Schooling Alarmist College Students on Bogus Climate Claims

Written by John O'Sullivan on February 20, 2020. Posted in Current News

A young American college student supporter of Principia Scientific International (name withheld) has been debating fellow students who have swallowed the junk science propaganda about man-man global warming.

Our young friend wrote:

“This alarmist said, “Principia Scientific is not a factual source. It is a think tank aka propaganda machine funded by the Heartland Institute. Tony Heller is not a factual source he’s made factually incorrect claims often times being corrected after them. Climate Change Dispatch also not a factual source that is based on emotions not factual information.” This guy also denounced Naomi Seibt and Tim Ball, saying they were stupid and didn’t know what they were talking about, and he stated Tim Ball isn’t a real scientist. I think these things he states are ridiculous. He then praises Arrhenius for his work and states all sorts of alarmist papers while discrediting places like this and other “think tanks.” How wrong or right is he, and what should I do to rebuttal him if I can?”

We sent this in reply:

We don’t represent Tony Heller or Climate Change Dispatch but we see no evidence they promote fake news. As for Principia Scientific International, we are a factual-based, educational services body and strictly regulated as such by the UK government. We are comprised of over 5,000 members, many of whom are graduates in the applied sciences, engineering and/or academia. We have a select member list of some of our most distinguished scientists at:

https://principia-scientific.com/why-psi-is-proposed-as-a-cic/

We also are registered as a UK non-profit (or Community Interest Company).  We take no funding from Heartland nor any other organisation. Almost all our donations are from grassroots supporters.  Dr Tim Ball is indeed a climatologist as he obtained his PhD in historic climatology in 1983 from Queen Mary College, University of London.

Tim Ball is indeed a Geographer, but most ignorant people do not know that the field of climate research is an infant science and 40 years ago no taught university degree courses existed in ‘climate science’ per se.

In fact, in Britain (rated a world leader in climate research) no graduate degree course in climate science existed prior to 2010 when the first Bachelor’s degree course in climate science started at the University of East Anglia, the HQ of Britain’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU).

Infamously, the head of the CRU, Professor Phil Jones was humiliated during the Climategate scandal (2009) for illegally disobeying 95 of 105 freedom of information requests. Independent scientists simply wanted to test the extreme claims made by such government-sponsored academics that human impacts on climate were ‘dangerous.’

Jones only escaped criminal prosecution on a technicality because the statutory time limit expired. The story was reported widely in the UK press. [1]

Rather than share his evidence and calculations openly for examination by independent experts, Jones chose to destroy/withhold it, thus frustrating honest debate on the matter. Britain’s disgraced top climate professor was later forced to admit there had been “no global warming since 1995.”[2]

This and other scandals proved that all claims about man-made global warming are too often  based on unverifiable claims concocted from ‘secret science’ .

Time and again we are told the ‘debate is over‘ but independent scientists have never been allowed to examine the calculations and methods of these corrupt govt scientists. As such, a growing number of critics are realizing that governments have employed self-serving academics to ramp up scare stories about climate change to help promote tax-raising govt policies.  But as any rational person can deduce, you cannot control the global temperature by raising more taxes.

Further proof that the world’s ‘top climate experts’ are dishonest and corrupt came in 2019 when Dr Ball won the famous Mann-v-Ball ‘science trial of the century.’  It is also seen as the battle of the graphs, as shown below:

Above: contrast and compare Dr Mann’s dodgy graph with Dr Ball’s more reliable version (based on that of the renowned H. H. Lamb) and see how Mann fraudulently altered the proxy climate date with a ‘hockey stick’ shape to falsely show the dramatic uptick with modern temperatures rising ‘catastrophically’ to fit the fake UN IPCC doomsaying narrative.

In that eight-year, multi-million-dollar lawsuit the famous UN IPPC climate fraudster and ‘world leading climate scientist’ Michael E Mann refused to submit his (faked) data to open courtroom examination. Mann stalled for eight years in avoiding showing in open court his discredited ‘hockey stick’ graph R2 regression numbers (the ‘working out’ of his math). Ball says if Mann showed it to the jury the world would know this top UN ‘expert’ was a fraudster.

Dr. Ball’s victory showed in a court of law that the man-made global warming is junk climate science based on unverifiable hidden data (fakery). Read the judge’s verdict here.

As with the case of Phil Jones in Britain, a UN top climate experts played fast and loose with the evidence when cornered.

After losing his claim, Dr Mann (image, above) was ordered by the Supreme Court of British Columbia to pay Dr Ball all his legal fees (about one million dollars) but the dishonest Mann has still not complied despite the verdict being in August last year.

