Left Panics over Peer-Reviewed Climate Paper’s Threat to Global Warming Alarmism

protestersYou’ve heard it said that the science is settled. And it’s true. It is settled–settled beyond the possibility of any dispute. A fundamental, inescapable, indubitable bedrock scientific principle is that lousy theories make lousy predictions.

Climate forecasts are lousy, therefore it is settled science that they must necessarily be based on lousy theories. And lousy theories should not be trusted.

Put it this way. Climate forecasts, of the type relied upon by the IPCC and over governmental entities, stink. They are no good. They have been promising ever increasing temperatures for decades, but the observations have been more or less steady. This must mean–it is inescapable–that something is very badly wrong with the theory behind the models. What?

There are many guesses. One is that something called “climate sensitivity,” a measure of the overall reaction of the atmosphere to carbon dioxide, is set too high in the models. So Lord Christopher Monckton, Willie Soon, David Legates, and I created a model to investigate this. Although our model is crude and captures only the barest characteristics of the atmosphere, it matches reality better than its luxuriously funded, more complex cousins.

The funding is important. Nobody asked or paid us to create our model. We asked nobody for anything, and nobody offered us anything. We did the work on our own time and submitted a peer-reviewed paper to the Science Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It’s title is “Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model.

The paper was quickly noticed, receiving at this writing well over 10,000 downloads. Anybody who understood the settled science that bad theories make bad forecasts knew that this paper was a key challenge to the climatological community to show that our guess of why climate models stink is wrong, or to prove there were other, better explanations for the decades-long failure to produce skillful forecasts.

After the paper made international news, strange things began to happen. My site was hacked. A pest named David Appell issued a FOIA request to Legates’s employer, the University of Delaware, to release all of Legates’s emails. But since we received no funding for our paper, which of course implies no state funding from Delaware, the university turned Appell down. 

The cult-like Greenpeace had better luck with Soon’s employer, the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who were very obliging.

They turned over all of Soon’s emails. And then Greenpeace sent them to a set of sympathetic mainstream reporters.

Why did Greenpeace do this? Because they suspected we were lying about receiving funding. They were hoping that if they could prove Soon was paid then Soon should have declared to Science Bulletin a conflict of interest, and because he didn’t (none of us did), then he should retract the paper.

Greenpeace went away disappointed. We were telling the truth. Soon, like most research scientists, has in the past accepted money from sources other than our beneficent government (and what makes government money pure?). Greenpeace, for instance, often issues these kinds of grants. But there was no money for this paper, as we said.

But Greenpeace still needed to sidetrack discussion—anything to distract from the news that climate models are broken–hence their cozying up to “science reporters.”

These reporters, all of whom are paid by corporate interests, emailed asking about the “alleged conflict.” I explained to them that we received no funding and thus had no conflict of interest. But they never heard me. It was as if they didn’t want to. I offered to discuss the science behind our paper, but none took me up on this.

I posted a running log of these emails at my site, and they make for fascinating reading of how narrow-minded and willfully ignorant the mainstream press can be. 

Justin Gillis of the New York Times was particularly reprehensible. In an email sent before publishing a hit piece on Sunday, Gillis accused Soon of an “ethical breach.” He issued veiled threats by saying that Soon ought to talk to him, because Soon’s employer “may be preparing to take adverse personnel action against” him.

I told Gillis there was no conflict. And I asked Gillis to explain his ties with Greenpeace and other environmental organizations.

Surprisingly, he refused to answer. Well, he did block me on Twitter.

Greenpeace denies the settled science that bad forecasts mean incorrect theories. Don’t let them change the subject. This is not about some false accusation of conflict of interest. This is about bad science passing for good because it’s politically expedient.

Source

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (20)

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    I assumed Greenpeace would still be cleaning up their PR disaster in Peru .
    What this confirms is the direct pipeline the extreme green crowd has to some like minded insiders .
    Any publication that has 10,000 downloads dwarfs little attempts to discredit and the bullies know it .

    When news papers step away from balanced coverage any walk back is the last thing they will do .

    It is telling that green organizations wouldn’t be thrilled with the discovery that the climate models run hot . But that is what happens when their go to cash cow is threatened .

    No conflict of interest there .No wonder Patrick Moore dumped Greenpeace .

    Reply

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    [quote] A pest named David Appell issued a FOIA request to Legates’s employer, the University of Delaware, to release all of Legates’s emails. But since we received no funding for our paper, which of course implies no state funding from Delaware, the university turned Appell down. [/quote] Hey! We know Davey Boy!

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Robert

      |

      Yes we certainly do, unfortunately.

      I see they noticed he’s a pest as well.

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Brandon Freeman

    |

    The scientific paper referenced is authored by Wei-Hock Soon (Willie Soon.) It was recently uncovered that he accepted funds from oil companies and the Koch brothers for research.

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      BEST also received money from the Koch brothers, and Big Oil also supports many warmists.

      [i]1. Climate Research Unit (CRU) History From the late 1970s through to the collapse of oil prices in the late 1980s, CRU received a series of contracts from BP to provide data and advice concerning their exploration operations in the Arctic marginal seas. Working closely with BP’s Cold Regions Group, CRU staff developed a set of detailed sea-ice atlases, This list is not fully exhaustive, but we would like to acknowledge the support of the following funders (in alphabetical order): …British Petroleum…Greenpeace International…Reinsurance Underwriters and Syndicates…Sultanate of Oman…Shell……

      2. Sierra Club TIME – 2 February 2012 Exclusive: How the Sierra Club Took Millions From the Natural Gas Industry TIME has learned that between 2007 and 2010 the Sierra Club accepted over $25 million in donations from the gas industry, mostly from Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy—one of the biggest gas drilling companies in the U.S. and a firm heavily involved in fracking…”

      3. Delhi Sustainable Development Summit [Founded by Teri under Dr. Rajendra Pachauri chairman of the IPCC] 2011: Star Partner – Rockefeller Foundation 2007: Partners – BP 2006: Co-Associates – NTPC [coal and gas power generation] | Function Hosts – BP 2005: Associate – Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, India | Co-Associate Shell

      4. Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project Berkeley Earth team members include: Richard Muller, Founder and Scientific Director……Steven Mosher, Scientist… Financial Support First Phase (2010) …Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation ($150,000) The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)… Second Phase (2011) …The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)… Third Phase (2012) …The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)…Anonymous Foundation ($250,000)… Fourth Phase (2013) …The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($100,000)…

      5. 350.org 350.org caught up in fossil fuel ‘divestment’ hypocrisy [Rockefellers Brothers Fund] RBF has given 350.org $800,000 in recent years and almost $2 million to the 1Sky Education Fund, now part of 350.org, according to foundation records.”

      6. Union of Concerned Scientists The 2013 Annual Report PDF UCS thanks the following companies that matched members’ gifts at a level of $1,000 or more….Chevron Corporation…” Annual Report 2002 PDF The Union of Concerned Scientists gratefully acknowledges the following individuals and foundations for their generous contributions of at least $500 during our fiscal year 2002 (October 1, 2001–September 30, 2002)…” Friends of UCS The Friends of UCS provide substantial support for the ongoing work of the organization…Larry Rockefeller…Matching Gift Companies…BP Amoco Matching Gift Program…Philip Morris Companies, Inc…”

      7. University of California, Berkeley CalCAP, Cal Climate Action Partnership What is CalCAP? The Cal Climate Action Partnership (CalCAP) is a collaboration of faculty, administration, staff, and students working to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at UC Berkeley.”

      8. University of California, Berkeley UC Berkeley News – 1 February 2007 BP selects UC Berkeley to lead $500 million energy research consortium with partners Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, University of Illinois.”

      9. Climate Institute About Us The Climate Institute has been in a unique position to inform key decision-makers, heighten international awareness of climate change, and identify practical ways of achieving significant emissions reductions… Donors American Gas Foundation…BP…NASA….PG&E Corporation [natural gas & electricity]…Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Shell Foundation…The Rockefeller Foundation…UNDP, UNEP…”

      10. EcoLiving About …EcoLiving provides events and hands-on workshops to teach Albertans about ways to reduce our collective ecological footprint, create more sustainable and energy efficient buildings, and share information about local environmental initiatives and services…” Sponsors 2008 Sponsors: …ConocoPhillips…Shell 2009 Sponsors: …ConocoPhillips Canada…2013 Sponsors:…Shell FuellingChange…”

      11. Nature Conservancy Climate Change Threats and Impacts Climate change is already beginning to transform life on Earth. Around the globe, seasons are shifting, temperatures are climbing and sea levels are rising…… If we don’t act now, climate change will rapidly alter the lands and waters we all depend upon for survival, leaving our children and grandchildren with a very different world…” [/i]

      So, should we dismiss all of these too? And there are more… 😀

      Reply

    • Avatar

      Robert

      |

      Oh give it a rest, the money was paid to the Smithsonian. So go bitch about them accepting the funds from oil companies, etc.

      Reply

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      Dr Soon’s paper passed peer review, and received zero funding from anyone.

      If we are dismissing papers written for money, then every paper the IPCC uses is null and void.

      If we are dismissing authors due to bias, then again every paper the IPCC uses must be rejected.

      It is time to stop the silly ‘Big Oil’ meme. It is time to put our big boy pants on and discuss the actual science, and ignore the meaningless and childish attacks on funding.

      Reply

      • Avatar

        Robert

        |

        Gator, what everyone isn’t talking about is none of this money had a thing to do with the “Models run to hot” paper.

        All this jabbering has to do with work Dr. Soon did in 2008 and which is now conveniently being used to try and slam him since the work in the recent “models” paper has upset the alarmists. Since they can’t counter it directly due to the models demonstrated lack of accuracy what else can they do but attack the man.

        Reply

        • Avatar

          Gator

          |

          Hey Robert! You and I know this paper had zero outside funding, but the Chicken Littles and useful idiots of this world do not. They also do not know that their own climate profits are on the take 100 times more than any skeptic.

          I have yet to find one natural climate change denier who understands the science, but I guess that’s what makes them what they are.

          Reply

  • Avatar

    sonnyhill

    |

    [quote name=”Gator”]Hey Robert! You and I know this paper had zero outside funding, but the Chicken Littles and useful idiots of this world do not. They also do not know that their own climate profits are on the take 100 times more than any skeptic.

    I have yet to find one natural climate change denier who understands the science, but I guess that’s what makes them what they are.[/quote] climate “prophets”, maybe?

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      [quote]climate “prophets”, maybe?[/quote]

      Nope!

      They obviously have never been able to predict anything with accuracy, but they do suck up grant money like a supercharged Electrolux.

      Reply

    • Avatar

      amirlach

      |

      [quote]climate “prophets”, maybe?[/quote] “cLIEmate Profit$!”…

      There fixed it for you!

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Jake

    |

    Briggs’ “list of these emails at my site” should be required viewing for everyone. It shows, without a doubt, that many reporters in positions of authority do NOT understand science, do NOT want to understand science, do NOT respect the reader’s grasp of science, and do NOT have a clue they are the paid spokespeople of the global-warming cottage industry.
    [url]http://wmbriggs.com/post/15356/[/url]

    Any high school student understands that experiments, not faulty computer models, prove theories. Anthropogenic global warming is still a hypothesis in search of a theory. Because of Gore and his lackeys, especially those in academia and the MSM, what was once considered a novel idea has turned into a booming industry.

    It is no coincidence that Apple, where Gore is on Apple’s board of directors, has announced the largest solar farm for any business for all of its data centers in the U.S. to combat non-existent global warming. Since Apple’s announcement by its CEO Tim Cook, stock prices in all solar powered companies have risen.

    Gore’s portfolio firm, Generation Investment Management, has ONE solar power company out of 30 stocks listed, with the rest being directly or indirectly tied to Apple’s profits, and none of them remotely Earth-friendly, as stated by GIM’s sustainability mission statement.
    [url]http://www.stockpickr.com/pro/portfolio/al-gore-generation-investment-management/[/url]
    It is valued at $7.3 billion dollars. GIM was founded and run by Gore and David Blood.

    One company in GIM’s portfolio is SPY (sounds ominous), a trust composed of 10 [i]more[/i] companies. At the top of the list is Apple (sneaky, isn’t it). So Gore, using GIM, and sitting on the board of directors at Apple, and having direct influence over the decisions Apple makes, is able to then profit through his investment organization. And it’s all perfectly legal.
    [url]http://www.stockpickr.com/symbol/SPY/fund-details/[/url]

    PS: If you think owning stock in a solar panel company is Earth friendly, watch the 60 minutes episode on the devastation they are creating in China (where most are made) from the toxic chemicals used to make each panel. No oversight, no regulations, with carcinogenic waste products being discarded into landfills, groundwater, and nearby streams and rivers.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Isn’t what you describe considered inside trading ? Perfectly legal…Really?

    So if a Board member suddenly dumps stock and word gets out and the stock falls even further how exactly is that representing the best interest of the other shareholders ?

    Sounds really goofy if this is in fact correct . Are common shareholders even aware of the risk ?

    I know one company I would not buy shares in so at the very least thanks for the heads up .

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Jake

      |

      I’m assuming it’s legal because even a nitwit like Gore, who’s constantly in the spotlight, wouldn’t be that arrogant as to profit illegally from insider trading.

      The links I listed, however, show that everything I wrote is correct. It’s available for all to see, and if you did deep enough, you begin to see a pattern.

      Many, if not all, of GIM’s investment portfolio have Apple as a vendor or vise-versa. Being on Apple’s board would give Gore inside information to its upcoming projects, what materials it will be procuring, what vendors it will need to work with, what threats Apple will face from the competition, etc…

      This is from Bloomberg news about Gore and just his Apple stock (2013):
      “Gore exercised options, at $7.48 a share, on 59,000 shares of Apple Inc. stock that he’d been granted for serving on the Cupertino, California-based company’s board since 2003. On paper, it was about a [b]$30 million payday[/b] based on the company’s share price on the day he claimed the options.”
      [url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-05-06/gore-is-romney-rich-with-200-million-after-bush-defeat[/url]
      He has more money that Romney but you won’t here that on any MSM outlets.

