Dissent in the climate ranks over Karl’s “pause buster” temperature data tweaking

WUWT
WUWT readers may recall that on June 4th, 2015, WUWT published a scathing criticism of the paper by Karl et al (“Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus”) that purported to erase the pause in the surface temperature record by applying some highly questionable, and apparently desperate  adjustments to SST data. I still stand by this initial critical work of Bob Tisdale and I: NOAA/NCDC’s new ‘pause-buster’ paper: a laughable attempt to create warming by adjusting past data.  .....it seems that other climate scientists on the “proponent” side have taken note of this chicanery.
Andrew Montford writes at Bishop Hill: ...."

NOAA refuses to provide Congress with e-mails on study claiming climate pause never happened

JunkScience
NOAA says the e-mails aren’t important.   .........

"Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology and a prominent congressional skeptic on climate change, issued the subpoenas two weeks ago demanding e-mails and records from U.S. scientists who participated in the study, which undercut a popular argument used by critics who reject the scientific consensus that man-made pollution is behind the planet’s recent warming.
Smith’s document request to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ordered the agency to turn over scientific data as well as internal “communications between or among employees” involved in the study, according to a letter Friday by the House committee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (Tex.).  Johnson accused Smith of “furthering a fishing expedition” by looking for ways to discredit NOAA’s study, which was published in June in the peer-reviewed journal Science."  (Washington Post)

NASA US Data Tampering Has Reversed A Post-1940 Cooling Trend

Real Science
In 1999, NASA’s top climatologists reported that the US was cooling, as greenhouse gases increased. ....That didn’t suit the agenda, so they later tampered with the data to make the cooling disappear. "

New York Times Sliming Their Readers Again

Real Science
Even the most ridiculous estimates of ice loss in Greenland are less than 200 km³ per year. The volume of the ice sheet is 3,000,000 km³. Using the most aggressive claims, it would take 15,000 years for the ice sheet to melt. That accounts for a sea level rise of about one hundredth of an inch per year. Does Coral Davenport think that one inch of sea level rise over the next century is going to drown her?
But the reality is that the surface of Greenland gains about 300 billion tons of ice every year. Greenland is not melting. Ninety percent of the ice sheet gained mass from September 1, 2014 to August 30, 2015.
Claims that the ice sheet is losing 200 km³ / year are based on unreliable gravity calculations made by people with an agenda. Glacial flow to the ocean is controlled by the amount of excess ice building up in the interior. If for some reason the amount of ice building up in the interior decreased, flow would also decrease. The New York Times has been reporting this same hysteria for almost 85 years."

Al Gore and the media were wrong: U.S. Major Hurricane Drought Now One Decade and Counting

WUWT
As of today, October 24th, it has been 3652 days (including leap years) or a decade (10 years) since the US has been hit by a Category 3 or greater hurricane.
The last such hurricane was Wilma on October 24th, 2005. Hurricane Wilma was the most intense tropical cyclone ever recorded in the Atlantic basin. Each day forward will be a new record in this decade long hurricane drought period.  .................But, to listen to Al Gore and the media, you’d think global warming has made more hurricanes hit the U.S. since then. In fact, there has been no Category three or stronger hurricane that has made U.S. landfall in a decade."

Claim: 170F (76c) Heat waves will make Persian Gulf Uninhabitable by 2100

WUWT
A new study claims that, by the end of this century, some cities in the Persian Gulf will be uninhabitable by humans, thanks to extreme temperatures up to 170F (76c).  -
"A number of cities in the Persian Gulf region may be unlivable the end of the century due to global warming if humans do not curb greenhouse gas emissions, according to new research." -
...................
According to Wikipedia, the hottest temperature ever recorded was 57c (134F) in Death Valley, in 1913. 76c (170F) might not seem like much of a leap from 57c, but the cities Doha, Abu Dhabi and Bandar Abbas are all coastal cities which experience substantial Summer rainfall.
Summer rainfall and storms are natural air conditioning. When temperatures soar, evaporation, convection and storm activity remove vast amounts of excess heat from the surface and transport the heat straight up to the edge of space. The heat laden water vapour keeps rising until it condenses – the vapour simply punches straight through the bulk of the world’s greenhouse blanket, soaring into the upper reaches of the troposphere, until it finds a height at which it can dump its vast store of heat."