Thus, indicating that Mann, like many ‘climate scientists’ is dishonest and willing to break the law in pursuit of their extreme, unscientific beliefs which are more about raising taxes and creating a one world socialist government than ‘saving the planet.’

As for the discredited work of Svante Arrhenius. His theory of CO2 warming the Earth has been falsified (by the Stefan-Boltzmann law and the laws of thermodynamics). He failed because Arrhenius’ idea of scientific experimentation was to read the papers of other people and to make (wrong) prognostications on them.

Arrhenius’s absorption values for CO2 and his conclusions met criticism by world-class scientist Knut Ångström in 1900 (Ångström’s father has wavelength physical unit named after him).

Ångström published the first modern infrared absorption spectrum of CO2 with two absorption bands, and published experimental results that seemed to show that absorption of infrared radiation by the gas in the atmosphere was already “saturated” so that adding more could make no difference.

Moreover, the famous experiment by Robert W. Wood, at John Hopkins University (photo, right), with two carton boxes/greenhouses, in 1909, is mentioned on many websites, as simple experimental evidence proving the fallacy of the greenhouse gas effect theory (GHE).

Thanks to Ångström and Wood mainstream scientists abandoned all interest in the idea that carbon dioxide could in any way be our planet’s climate control knob.

The history books show that right through to the 1950’s and beyond major international scientific bodies, such at the American Meteorological Association (AMA) rejected the greenhouse gas theory as an explanation of earth’s climate.  We know this because in 1952 Britain’s world-famous meteorologist C.E.P. Brooks wrote in AMA’s ‘Compendium of Science’ that the idea that CO2 could alter the climate:

“was never widely accepted and was abandoned when it was found that all the long-wave radiation [that would be] absorbed by CO2 is [already] absorbed by water vapor.” [3]

However, in the 1980’s the greenhouse gas ‘theory’ was re-invented by dishonest government scientists such as NASA’s Dr James Hansen, to scare taxpayers into thinking CO2 emissions would ‘dangerously’ alter climate.

In 2011 unbiased, independent scientists once again came to the fore to demonstrate empirically (not by using junk computer climate model programs)  that CO2 cannot ‘trap’ heat or delay cooling.  Professor Nasif Nahle (Monterrey, Mexico) is credited with once again validating the Wood’s experiment.

Nahle’s findings shoot holes in the claims of supporters of the greenhouse gas theory.

Professor Nahle’s findings will come as no surprise to anyone who is up to speed with the fact that despite CO2 levels rising global temperatures have flatlined for over 20 years. Even  NASA admits global warming just isn’t happening despite ever-rising levels of CO2.

Why Did the World Believe CO2 Could ‘Trap’ Heat?

It was shown that the error (or deception) was due to a botched lab experiment testing a heated flask with CO2 trapped inside. What is shown is that the glass of the lab flask (or ‘greenhouse’) caused the “trapped” radiation all along. The flask (or greenhouse) being what scientists refer to as a ‘closed system’; while Earth’s atmosphere isn’t closed at all but rather open to space allowing heat energy to freely escape.

This is what makes “Climate physics” a veritable post-normal science anomaly; a faith-based concoction. It is a facsimile of real science only given the veneer of validity thanks to expensive computer models fed on a diet of secret data.

The staple foodstuff of those computers is that they are pre-programmed to regard the earth as flat, with no day or night. Doing so allows the fiction of NASA’s Dr. James Hansen’s “missing” 33 degrees of greenhouse heat to be added to make up the difference. But PSI proved that when taking the exact same solar radiative input numbers and modeling in three-dimensions instead of two, there is no need to add any such extra 33 degrees of GHE heat.

As such, the GHE is an expendable superfluity – an utterly unwarranted simulacra of wrong-headed algebra.

That so many people have been deceived is testament to society’s general failure to maintain a high enough standard in overall scientific understanding. Our universities and colleges have sadly been over populated by arts students rather than scientists and as long as this situation prevails, we will always be liable to massive deceptions perpetrated on us by self-serving policymakers and activists.

[1]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/7088055/University-scientists-in-climategate-row-hid-data.html

[2] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

[3]  Brooks, C.E.P. (1951). “Geological and Historical Aspects of Climatic Change.” In Compendium of Meteorology, edited by Thomas F. Malone, pp. 1004-18 (at 1016). Boston: American Meteorological Association. It stated that the idea that CO2 could alter the climate “was never widely accepted and was abandoned when it was found that all the long-wave radiation [that would be] absorbed by CO2 is [already] absorbed by water vapor.”

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.