with intentionally corrupt or incompetently done statistics it turns out that climate models may be based upon computer programs with serious math flaws: the limits of the floating point and double precision floating point data types can produce incorrect results since “Floating Point Numbers Aren’t Real Numbers!” they are data types with limited precision. It gets even worse than that, when supposedly good programs are transformed into massively parallel programs with N threads of execution the results can vary with the number of threads chosen to run the program! Of course in climate science N can be 2 or 4 threads on a single multi-core machine but it can also be 1,000+ using GPGPUs or server compute farms.

Have the climate model programs been vetted to ensure mathematical accuracy? Is there a set of test cases that validate it after new changes have been made to the climate models? Do the test cases cover all the calculations in the climate model software? How do we know the answers are even accurate mathematically? (Of course that’s not even asking how do we know the model is relevant but this inquiry is not into relevancy it’s into accuracy of the calculations, whatever they happen to be, in climate models).

The more cores programmers run their parallelized code on, the more ways operations can be interleaved and the more challenges programmers face. Parallel programmers must deal with a host of issues peculiar to parallel programs such as synchronization, protecting shared variables, and finding thread safe versions of common math routines (such as random number generation). One of the most subtle problems faced by the parallel programmer, however, arises from the properties of floating point numbers. Floating point numbers are the same in serial and parallel computations, of course, but when a program executes in parallel, special features of these numbers are more likely to impact your results.” – Tim Mattson and Ken Strandberg, Intel, in “Parallelization and Floating Point Numbers

One aspect of models in science and engineering that involve calculations using the “floating point number format” is that Floating Point numbers are NOT REAL NUMBERS they are limited precision approximations of Real Numbers and as such they have their limits often caused by rounding which results in Floating Point numbers not being associative, in other words the order matters!!! What happens in science and engineering calculations on computers using Float 32 or Double floats (64 bits) especially when scaling massive numbers of computations to multiple threads on your multiple cores or on thousands of processor nodes in super computers or on GPGPU (general purpose graphics processing units) is that you get the wrong answers due to the miss use of these floating point data types.

You can easily generate numbers that don’t fit into the floating point format, and thus you produce answers from the basic arithmetic operations that don’t fit into a floating point format. In other words, the floating point numbers when operated on by the basic arithmetic operations do not constitute a closed set.

The impact of this is significant. Floating numbers are not associative or distributive. So,

A * (C * B) ≠ (A * C) * B and

A * (B + C) ≠ A * B + A * C

[Obviously the sentence is missing something here, most likely the two equations do not produce the same answers! -pwl]

This means that as you change the order of a long sequence of arithmetic operations, you can generate different answers. Mathematically with real numbers, the answers can’t depend on the order of the operations (for commutative operations) or the way they are grouped together (associatively). But with floating point numbers, if you interleave the operations in different ways, you get different results.

Here’s a good test to demonstrate the implications of this behavior by floating point numbers:

1. Fill 2 arrays each with 10000 random values between 0.0 and 1.0.

2. Shift one up by 100 and shift the other down by 0.001.

3. Mix the arrays together, sum them, and subtract a large number (500000).

Here are the results run on 1, 2, and 4 threads.

1 thread computes 170.968750

2 threads computes 171.968750

4 threads computes 172.750000

Which one of these numbers is correct, the 1-thread, 2-thread, or 4-thread value? Are any of these the true value? Would you consider that with 4 threads, the answer is correct and the others wrong? Or with 1 thread?

This is not a trick question, nor is its goal to make programmers look silly. Developers are smart people. But, many programmers steeped in sequential programming for so many years make the assumption that there is only one right answer for their algorithm. After all, their code has always delivered the same answer every time it was run. When you consider the above example, however, all the answers are equally correct. To pick one arbitrarily and call it right and the others wrong is completely unjustified.

Wait there is more! This is quite shocking isn’t it? What you were taught in math class isn’t the way that computers do math! Yikes. Most computer scientists are not aware of this problem as most never encounter it in their careers, or don’t know that it’s a problem that is happening right under their noses. Scary.

By mixing the numbers as this example does, it creates a pathological situation designed to maximize problems due to round off error. The test mixes very large and very small numbers together. The arithmetic unit aligns the numbers before adding them, which, given the large difference in their absolute magnitudes, all but guarantees that we’ll loose bits of precision in the process.

As the number of threads changes, the combinations of numbers being added also changes. With all the roundoff errors, as the way these numbers are combined changes, the way roundoff error is accumulated also keeps changing. Thus, the answers change.

So which answer is correct? The algorithm for adding them together is unstable. If you carefully add the numbers together so large numbers add with large numbers and small numbers add with small numbers, and then add the “large_set_sum” to the “small_set_sum”, you get a numerically stable result. The answer in this case is 177.750. Note that the test answers in every case considerably vary from the stable method of obtaining the answer.

Note also that, with a serial algorithm, you’d never know there was a problem. Only as the thread count grows and the answers change, does the instability of the algorithm become obvious. It’s apparent the problem is not in the compiler or even the program. The problem is with the numerical instability of the algorithm. And it’s only revealed by going to multiple threads.

The video with Tim Mattson explains it well.

