Beyond Mark Steyn V. Michael Mann, Beyond Rebuttals
Last week, Judge Alfred S. Irving Jr. in the Superior Court in Washington DC found in favour of Mark Steyn. On one point
Mark Steyn is one of my heroes in the fight for some integrity in historical temperature reconstructions.
Across at my weblog you can read about his decade-long fight against Michael E. Mann who brought the original defamation case, click here.
One of the main reasons we now have such unaffordable energy in the West is because of fraudulent historical temperature reconstructions – most notably Michael Mann’s infamous hockey stick reworking of the last 1,000 years of European temperature history.
Mark Steyn has repeatedly described it as fraud.
The fraudulent chart/the historical temperature reconstruction featured prominently in the 2001 IPCC report and frightened policy makers into believing we have a climate catastrophe.
Of course, many have been keen to be ‘frightened’ because they have found financial and other advantage in the mandated transition to ostensibly ‘clean’ energy.
It is the little people who are now paying for all of this, including through ridiculously unaffordable energy bills.
At the recent Alliance for Responsible Citizenship conference in London there was much lamenting the consequences of unaffordable energy, by so many polite conservatives who now have real political power.
But these same conservative leaders were in complete denial of the cause and determined not to mention the science – the fraudulent historical temperature reconstructions.
Shame on them.
I’m more convinced than ever that many polite conservatives are now frightened of ‘the science’.
I have been writing for over a decade about the many ways the Australian Bureau of Meteorology corrupt the Australian historical temperature series. Despite so many attempts including by bringing a case against the Bureau through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, we are getting nowhere. At least not yet.
In the end we must move beyond rebuttals, we can’t keep being on the defensive or being ignored.
For sure, integrity in science is not ‘climate change’ is natural or ‘sea levels are rising just not very much’ or even ‘drill baby drill’. There is a real need to be able to anticipate floods and droughts and also to know when and how to protect the natural environment including from pollution.
There is absolutely a need for us to have our own coherent story that explains climate change – beyond that it changes naturally that is not a theory – and a real need to be able to show and explain the more significant trend of global cooling since at least the Holocene High Stand some few thousand years ago when sea levels along the east coast of Australia were up to 2 metres higher than they are today.
Dennis Armstrong wrote to me before my last Zoom meeting that, “We are not aware that there is a current theory of human induced climate change. There are assertions that the burning fossil fuels by humans generates CO2 emissions, which is causing climate warming/change. … it can’t explain climate change past, present and future.”
In my next Zoom, Zoom # 3, following on from interviews with Bill Kininmonth and Ivan Kennedy, I will make the case as follows and with examples:
- There is a current theory of climate change, endorsed by all the key institutions, that has a focus on radiative balance perceived to be perturbed by increasing levels of carbon dioxide.
- The current theory dominates thinking including by scientists who are darlings of conservative politics who often tangle themselves within its strictures.
- The current theory has been disproven over and over, but it doesn’t go away because rebuttals never win.
- The history of science shows that failed scientific theories are only ever replaced, not disproven – to be clear they are only disproven according to the dominant narrative after there is an alternative theory that can be articulated.
I am allowing two hours, with perhaps 30 minutes for my opening remarks and the rest of the time for questions and discussion. I am planning this as three sessions to variously fit in with friends across different time zones:
CALLING LONDON
When: Mar 29, 2025. 11:00 AM LONDON
Register in advance for this meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/AEic7FtGR0-1pprt-EDz8w
CALLING HOUSTON
When: Mar 29, 2025. 03:00 PM Central Time (US and Canada)
Register in advance for this meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tHsbs5CmRYuR4pnrAXiKOg
CALLING HOME
When: Mar 29, 2025. 12:00 PM Brisbane
Register in advance for this meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/8G7Ze9hSRmG4x1MNbVCvvg
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting. File the confirmation email, with links carefully.
I have received various requests for the audio/video of my interviews with Ivan Kennedy and Bill Kininmonth.
I am learning how to edit audio and how to develop this and other interviews, including one I did with Alex Pope, into a podcast series.
So, for everyone who did not attend previous webinars and meetings with Ivan Kennedy and Bill Kininmonth respectively, the information is not lost to you forever, but until I launch my new podcast series that will perhaps be in July or more realistically next year.
See more here jennifermarohasy.com
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.