The Chosen Who ?

Recently I put a comment on one of Andrew Bolt’s posts to which one reader commented:

Jews have never sought to shove their religious beliefs down society’s throat and make us change our culture to suit them; whereas, Muslims do precisely that, the goal of every devout Muslim being to further the spread of Islam and Sharia. Lumping both Judaism and Islam into the same totalitarian box isn’t right.

Perhaps, but as Gilad Atzmon noted, the Jews stopped proselytising their religion centuries ago (See the The Wandering Who?).

The point is that Judaism and Islam, (and other missionary faiths), are essentially totalitarian in that religion and the secular are combined, where in Christianity the secular and religious are separated.

But if the Muslims are continuing their proselytising, then have the Jews actually stopped? No, not really because their proselytising has morphed into the proxy of socialism because I suspect the religious jews realised that if they were successful in converting the rest of humanity to Judaism, then the distinction between the chosen people, they, and the unchosen, or goyim, as they label us, would disappear. This would seem far too egalitarian an outcome so I wonder if the Jews hit on a more subtle way of spreading the faith without losing their status as the “chosen”? (It should be pointed out that the Jews were not uniquely chosen, and that other cultures also have “chosen elites”, such as the Brahmin sect in India; survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs also consider themselves “chosen”; no doubt other examples could be listed).

Totalitarian systems are those in which the individual is subsumed by the collective in thrall of an authority, in the Jewish case Jehova, or G_d according to the policies defined in the Old Testament and interpreted by the Rabbis, or some abstraction like “the State”, guided by a self appointed social elite. The secular equivalent to Judaism and Islam is thus socialism, so apart from the rhetorical superstructure over the these two religions and their antecedents, is there really that much difference between the two systems?

No, both are in thrall of an abstract authority whose earthly representatives interpret the holy books, be they the Old testament, the Quran, or the Environmental gospel.

So, like it or not, Judaism and Islam are in the same totalitarian box.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Craig Idso’s too hot to handle op-ed (H/T WUWT)

The release of a United Nations (UN) climate change report last week energized various politicians and environmental activists, who issued a new round of calls to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Some of the most fiery language in this regard came from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who called upon Congress to “wake up and do everything in its power to reduce dangerous carbon pollution,” while Secretary of State John Kerry expressed similar sentiments in a State Department release, claiming that “unless we act dramatically and quickly, science tells us our climate and our way of life are literally in jeopardy.”

Really? Is Earth’s climate so fragile that both it and our way of life are in jeopardy because of rising carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions?

In a word, no! The human impact on global climate is small; and any warming that may occur as a result of anthropogenic CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions is likely to have little effect on either Earth’s climate or biosphere, according to the recently-released contrasting report Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts, which was produced by the independent Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

This alternative assessment reviews literally thousands of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles that do not support and often contradict the findings of the UN report. Whether the subject is the effects of warming and rising CO2 on plants, animals, or humans, the UN report invariably highlights the studies and models that paint global warming in the darkest possible hue, ignoring or downplaying those that don’t.

To borrow a telling phrase from their report, the UN sees nothing but “death, injury, and disrupted livelihoods” everywhere it looks—as do Senator Boxer, Secretary Kerry, and others. Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts demonstrates that life on Earth is not suffering from rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels. Citing reams of real-world data, it offers solid scientific evidence that most plants actually flourish when exposed to both higher temperatures and greater CO2 concentrations. In fact, it demonstrates that the planet’s terrestrial biosphere is undergoing a great greening, which is causing deserts to shrink and forests to expand, thereby enlarging and enhancing habitat for wildlife. And much the same story can be told of global warming and atmospheric CO2 enrichment’s impacts on terrestrial animals, aquatic life, and human health.

Why are these research findings and this positive perspective missing from the UN climate reports? Although the UN claims to be unbiased and to have based its assessments on the best available science, such is obviously not the case. And it is most fortunate, therefore, that the NIPCC report provides tangible evidence that the CO2-induced global warming and ocean acidification debate remains unsettled on multiple levels; for there are literally thousands of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles that do not support a catastrophic, or even problematic, view of atmospheric CO2 enrichment.

Unfortunately, climate alarmism has become the modus operandi of the UN assessment reports. This fact is sad, indeed, because in compiling these reports, the UN either was purposely blind to views that ran counter to the materials they utilized, or its authors did not invest the amount of time, energy, and resources needed to fully investigate an issue that has profound significance for all life on Earth. And as a result, the UN has seriously exaggerated many dire conclusions, distorted relevant facts, and omitted or ignored key scientific findings. Yet in spite of these failings, various politicians, governments, and institutions continue to rally around the UN climate reports and to utilize their contentions as justification to legislate reductions in CO2 emissions, such as epitomized by the remarks of Senator Boxer and Secretary Kerry.

Citing only studies that promote climate catastrophism as a basis for such regulation, while ignoring studies that suggest just the opposite, is simply wrong. Citizens of every nation deserve much better scientific scrutiny of this issue by their governments; and they should demand greater accountability from their elected officials as they attempt to provide it.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Unexpected Teleconnections

Another ‘unexpected’ discovery by NASA – more here

For example, says Cora Randall, AIM science team member and Chair of the Dept. of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado, “we have found that the winter air temperature in Indianapolis, Indiana, is well correlated with the frequency of noctilucent clouds over Antarctica.”

Noctilucent clouds, or “NLCs,” are Earth’s highest clouds. They form at the edge of space 83 km above our planet’s polar regions in a layer of the atmosphere called the mesosphere. Seeded by “meteor smoke,” NLCs are made of tiny ice crystals that glow electric blue when sunlight lances through their cloud-tops.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Where is the Missing Heat? It escapes from the earth as cyclones.