Are you getting different numbers for calculations as you vary the number of threads? Your algorithm may be incorrect. Real numbers are nice; floating numbers are not nice. Floating numbers are not a closed set, the overflow bits need to be rounded and that can change the results of a calculation. Tim discusses how to work with floating point numbers and resources available to help in the Intel Math Kernel Libraries.

In the engineering applications that I’ve worked on for civil engineering of bridges we found that Double Precision Floating Point Numbers at 64 bits was simply not enough accuracy. We were able to use 80bit Extended Double Precision Floating Point numbers supported by the 8087 math coprocessor in the Intel line of chips. Even though the extended precision covered most of the cases that Double Precision didn’t there were a few cases where we had to adjust the order of our computations to ensure that we didn’t overflow the precision limits of the computation of the extended 80bit math! As you can imagine errors in bridge calculations are rather critical to life and limb.

The same is true in the Climate Models, lives and treasure both depend on correct math. The science fails when the math is wrong. Have they been vetted for numeric accuracy? How do we know that? Have test cases been written that test these limits in the climate model programs?


The same applies to random numbers in computers, they are not real random numbers either. As Tim Mattson says “We now know that god does play dice but that computers can’t!” (paraphrased). Random numbers are important in climate models since the climate is in inherently a system with randomness being generated from within. See Wolfram’s A New Kind of Science.

Computers cannot make truly random numbers. For statistical algorithms requiring random numbers, developers need to be careful in parallel code to avoid overlapping sequences from random number generators. Tim discusses different methods to use random number generators – including using independent generators for each thread and the “leap frog method” – to produce “pseudo random numbers” for statistical algorithms that work in parallel code.


Very interesting and important topic to any system that depends upon parallel computations being correct to protect limb, life and treasure.

Thanks to Intel, Tim Mattson and Ken Strandberg for this important information.

Posted in Awesome, Bad Ideas, Bad Science, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Damn it!, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows | 1 Comment »

Open Source Science is the path through the dark into the new enlightenment

Posted by pwl on July 27, 2009

The articles linked here raise some very disturbing problems with the manner in which climate science is being conducted. This is especially important due to the HUGE public costs about to be undertaken over the next decades.

“The UK’s Met Office Hadley Centre and University of East Anglia have been refusing access to the data used for their global climate averages and scientific studies.” – slashdot

Opening Science is the way forward, the path through the darkness, the endarkenment of closed source science.

If’s it’s paid by the public purse it must be OPEN data that anyone can see and audit.

Yes, you feel certain that you are right about your science but lets see the actual data and the methods used by that science to prove that your certainty is justified.

Science is based upon the notion of being able to validate or invalidate in whole or in part the “claims” made by various “hypotheses” put forward.

When you “BELIEVE” science you’re just another religion.

When you can’t audit the work of scientists whose work is the basis of public policy then you and the public are being endarkened and kept excluded. But why? For what or whose agenda?

As long as the data, the methods, the algorithms, the statical analysis, the step by step procedures are kept secret the work is suspect to scientific fraud.

Have the guts to open your science to the light of day, it will in the end be better for it once it’s vetted by more eyes and brains and math nuts and others poking holes in it.

ANY AND ALL CLAIMS MADE BY PEOPLE WHO KEEP THEIR SCIENCE CLOSED AND SECRET is suspect of FRAUD. What are they hiding? Are they simply embarrassed to admit that they might be wrong? That they’ve made mistakes? That they are afraid that others might gain an edge in the grant process and shut them out of funding?

Open Source Science is the way forward through the darkness into the light that empower verification and falsification and thus progress EITHER way!!!

When you “BELIEVE” science you’re just another religion. In fact, open source science is the BEST and ONLY WAY to avoid science from becoming the new religion as it has, for example, in the climate debates.

The scientific method is the tool for vetting the works of science and if the work of science is closed and secret and kept close to the scientists chests by refusals to share their data, methods, source codes, procedures, etc… then their work can’t be verified and might as well be works of fiction just like those of any religious cleric or priest or nutter.

If you can’t take others vetting your scientific work then maybe you don’t belong in science?

Open Source Science raises the bar and will in the long run improve the quality of the science that is done. Some progress is being made, much more needs to be done.


Climate science makes extraordinary claims about Anthropogenic Global Warming and Global Warming.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” – Carl Sagan

Yet when asked for the data that is claimed to provide some of the evidence the data is refused on POLITICAL grounds. Very disturbing.

Regardless of the reasons that the data is not provided the bad science attitude by the MET office hinders actual science from proceeding. Very disturbing.


When you can’t test a scientific hypothesis or read all of the supporting evidence for it you must then rely on “taking their word for it” which is also known as “accepting based upon belief alone”. This is the end of science bit by bit and leads to the path of the dark side, to an age endarkenment.

When people find science open to validate themselves with experiments that they can do themselves or by reading all the evidence and vetting the work of others belief is eliminated and tested knowledge is obtained by that person bolstering the accuracy of their representation of the universe.

Belief is the enemy of science. Open Source science is the path forward that helps to eliminate belief and lay the ground work for a new scientific enlightenment accessible to the masses.

Terminate belief. Grow your knowledge based upon the scientific method. Stop being a science geek who takes it up the ass from authorities just like the religious nut jobs who take it up the ass from The Pope and his ilk.

Posted in A New Kind of Science [NKS], Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Energy, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Politics, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Smackdown, Something to think about | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: