Friday, November 20, 2015

It's non-stop -- The climate change paradigm received infinite resources, like light from the sun


From the dystopian to the optimistic, from college students to Pulitzer Prize winners, LETTERS TO THE FUTURE--a national effort to encourage people from all walks of life to write six generations into the future about climate change-- generated original reflections on what has been called the greatest challenge facing the planet.
The campaign puts a spotlight on the importance of world leaders agreeing to a global climate treaty in Paris. Dozens of celebrated public figures joined in drafting letters to future generations of their own families, predicting the success or failure of the Paris talks. Hundreds of letters from the public continue to be posted at
LETTERS TO THE FUTURE is a collaborative independent media project will reach more than 20 Million readers in print and online. The project was orchestrated out of the offices of the Sacramento News & Review and sponsored by the Association of Alternative Newsmedia and The Media Consortium.
To date, LETTERS TO THE FUTURE has attracted letters
…From writers across North America
Jane Smiley, Author, Pulitzer Prize Winner
West America was once a beautiful place—not the parched desert landscape that it is now. Where you see abandoned, flooded cities, we saw smooth beaches and easy waves.
T.C. Boyle, Author, Winner of PEN/Faulkner Award, Finalist for the National Book Award
At least you don’t have to worry about abattoirs, piggeries, feed lots, bovine intestinal gases and the like—or, for that matter, the ozone layer, which would have been long gone by the time you started walking on two legs.” (T.C. Boyle wrote his LETTER TO THE FUTURE to… rats.)
Kim Stanley Robinson, Author, Nebula and Hugo Award Winner
Dear Great-Great-Grandchildren, I’ve been worried about you for a long time. But recently I’ve seen signs that we might give you a better result. At this moment the issue is still in doubt. But a good path leading from me to you can be discerned.
…as well as performing artists
Nitanju Bolade Casel, Member of the Grammy Award-Winning Troupe Sweet Honey in the Rock
Please know that there were also visionaries who worked endlessly for positive changes in this world—changes to benefit the many, not just the few; you may have to do the same.
David Harrington, Violinist, Artistic Director, Kronos Quartet
All those who object to the unsurvivable situation humanity faces must mobilize every available resource to circumvent dire shortsightedness.
…To those active in the world of politics
Annie Leonard, Story of Stuff and Exec Director, Greenpeace USA
“Paris … paved the way for an era of unprecedented innovation, as entrepreneurs and academics fine-tuned the best ways to harness the unlimited power of our wind, waves and sun.”
U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, United States Senator from Nevada
You deserve a chance to experience the beautiful world that I grew up in. ... The idea that our actions could jeopardize your future was simply unbearable.
Bill McKibben, Author, Educator and Environmentalist
By the time the great Paris climate conference of 2015 rolled around, many of us were inclined to cynicism.
Sen. Kevin de León, President Pro Tempore, CA State Senate
This fight is larger than me, larger than any industry, state or nation. It’s about you and the future of your family.
For more information, please go to

Wednesday, November 4, 2015

It's true. Canada now has a federal ministry of "climate change"

The Ministry of the Environment, under incoming prime ministry Justin Trudeau, is now renamed Ministry of "Environment and Climate Change" (LINK-media-article).

There you have it. Minister Catherine McKenna (my home riding in Ottawa!) will be in charge of managing climate change for Canada.

Her success will presumably be measured in degrees Celcius? And her training as a lawyer will certainly be of value.


Tuesday, November 3, 2015

It was obvious! The coal will not be left in the ground

By Denis G. Rancourt

In my February 2007 essay "Gobal Warming: Truth or Dare?" I predicted:

"In this world, before renewable sources become the new basis of global economic extortion, oil exploration will be extended to every sensitive ecosystem on the globe and the world’s massive coal reserves will be liquefied and gasified. There are enough coal reserves to keep the wheels of corporate exploitation turning for another 1000 years or so at the present rate."

Today Reuters reported:

"[I]n Asia alone this year power companies are building more than 500 coal-fired plants, with at least a thousand more on planning boards. Coal is not only cheaper than natural gas, it is often available locally and has no heavy import costs."

This occurs as the US is attempting to use carbon panic (global "climate mitigation") as coercion to impede and exploit the emergence of BRICS et al., with the overly enthusiastic collaboration of too many American and European middle-class citizens who irrationally fear a planetary collapse induced by atmospheric CO2.

Related 2015 essay: "Climate Stupidity and Human Survival"

Sunday, October 18, 2015

Should we celebrate CO2? -- Blistering talk by Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore

Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, PhD in ecology, delivers a blistering talk at the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, London, on October 14, 2015.

Full text:

Two excerpts:

[...] And then there is the actual immense pile of filth fed to us more than three times daily by the green-media nexus, a seething cauldron of imminent doom, like we are already condemned to Damnation in Hell and there is little chance of Redemption. I fear for the end of the Enlightenment. I fear an intellectual Gulag with Greenpeace as my prison guards.

[...] A well-documented record of global temperature over the past 65 million years shows that we have been in a major cooling period since the Eocene Thermal Maximum 50 million years ago. The Earth was an average 16C warmer then, with most of the increased warmth at the higher latitudes. The entire planet, including the Arctic and Antarctica were ice-free and the land there was covered in forest.

The ancestors of every species on Earth today survived through what may have been the warmest time in the history of life. It makes one wonder about dire predictions that even a 2C rise in temperature from pre-industrial times would cause mass extinctions and the destruction of civilization. Glaciers began to form in Antarctica 30 million years ago and in the northern hemisphere 3 million years ago. Today, even in this interglacial period of the Pleistocene Ice Age, we are experiencing one of the coldest climates in the Earth’s history. [...]

Monday, September 21, 2015

1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism --Popular Technology list

1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarmism (LINK)


"A tour de force list of scientific papers..."
- Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist

"Wow, the list is pretty impressive ...It's Oreskes done right."
- Luboš Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physicist

"I really appreciate your important effort in compiling the list."
- Willie Soon, Ph.D. Astrophysicist and Geoscientist

"An excellent place to start to take stock of the scientific diversity of positions on AGW."
- Emil A.Røyrvik, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist

"'s a very useful resource. Thanks to the pop tech team."
- Joanne Nova, Author of The Skeptics Handbook

"I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list..."
- John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science

† This resource has been cited over 90 times, including in scholarly peer-reviewed journals.

Friday, September 18, 2015

IPCC authors on the myth of scientific consensus, 2011 summary

Carbon-panic zealots and popular authors vehemently claim that "there is a scientific consensus" and that "the science is settled"; typically, in advancing that the human species itself is at risk.

(These claims are routinely debunked. For example, here, here, here; and on species extinction here.)

Their enthusiasm is of great service to the US Empire that wants to coerce competing independent blocs (BRICS) into accepting carbon instruments that are barely-covert geopolitical instruments.

But here is what major IPCC insiders have said about "consensus" and on the harm of an IPCC structure and culture that imposes consensus in the face of "the range of views" [1]:

5 The issue of consensus

To many, notably including Risbey and Curry in this special issue, the emphasis on consensus is the most troublesome limitation of IPCC assessment processes (for a general critique of the consensus approach to science, see Moore and Beatty 2010). Achieving consensus is, to be clear, one of the major objectives of IPCC activities. Paragraph 10 of the amended Procedures Guiding IPCC Work, for example, states that “In taking decisions, and approving, adopting and accepting reports, the Panel, its Working Groups and any Task Forces shall use all best endeavors to reach consensus” (http://​ipcc.​ch/​pdf/​ipcc-principles/​ipcc-principles.​pdf). The paragraph continues by noting that “for approval, adoption and acceptance of reports, differing views shall be explained and, upon request (by countries participating in the approval plenaries), recorded (in publically available documentation that is maintained by the IPCC Secretariat). Differing views on matters of a scientific, technical or socio-economic nature shall, as appropriate in the context, be represented in the scientific, technical or socio-economic document concerned,” but it is certainly the case that all participants in IPCC assessments would like this to be the exception rather than the rule. To our memory, such documentation has never been required at least so far as SPM’s are concerned.

Drawing the boundaries between consensus and disagreement is an activity which is so subjective that it ipso facto violates restriction #3 (Moore and Beatty 2010). As IPCC, in a search for objectivity in uncertainty assessment, has turned more to describing uncertainty in terms of the characteristics of ensembles of model outcomes, the deficiency in such an approach (its exclusion or limited treatment of systemic, structural uncertainty in models) has become increasingly apparent to the community (Winsberg 2010; Knutti et al. 2008; Goldstein and Rougier 2009). The exercise of subjective judgment in the comparison of ensemble outcomes to observational and paleoclimatic data provides a critically important means to augment the criteria internal to the model world. Indeed, there are examples in IPCC reports of willingness to acknowledge the importance of expert (subjective) judgment, if on a limited basis (e.g., see discussions of climate sensitivity, detection and attribution and climate and weather extremes in WGI report, assessment of response strategies in the WGII report of AR4; see also Knutti and Hegerl (2008) for futher details on the role of expert judgement in estimating climate sensitivity). But more salient is IPCC’s reluctance to fully couple the inevitable process of subjective judgment in a coherent way into its assessments of uncertainty and, absent this coupling, IPCC’s tendency, particularly in SPMs, to resort to emphasizing ensemble means rather than fully describing the range of views. In some cases, neither ranges of views nor are consensus judgments reported, leaving decision makers at a loss. Outstanding examples of the latter include, in addition to the examples of SRES and ice sheets above, authors’ avoidance of any estimates of carbon cycle feedbacks involving tundra or methane hydrate reservoirs; and avoidance of estimations of the degree of implementation of adaptation capacity under particular circumstances. [Emphasis added]

The latter "range of views" is the range admitted via the institutional-self-censorship mechanism of peer-review and citation indices [2][3][4]. It often does not even include these scientific views.


[1] Gary Yohe, Michael Oppenheimer, "Evaluation, characterization, and communication of uncertainty by the intergovernmental panel on climate change—an introductory essay", Article, Climatic Change, October 2011, Volume 108, Issue 4, pp 629-639.

[2] David F. Noble, "Regression on the Left", Climate Guy, May 30, 2007.

[3] Susan Mazur, "Peer Review as Censorship", CounterPunch, February 26, 2010.

[4] Denis G. Rancourt, "Peer-Review Failure in Climate Prof Denis Rancourt", YouTube -- 1000frolly channel, August 23, 2015.

Monday, August 24, 2015

Meet Dr. John Brignell of Number Watch

I just discovered the brilliant work -- on global warming hysteria and medical establishment hype -- of Dr. John Brignell.

Here is the main link to his remarkable Number Watch website:

Here is a small example of his hilarious and effective approach to CO2 panic:

Number Watch website logo

Denis Rancourt on the institutional mechanisms and politics of "peer review" -- video

Source and background links:

Two talks by Dr. Tim Ball -- videos

Two lecture-style talks by Dr. Tim Ball, from 2012 and 2013...