Further data on this apparently vexing problem climate science has.

From the Engineering toolbox we have the following specific heats of ice, water and water vapour.

Screen Shot 2014 04 10 at 4 31 54 pm

Notice that water has double the heat capacity of both ice and water-vapour.

Why ?

Gerald H. Pollack explains why in his recent book “The Fourth State of Water”.

Screen Shot 2014 04 10 at 4 25 48 pm

Approximately half the radiant energy goes to where ?????

Screen Shot 2014 04 10 at 4 26 08 pm

Climate science assumes that all the incident radiative energy on water gets transferred to heat.

It doesn’t, only half of it does.

And they wonder where the missing heat is?

Cyclones, hurricanes and typhoons all start in warm oceans, and represent a loss of energy to the system. so where might the energy come from?

Because these weather phenomena are also rotational systems, the most plausible explanation seems to be electric charge loss via Birkeland currents which impart rotational motion.

Posted in Climate, Science, Weather | Tagged , | Leave a comment

An up to date summary of climate change theory

This is really interesting and that’s all I am going to comment on at present.

Update: Ben’s concluding point was on the scientific process – where journals drive scientists to publish papers to generate journal sales, and where MIT software engineers write a program that scours the internet for data etc that seem inter-related, and then having the code produce a scientific paper – gibberish – and then have those papers published in the ‘peer reviewed’ journals.

Hannes Alfven pointed it out last century, paraphrasing him, that we have too many scientists, most of whom are academically mediocre, and who subsequently publish gibberish.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , ,

A significant improvement in the mainstream understanding of weather – the existing paradigm is wrong.

Willis Eschenbach at WUWT has written an excellent summary of his latest research post:

The volcanoes pose a huge problem for the commonly held view that the changes in global average temperature are a linear function of the changes in forcing. The climate models are nothing but a mechanistic implementation of that circumscribed and simplistic hypothesis.

Now, we know for a fact that the solar forcing after Pinatubo underwent a large and fairly lengthy drop … but we don’t find either the amount or the pattern of cooling predicted by the models. Heck, not only that, but the predominate pattern after Pinatubo was warming, not cooling … once again, the only tenable conclusions are:

1) Whatever the volcanoes might be doing, they’re not doing what the model says or what conventional climate theory predicts, and

2) Whatever the volcanoes might be doing, they are not doing enough of it to even rise above the noise.

To me, this is simply more evidence that the underlying climate paradigm, the idea that changes in temperatures are a linear function of changes in forcing, is simply not correct. If it were correct, the eruptions would show it … but they simply don’t.

That’s why I describe myself as a climate heretic rather than a skeptic—I think that the most fundamental paradigm of how the climate works is wrong. The temperature changes are NOT a linear function of forcing changes as conventional climate theory holds.(My bolding)

Exactly – the current climate theory is wrong – it’s not based on thermal uplift and atmosphere chemistry (the CO2 effect) and solar radiation. Earth weather is driven by space weather that is modulated by the sun’s electromagnetic behaviour, of which sunlight is but a small visual effect much like the speedometer of an automobile. The real weather engine, like the automobile’s engine under its bonnet, is hidden from sight – and is the electrical connection as indicated by earlier posts.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

What Defines A Scientist ?

WUWT has posted an interesting topic on what defines a scientist, in response to an article published by USA Today

According to USA Today on April 3rd and repeated on April 4th:

“Keith Baugues is not a scientist, but that didn’t stop him on a recent wintry day from expressing skepticism about global warming — something that is broadly accepted in the scientific community.”

“Baugues studied engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology in Terre Haute and has spent six years at the Department of Environmental Management and nine years with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.” USA Today

A scientist is some who uses the scientific method in which a theory is proposed, an hypothesis put forward to test the theory, and a binary result expected, false or positive. Exploration geologists are probably the most experienced practitioners of the scientific method since their whole professional life involves the continual process of coming up with a theory, the mineral deposit is so and so, at a depth of etc, and the hypothesis to test the theory is then the drill-hole which either yields a yes or no result. After you have drilled a few thousand drill holes testing various theories, you tend to become somewhat proficient in the scientific method, apart from understanding what it means. Good exploration geologists are few and far between, I should add.

But most people who are employed as scientists are not – they are more accurately described as technicians or engineers, highly skilled people who can put into practice scientifically verified theories. These people are not doing science, but are implementing technology that is the spinoff from science. Meteorologists, for example, are not scientists, but highly skilled experts who can apply specific scientific theories in describing the weather. Forecasting or predicting weather isn’t applying the scientific method, for example. Pattern drilling an ore-body to estimate metal reserves isn’t doing science. Designing automobiles or airplanes isn’t science. You should get the idea.

The problem these days is that the political activists have invaded the halls of science, mainly as the result of the world’s governments hiding the unemployed as students in the universities, and this egalitarianism has had some unfortunate consequences, including an explosion of technicians masquerading as scientists, in the belief that by wearing a white or grey lab coat and doing ‘science’, makes one a scientist and hence credentialed to speak authoritatively on some or other issue of the day.

This leads to the USA Today comment that ‘Keith Baugues is not a scientist’ ad hominem and in the rest of the post on WUWT you can read the rest, including the idea of “consensus science” which means that it isn’t science, of course.

What has actually happened is that science has become politicised, hardly surprising given the golden rule, and that the lunatics have gained control of the asylum. And there’s nothing we can do about it.

We are living during interesting times.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment