Nobel Laureate Silenced For His Climate Skepticism
Nobel Laureate (Physics 2022) Dr. John Clauser was to present a seminar on climate models to the IMF on Thursday and now his talk has been summarily cancelled
According to an email he received last evening, the Director of the Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund, Pablo Moreno, had read the flyer for John’s July 25 zoom talk and summarily and immediately canceled the talk.
Technically, it was “postponed.”
Dr. Clauser had previously criticized the awarding of the 2021 Nobel Prize for work in the development of computer models predicting global warming and told President Biden that he disagreed with his climate policies.
Dr. Clauser has developed a climate model that adds a new significant dominant process to existing models.
The process involves the visible light reflected by cumulus clouds that cover, on average, half of the Earth.
Existing models greatly underestimate this cloud feedback, which provides a very powerful, dominant thermostatic control of the Earth’s temperature.
More recently, he addressed the Korea Quantum Conference where he stated, “I don’t believe there is a climate crisis” and expressed his belief that “key processes are exaggerated and misunderstood by approximately 200 times.”
Dr. Clauser, who is recognized as a climate change skeptic, also became a member of the board of directors of the CO2 Coalition last month, an organization that argues that carbon dioxide emissions are beneficial to life on Earth.
See more here co2coalition.org
Header image: Sustainability Awakening
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Saeed Qureshi
| #
Yesterday, I read Dr. Clauser’s blog, “The Crisis of Pseudoscience.”
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-crisis-of-pseudoscience-by-john-f-clauser/?fbclid=IwAR1xwNZkfpHaKJce4SC1o2ZEyMQZd-4Z4cS5LHpbZZmVMtwEgfKiLeYw9mI (July 25, 2023).
Although his blog post is about climate science, it is equally valid for medicines. He describes the current situation as follows:
“Sometimes people will promote new ideas that are off by factors of 1,000,000. They just simply haven’t run the numbers themselves. The most pathetic part of all this is that they don’t know that they need to know how to do that. Their lack of scientific knowledge allows science, pseudoscience, to promote what I will refer to as techno-cons, political opportunistic aims,” – referring them as techno-cons.
Following his blog, some discussions were initiated on FB, including one from me
(1) https://www.facebook.com/saeed.qureshi.5201/posts/pfbid0bgJLJt1Ayc3yydUaHT391jSy2uSofDK8aM2vt7Ee3Bq1kp9Sy6jmFCSt1XWLYHMil
(2) https://www.facebook.com/dekonstructsteve/posts/pfbid02ErSCTPNjcjb8A55VBLL9jYK8eUzvSLcSjZpb125dG4WCEwcJRzD5bUf79Zwj58ADl
(3) https://www.facebook.com/dekonstructsteve/posts/pfbid0cZjjcLV2EnWrZfPJUAu9wRUWC4KPGEve4s1VTdXcyb5miE7a3P1q38fd7io5XktGl
Please consider reading them and share your thoughts on the topic here on PSI and/or FB. Thank you.
Reply
Koen Vogel
| #
I would count this as a “win” for Dr Clauser. By censoring a reputable physicist the IMF are admitting scientific dissent is hurting the power they can bring to bear on governments that do not comply to their climate change “solutions”. As Saeed Qureshi says, it is all depressingly familiar, as they do exactly the same in pressuring governments to accept vaccine “solutions” pushed by the BMGF and WHO over basic nutritional and hygienic improvements to preventable diseases. So who are you going to trust for your science, the scientist who won the Nobel prize for physics last year, or the den of thieves at the IMF?
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
. Hi Saeed, Koen, and others who have read this article,
Maybe you do not consider “The process involves the visible light reflected by cumulus clouds that cover, on average, half of the Earth.” a serious problem. It illustrates (demonstrates) either a lack of attention to detail or total ignorance on the part of its author. And I’m not sure it isn’t the latter.
For in THE FEYNMAN LECTURES ON PYTSICS Richard, another Nobel Prize winning physicist, asked his class: “Why do we ever see the clouds? Where do the clouds come from? Evert body knows it is the condensation of water vapor. But, of course, the water vapor is already in the atmosphere before it condense, so why don’t we see it then?” (Lecture 32, page 9
However, one must have read (32-5 Scattering of light) that he had just taught “That is to say. light which is of higher frequency by, say, by a factor of two, is sixteen times more intensely scattered, which is a sizable differnce. This means that blue light, which has about twice the frequency of the reddish end of the spectrum, is scattered to a far greater extent than the red light. as he begins to consider the scattering of light by the much bigger water droplets of cloud.
And from personal experience is difficult find anyone referring to this could scattering theory which Feynman taught. Hence, visible light REFLECTED by cumulus clouds and NOT SCATTERED.
Have a good day
Reply
Kevin Doyle
| #
Totalitarians must always silence their critics…
Darkness can tolerate no Light.
Reply