      Reply

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      You are so gullible! 😀

      You bought the Greenpeace hit job, and even thought their link would be helpful! 😀

      I’ve got newski for ya, if we must dismiss all entities that take Big Oil money, your precious Greenpeace, CRU, BEST, Mann, etc… all must go.

      I say go for it!

      [i]1. Climate Research Unit (CRU) History From the late 1970s through to the collapse of oil prices in the late 1980s, CRU received a series of contracts from BP to provide data and advice concerning their exploration operations in the Arctic marginal seas. Working closely with BP’s Cold Regions Group, CRU staff developed a set of detailed sea-ice atlases, This list is not fully exhaustive, but we would like to acknowledge the support of the following funders (in alphabetical order): …British Petroleum…Greenpeace International…Reinsurance Underwriters and Syndicates…Sultanate of Oman…Shell……

      2. Sierra Club TIME – 2 February 2012 Exclusive: How the Sierra Club Took Millions From the Natural Gas Industry TIME has learned that between 2007 and 2010 the Sierra Club accepted over $25 million in donations from the gas industry, mostly from Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy—one of the biggest gas drilling companies in the U.S. and a firm heavily involved in fracking…”

      3. Delhi Sustainable Development Summit [Founded by Teri under Dr. Rajendra Pachauri chairman of the IPCC] 2011: Star Partner – Rockefeller Foundation 2007: Partners – BP 2006: Co-Associates – NTPC [coal and gas power generation] | Function Hosts – BP 2005: Associate – Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, India | Co-Associate Shell

      4. Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) project Berkeley Earth team members include: Richard Muller, Founder and Scientific Director……Steven Mosher, Scientist… Financial Support First Phase (2010) …Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation ($150,000) The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)… Second Phase (2011) …The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)… Third Phase (2012) …The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($50,000)…Anonymous Foundation ($250,000)… Fourth Phase (2013) …The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation ($100,000)…

      5. 350.org 350.org caught up in fossil fuel ‘divestment’ hypocrisy [Rockefellers Brothers Fund] RBF has given 350.org $800,000 in recent years and almost $2 million to the 1Sky Education Fund, now part of 350.org, according to foundation records.”

      6. Union of Concerned Scientists The 2013 Annual Report PDF UCS thanks the following companies that matched members’ gifts at a level of $1,000 or more….Chevron Corporation…” Annual Report 2002 PDF The Union of Concerned Scientists gratefully acknowledges the following individuals and foundations for their generous contributions of at least $500 during our fiscal year 2002 (October 1, 2001–September 30, 2002)…” Friends of UCS The Friends of UCS provide substantial support for the ongoing work of the organization…Larry Rockefeller…Matching Gift Companies…BP Amoco Matching Gift Program…Philip Morris Companies, Inc…”

      7. University of California, Berkeley CalCAP, Cal Climate Action Partnership What is CalCAP? The Cal Climate Action Partnership (CalCAP) is a collaboration of faculty, administration, staff, and students working to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at UC Berkeley.”

      8. University of California, Berkeley UC Berkeley News – 1 February 2007 BP selects UC Berkeley to lead $500 million energy research consortium with partners Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, University of Illinois.”

      9. Climate Institute About Us The Climate Institute has been in a unique position to inform key decision-makers, heighten international awareness of climate change, and identify practical ways of achieving significant emissions reductions… Donors American Gas Foundation…BP…NASA….PG&E Corporation [natural gas & electricity]…Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Shell Foundation…The Rockefeller Foundation…UNDP, UNEP…”

      10. EcoLiving About …EcoLiving provides events and hands-on workshops to teach Albertans about ways to reduce our collective ecological footprint, create more sustainable.. Sponsors 2008 Sponsors: …ConocoPhillips…Shell 2009 Sponsors: …ConocoPhillips Canada…2013 Sponsors:…Shell FuellingChange…”

      11. Nature Conservancy Climate Change Threats and Impacts Climate change is already beginning to transform life on Earth. Around the globe, seasons are shifting, temperatures are climbing and sea levels are rising…… If we don’t act now, climate change will rapidly alter the lands and waters we all depend upon for survival, leaving our children and grandchildren with a very different world…” [/i]

      List goes on, and I can provide you with more, just ask.

      Hey Pinocchio! Have you seen Pachauri lately? 😀

      Reply

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    If someone has a problem with big oil then stop using it and everything it makes .
    Cave dwellers did and so can the rest of the whiners if they are so offended . Go ahead join the dark side it will help stretch the supply a few minutes longer for those of us less hypocritical .

    Banks, hedge funds, politicians and the scary global warming promoters are the ones to be very leery of .

    Reply

Leave a comment

No Trackbacks.