Top boffin Freeman Dyson on climate change, interstellar travel, fusion, and more

The Register
An Obama supporter who describes himself as "100 per cent Democrat," Dyson says he is disappointed that the President "chose the wrong side." Increasing CO₂ in the atmosphere does more good than harm, he argues, and humanity doesn't face an existential crisis. Climate change, he tells us, "is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?"    ......
Q:
Are climate models getting better? You wrote how they have the most awful fudges, and they only really impress people who don't know about them.
A: "I would say the opposite. What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what's observed and what's predicted have become much stronger. It's clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn't so clear 10 years ago. I can't say if they'll always be wrong, but the observations are improving and so the models are becoming more verifiable."

France’s top weatherman has been suspended from his job for questioning the cult of global warming.

Brietbart

Every night, I present myself to five million French people to talk about the wind, the clouds, the sun. And yet, there are some things of importance, of great importance, that I haven’t been able to tell you, because it is neither the time nor the place.
We are hostage to the planetary scandal of global warming — a war-machine designed to keep us afraid. At its heart, it’s a science manipulated and politicized, of conflict of interest, of corruption, of sexual scandal, then the politics, which serves nothing but their image and their thirst for power.
The media, weakened [or blinded], loses control of itself and engages in censorship due to pressure by shareholders and advertisers.
Oppressive financial interests, a self-serving engine, a new religion, the framework of a new faith…"

Another Smoking Gun Of Temperature Fraud At NASA

Real Science
The US has (by far) the most credible temperature record in the world, so this cooling was devastating to their global warming theory. NASA responded to this challenge as they always do, by tampering with the data and making the cooling disappear."

How a liberal vegan environmentalist made the switch from climate proponent to climate skeptic

WUWT

Recently, a friend challenged those assumptions. At first, I was annoyed, because I thought the science really was settled. As I started to look at the data and read about climate science, I was surprised, then shocked. As I learned more, I changed my mind. I now think there probably is no climate crisis and that the focus on CO2 takes funding and attention from critical environmental problems. I’ll start by making ten short statements that should challenge your assumptions and then back them up with an essay.

1 Weather is not climate. There are no studies showing a conclusive link between global warming and increased frequency or intensity of storms, droughts, floods, cold or heat waves.

2 Natural variation in weather and climate is tremendous. Most of what people call “global warming” is natural.

3 There is tremendous uncertainty as to how the climate really works. Climate models are not yet skillful; predictions are unresolved.

4 New research shows that fluctuations in energy from the sun correlate very strongly with changes in earth’s temperature, at both long and short time scales.

5 CO2 has very little to do with it. All the decarbonization we can do isn’t going to change the climate much.

6 There is no such thing as “carbon pollution.” Carbon dioxide is coming out of your nose right now; it is not a poisonous gas. CO2 concentrations in previous eras have been many times higher than they are today.

7 Sea level will probably continue to rise, naturally and slowly. Researchers have found no link between CO2 and sea level.

8 The Arctic experiences natural variation as well, with some years warmer earlier than others. Polar bear numbers are up, not down. They have more to do with hunting permits than CO2*.

9 No one has shown any damage to reef or marine systems. Additional man-made CO2 will not likely harm oceans, reef systems, or marine life. Fish are mostly threatened by people who eat them.

10 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and others are pursuing a political agenda and a PR campaign, not scientific inquiry. There’s a tremendous amount of trickery going on under the surface*.

Could this possibly be right? Is it heresy, or critical thinking — or both? If I’ve upset or confused you, let me guide you through my journey

You’ll find it at: www.climatecurious.com.

France's top weatherman sparks storm over book questioning climate change

Telegraph
According to Mr Verdier, top climate scientists, who often rely on state funding, have been “manipulated and politicised”. He specifically challenges the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, saying they “blatantly erased” data that went against their overall conclusions, and casts doubt on the accuracy of their climate models."

France’s top TV meteorologist writes skeptic book, gets told not to come to work

JoNova (Australia)
Philippe Verdier is a household name in France where he does the weather on the nightly news on “France 2″. He’s releasing a book “Climat Investigation” being launched right now, outing himself as very much a skeptic, saying top climate scientists “have been “manipulated and politicised”. He decided to write the book because a year ago he was horrified when the French Foreign Minister got all the weather presenters together and urged them to use the term “climate chaos” in their broadcasts."

'This winter will not be normal': Forecasters say El Niño is set to outgrow 1997 event as they warn phenomenon is now too big to fail

Daily Mail

A strong El Nino arrives about once every 20 years.  Ocean temperatures show this one to be the second-strongest since such record keeping began in 1950, said Eric Boldt, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service. That would make it weaker than the El Nino of 1997-98 but stronger than the El Nino of 1982-83. Both of those winters were known in California for relentless rain, strong winds and heavy snow.   .....Ninos can be unpredictable.....The current El Nino weather phenomenon is expected to peak between October and January and could turn into one of the strongest on record, experts from the World Meteorological Organization have warned."

Ex-IPCC Wonk: Carbon Good for the Planet

Guido Fawkes
The Global Warming Policy Foundation have published a report by IPCC delegate Dr Indur Goklany today calling for a “reassessment” of carbon dioxide. It turns out CO2 is delicious plant food that is reducing world hunger…

“Carbon dioxide fertilises plants, and emissions from fossil fuels have already had a hugely beneficial effect on crops, increasing yields by at least 10-15%. This has not only been good for humankind but for the natural world too, because an acre of land that is not used for crops is an acre of land that is left for nature.”

You can read the good news here…

Judges plan to outlaw climate change 'denial’

Christopher Booker, Telegraph

We might think that a semi-secret, international conference of top judges, held in the highest courtroom in Britain, to propose that it should be made illegal for anyone to question the scientific evidence for man-made global warming, was odd enough to be worthy of front-page coverage.

Last week I mentioned that the Prince of Wales had sent a message to this conference calling for the UN’s forthcoming climate meeting in Paris to agree on “a Magna Carta for the Earth”. But only a series of startling posts by a sharp-eyed Canadian blogger, Donna Laframboise (on Nofrakkingconsensus), have alerted us to what a bizarre event this judicial gathering turned out to be (the organisers even refused to give her the names of those who attended).

Including senior judges and lawyers from across the world, the three-day conference on “Climate Change and the Law” was staged in London’s Supreme Court. It was funded, inter alia, by the Supreme Court itself, the UK government and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).

As one of the two UN sponsors of its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, UNEP has been one of the main drivers of alarm over global warming for 40 years. The organiser and chairman of the conference was the Supreme Court judge Lord Carnwath, a fervent believer in man-made climate change, who has worked with the Prince of Wales for more than 20 years, and with UNEP since 2002.
The purpose of this strange get-together was outlined in a keynote speech (visible on YouTube) by Philippe Sands, a QC from Cherie Blair’s Matrix Chambers and professor of law at University College, London. Since it is now unlikely that the world will agree in Paris to a legally binding treaty to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees C from pre-industrial levels, his theme was that it is now time for the courts to step in, to enforce this as worldwide law."

South Carolina Flooding is NOT a 1 in 1,000 Year Event

Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
Unfortunately, there seems to be an trend toward classifying events as “1 in 1,000 years”, when there is no way of knowing such things. This is especially true for floods, where paving of urban and suburban areas causes increasing runoff, making river flooding worse for the same amount of rainfall. This is a big reason why flood events have gotten worse in the last 100 years…it has nothing to do with “climate change”.
For some areas the current flood is no doubt a 1 in 100 year event, or even worse. But remember, it is perfectly normal to have a 1 in 100 year event every year…as long as they occur in different locations.
That’s how weather records work.

Getting Rich off Climate Extremism

National Review

It would seem to go without saying, but: Before accusing myriad individuals and organizations of defrauding the American people, it’s advisable to make sure you are not currently doing the same. With that in mind, meet Jagadish Shukla, professor of climate dynamics at George Mason University. On September 1, Dr. Shukla and 19 other climate scientists sent a letter to President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and White House Office of Science and Technology policy director John Holdren calling for “a RICO investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change,” a (criminally irresponsible) tactic initially proposed by Rhode Island senator Sheldon Whitehouse in a Washington Post op-ed in May. The letter could be found on the website of the Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES) — the “non-profit, tax-exempt research institute” founded and headed by Dr. Shukla.     And then it couldn’t. In late September, the “RICO20” letter vanished from the IGES website; in its place is a message explaining that “the letter was inadvertently posted on this web site [and] has been removed.” (It is still visible here.) The curious disappearance set several people inquiring. It turns out that heading up IGES is nice work if you can get it. The Washington Free Beacon reports that since 2001 the organization has received more than $63 million — 98 percent of its total revenue — from taxpayers, mainly in the form of grants from the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. And an astonishing amount of that money has ended up in Dr. Shukla’s pocket."

Central Europe Sees Cool September…Germany Mean Temperature 0.5°C Colder Than Normal

NoTricksZone
The overall trend for Germany over the past 25 years remains slight cooling. There has not been any statistically meaningful warming since 1990."

India’s Proposed COP21 Climate Plan Will Triple Emissions By 2030

WUWT
Cost
There is, of course, a bill attached to all of this!




Or $166 billion a year!
Summary
I expect this Plan will be lauded by the BBC and the like, but the reality is that India desperately need to increase both its electrical capacity and total energy consumption by large amounts in coming years if its economy is to grow and help reduce poverty levels, not to mention a rapidly expanding population.
Most of this extra power cannot be supplied by inefficient and unreliable renewables, though they do have a role to play in remote rural areas.
Even with mammoth climate aid payments from the West, India’s CO2 emissions will likely treble by 2030. Moreover, there is absolutely no commitment, or for that matter likelihood, that there will be any drop in those emissions after 2030."

Turnbull, Hunt suggest carbon emissions trading could start mid 2016 (Thank Gore and Palmer for the open door)

JoNova (Australia)
Australians have voted against a carbon tax twice. Liberals threw out Turnbull over the introduction of an emissions trading scheme in 2009, yet here he is, barely leader for two weeks and already they are floating a timeframe for the introduction of emissions trading."

Absolute waste? Now Cameron spends foreign aid budget on £6bn global climate change bill

Daily Express
However, climate change sceptics claim there has been no global warming for 18 years.
Critics have asked why Britain is spending more money on tackling climate change abroad when energy-guzzling nations like China are proving reluctant to sign up to carbon-reducing targets.
They also asked whether the £6billion could not also be better spent at home."

Global warming SHOCK: Earth’s natural coolant could be TWICE as powerful as first thought

Daily Express
Dr Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: “Here is more evidence of what we have known for some time: that climate models simply do not mirror the reality of a chaotic system – and that they should never have been trusted in the first place."

RICO20 Letter to President Obama Disappears

Donna Laframboise  (Canada)
I recently discussed a letter, sent earlier this month to the US president and Attorney General, that called for mobster-style police investigations against those who express non-mainstream climate views.
The letter was signed by 20 American academics (since dubbed the RICO20) who are associated with institutions ranging from George Mason University to Columbia to Rutgers. Declaring imperiously that “the world’s response to climate change” is “insufficient,” it alleged that certain corporations and organizations “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
A public copy of that letter has since disappeared. The letter’s apparent organizer, who heads its lists of signatories, is a George Mason professor named Jagadish Shukla. He also happens to be president of the Institute of Global Environment and Society. It was via that institute’s website that this letter was made public."

Jagdish Shukla’s #RICO20 blunder may have opened the ‘largest science scandal in US history’

WUWT
At issue is at least 63.5 million dollars from the National Science Foundation, and where it went, whether it was used for the purpose intended, and who benefited from that money. The problem at hand seems to be that there may have been more than a little “double dipping” going on with that grant money as Steve McIntyre pointed out in Shukla’s Gold: "

Scientist calling for RICO investigation on skeptics is now being investigated himself

JoNova (Australia)
Remember how some climate scientists wanted to give up debating science and potentially jail skeptics instead? These were the 20 “scientists” who reasoned by looking for “tobacco tactics” in opponent’s arguments. They called for a RICO investigation — a the kind of racketeering investigation done on the mafia. I pointed out their team used more “tobacco tactics” against skeptics than anything the skeptics did, but looks like that may have been only the minor part of their projection of their own flaws.
It turns out that the scientist driving the letter, along with his wife and daughter, has made over $5m  above his university salary, and now questions are being raised in Congress about his “double dipping”. The National Science Foundation is very unhappy about scientists who blur the line between their university and their outside consulting, and earn twice for doing the same job. I hear people have been jailed for this sort of thing.
Have a look at how well the leader of the group-of-20 has been doing: meet  Jagadish Shukla, professor of climate dynamics at George Mason University, who must now be wishing he hadn’t called for an investigation."

New Science 1: Pushing the edge of climate research. Back to the new-old way of doing science

JoNova (Australia)
For those of you who are die-hard puzzle solvers here to spar about cutting edge research: good news, here’s where we begin the long awaited update to Dr David Evans’ climate research. There are a few surprises, sacred cows, we did not expect we would need to challenge, like the idea of “forcings”.

Government science is stuck in a rut, strangled – trying to capture the creative genius of discovery and force it through a bureaucratic formula, like it can work to a deadline or be judged by the number of papers, or pages, or citations, or by b-grade officials. Blogs are new, but this form of independent scientific research, done for the thrill of discovery, outside institutions and funded by philanthropists, is the way science was mainly done before WWII."