by Dr. Ed Berry
We all know Democrats and Republicans differ on partisan politics. But there are bipartisan issues where everyone should agree. We should all agree on what facts and science tell us.
Democrats, in general, claim scientists like me “deny climate change.” The truth is these Democrats deny science.
Anyone who has an open mind to scientific truth will understand there is no evidence that our carbon dioxide emissions cause dangerous climate change.
Facts prove our carbon dioxide emissions are not dangerous. If anything, facts show we should try to increase the carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. [Read more…]
by John R. Christy, University of Alabama in Huntsville, February 2, 2016
I am John R. Christy, Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science, Alabama’s State Climatologist and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. I have served as Lead Author, Contributing Author and Reviewer of United Nations IPCC assessments, have been awarded NASA’s Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement, and in 2002 was elected a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society.
It is a privilege for me to offer my analysis of the current situation regarding (1) the temperature datasets used to study climate, (2) our basic understanding of climate change and (3) the effect that regulations, such as the Paris agreement, might have on climate. I have also attached an extract from my Senate Testimony last December in which I address (1) the popular notion that extreme climate events are increasing due to human- induced climate change (they are not), and (2) the unfortunate direction research in this area has taken.
My research area might be best described as building datasets from scratch to advance our understanding of what the climate is doing and why – an activity I began as a teenager over 50 years ago. I have used traditional surface observations as well as measurements from balloons and satellites to document the climate story. Many of our UAH datasets are used to test hypotheses of climate variability and change. [Read more…]
“Now I’m going to discuss how we would look for a new law. In general, we look for a new law by the following process.
“First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply.
“Then we compare the computation results to nature, or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works.
“If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science.
“It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are, or who made the guess, or what his name is…
“If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. That’s all there is to it.”
Climate models disagree with experiment, therefore they are wrong. Therefore, the hypothesis that our CO2 emissions cause significant global warming is wrong.
First published on Sep 29, 2015. I changed this date so more readers can find Soon’s publication. – Ed
by Dr. Ed Berry (Ph.D., Atmospheric Physics)
A new, peer-reviewed professional paper shows our sun, not our carbon dioxide, causes climate change. It also shows atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations are an insignificant player, and possibly a non-player, in climate change.
The authors, Willie Soon, Ronan Connolly, and Michael Connolly received no government, corporate, or any outside funding for their work on their paper.
Here, I will make their conclusions very simple for you to understand.
They used northern hemisphere data from 1880 to 2014. They used data, not theories, to make their case. [Read more…]
by Dr. Ed Berry
Last week, I published my article “Democrats keep lying about global warming” about Dr. Steve Running of the University of Montana and his unethical claim to have a Nobel Peace Prize.
Seems Dr. Eric Grimsrud has a problem with my article. He added two comments so far. Here I reply to his comments. My reply is of necessity too long for a comment. So I publish my reply as this new post.
You believe human carbon dioxide emissions will destroy planet Earth. Yet your quest to “prove” your case continues to fail. Here’s why.
You believe your key to proof is to personally denigrate all who claim your scientific conclusion is wrong.
Back in Climate Clash, you claimed Richard Lindzen was a pseudo scientist because you could not prove his published papers on climate were wrong.
You are preoccupied with the question of “Who is the smartest?” You believe the answer to this question determines who is correct about climate. It doesn’t.
You brag about your scientific papers because you believe the number of your published papers proves you are correct about climate. It doesn’t.
All your published papers were about a relatively narrow subject in chemistry. You have no demonstrated expertise outside this narrow field. You have no expertise in numerical models, meteorology or climate physics.
You brag about the subjects you studied. You believe this proves you are correct about climate. It doesn’t.
Your list shows you missed the most important course: the philosophy of science. [Read more…]
Dr. Nebert is a physician-scientist with 50 years of work in basic and clinical research. He has over 500 publications. His public-oriented articles, like this one, are about busting myths. He uses scientific facts to counter publicly accepted hype and hysteria. The Cincinnati Enquirer published this article in May 2015. – Ed
by Dr. Daniel W Nebert, Professor Emeritus, University of Cincinnati Medical Center
The media constantly strives to increase newspaper and magazine circulation; also the number of radio listeners and television, online and podcast viewers. One effective way to achieve this goal is to exploit the theme: “Should I worry?”
For example, after World War II was the “flying saucer scare”. Worry about an invasion from outer space certainly sold more newspapers and magazines and increased television news-watching. This concern also led to the government-funded program, Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI). [Read more…]
This is an excellent and accurate 5-minute video by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT.