The relentless war on carbon is justified by the false assumption that global temperature is controlled by human production of two carbon-bearing “Greenhouse Gases”. The scary forecasts of runaway heating are based on complex and circumscribed, carbon-centric, computerised Global Circulation Models built for the UN IPCC. These models omit many significant climate factors and rely heavily on dodgy temperature records and unproven assumptions about two natural trace gases in the atmosphere. 

The models fail to explain Earth’s long history of changing climate and ignore the powerful role of interacting cycles in the solar system which determine how much solar energy is absorbed and reflected by Earth’s atmosphere, clouds and surface. Several ancient societies and some modern mavericks, without help from million dollar computers, recognised that the sun, moon and major planets produce cyclic changes in Earth’s climate.

The IPCC models misread the positive and negative temperature feedbacks from water vapour (the main ‘greenhouse gas’) and their accounting for natural processes in the carbon cycle is based on very incomplete knowledge and numerous unproven assumptions.

Many have suspected that U.S. political intervention in climate science has corrupted the outcome. The new emergence of an old 1995 document from the U.S. State Department to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirms those suspicions, or at least gives the allegation credence enough to ask questions.

It’s troubling that a FOIA lawsuit came up empty – “no such correspondence in our files” – when the old 1995 document was requested from the U.S. State Department late last year. This raises a certain ironic question: If I have a copy of your document, how come you don’t?” 

State’s response is also somewhat unbelievable because the document that fell into my hands showed State’s date-stamp, the signature of a State Department official and the names of persons still living – along with 30 pages of detailed instructions on how to change the IPCC’s science document and the summary for policymakers.

The document itself consists of a three-page cover letter to Sir John Houghton, head of IPCC Working Group I (Science), from Day Mount, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Acting, Environment and Development, United States Department of State, along with the thirty-page instruction set with line-by-line “suggestions,” written by scientist Robert Watson and others.

Faraday is best known as one of the great experimentalists. Although he corresponded lucidly with James Clerk Maxwell, he was notoriously suspicious of the use of mathematics in physics. But in a couple of brief papers, Faraday took on what could be called ‘metaphysics’. The term, which came from a title given to a series of lectures by Aristotle, meant ‘the things that come after physics’ — the things presupposed by physics, but inevitably, the invisible things that could not be measured or tested. Hence, ‘metaphysics’ became metaphysical, a thing disdained by physicists, and perhaps especially disdained by experimentalists like Faraday, and his successors, the students of plasma. So David will ask: what would drive someone like Faraday to metaphysics? What needs to be going on ‘behind the scenes’ to allow for the phenomena of electromagnetism and plasma? Are there any checks on the reasoning about these invisible things? Does the EU engage in metaphysics, and should it?

In a recent 5-part video compilation, Dr. Franklin Anariba, a specialist in electrochemistry, offered his extensive analysis of several papers from the Rosetta mission to Comet 67P. Among the findings Dr. Anariba discussed was the discovery of electric fields and fast moving electrons close to the comet nucleus, and the evidence that electrochemical processes may be responsible for the production of water molecules in the comet’s coma. In January, science news headlines stated that ESA scientists have observed so-called exposed water ice on the comet surface. However, the term exposed water-ice betrays the ongoing assumption that large amounts of ice exist beneath the exterior of the nucleus. We asked Dr. Anariba for his thoughts on this development with the Rosetta mission.

Astrophysicists have outlined what Planet Nine might be like – if indeed it exists.

In January, researchers at Caltech in the US suggested a large, additional planet might be lurking in the icy outer reaches of the Solar System.

Now, a team at the University of Bern in Switzerland has worked out what they say are upper and lower limits on how big, bright and cold it might be.

The study has been accepted by the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.

Prof Mike Brown and Dr Konstantin Batygin made their case for the existence of a ninth planet in our Solar System orbiting far beyond even the dwarf world Pluto.

There are no direct observations of this much bigger object yet, but a search is now underway using the world’s largest telescopes.

Incompatibilities in the DNA of Neanderthals and modern humans may have limited the impact of interbreeding between the two groups.

It’s now widely known that many modern humans carry up to 4{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} Neanderthal DNA.

But a new analysis of the Neanderthal Y chromosome, the package of genes passed down from fathers to sons, shows it is missing from modern populations.

The team found differences in immunity genes on the Neanderthal Y chromosome that could have led to miscarriages.

The results have been published in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

The small amount of DNA in present-day people is the legacy of breeding between the two populations 50,000 years ago – after our species Homo sapiens expanded out of its African homeland and began to colonise Eurasia.

But the new analysis reveals the Neanderthal Y chromosome is distinct from any found in humans today.

The US aerospace company SpaceX has successfully landed a resusable rocket on an ocean platform, after four previous attempts failed.

Mission controllers cheered as the Falcon 9 rocket remained upright on the platform off Florida.

It was returning from delivering an inflatable habitat into space for Nasa.

The inflatable room will attach to the International Space Station (ISS) for a two-year test and become the first such habitat to for humans in orbit.

It is due to reach the ISS around 09:00 GMT on Sunday along with other freight aboard the Dragon capsule.

Built by Nevada company Bigelow Aerospace, the habitat is intended to pave the way towards the use of such rooms for long space trips, including to Mars.

‘Really excited’

[Semi-satirical]
The authorities are ever so concerned about the well- being of our own and future generations. From local, to national governments, and to the UN, i.e. the One-World Government-in-Waiting, they all are doing their utmost to bamboozle us into the belief that they have all the recipes for everyone to be happy—just pay up and follow their advice.

Aren’t you glad to know that at least some occupants of this planet already feel happy, without the UN functionaries’ advice, like the Danes in Denmark?

The Happy Danes

According to the latest “world happiness” poll, the Danes are on top—still. As the “The Parksville Qualicum Beach News” reports, “Danes, once again, take top spot in the world happiness report” and quote “Knud Christensen, a 39-year-old social worker, knows one reason why his compatriots are laid-back—they feel secure in a country with few natural disasters, little corruption and a near absence of drastic events.” His only worries, it seems, is the weather: it could rain, you know.

I saw this quote within a recent email exchange among the Slayers, and although I don’t know the exact paper source, R.W. Wood is well-enough known to just quote him directly:

R.W. Wood:

“The solar rays penetrate the atmosphere, warm the ground which in turn warms the atmosphere by contact and by convection currents.”

Did you know that climate scientists think that the Sun can’t heat the Earth, and that they vehemently disagree with Wood’s conclusion?  Climate science and climate alarmism believes that sunshine is freezing cold, unable to heat the Earth’s surface above -18 °C (-0.4 °F), and by some other climate alarmist accounts, not even above -40 °C (-40 °F)!

How could they make such a grotesque mistake?  How could they not be cognizant of the difference between standing in full sunshine and feeling its significant heat, and standing in the shade?  Are they vampires that only come out at night?  You would almost have to conclude that the core climate alarmists must be vampires who have never stepped into the light of the Sun.  Even if they do faulty mathematics and science, you would think that the empirical sensation of standing in full sunlight would have helped them discover the error in their maths.  Why doesn’t it?

Well, the vampire thing is all well and funny, but the problem truly is one of extremely bad science, terribly bad physics, and sophistical abuse of mathematics.  Do you want to know the mistake they make?  It’s actually really kind of ridiculous…funny, but then immediately not funny when it becomes clear just how stupid it is:

They spread incoming sunlight over the entire surface of the Earth at once…

Think about that for a minute.  Think about what it means.  Think about shade.  Think about where sunlight makes shade on the entire planet Earth.  …Half of the planet Earth is in shade, right?

So if you take the actual incoming sunshine, but then in your maths you spread it out over the entire Earth at once, i.e. twice as much area, what does that do to the power of the sunshine in your maths?  Look at it this way: If you have one scoop of peanut butter meant for one slice of toast, what happens to that scoop of peanut butter when you spread it over two slices of toast?  You better like dry toast!  That’s what happens.  The same is true for sunshine being spread over and into area it does not actually physically go in reality, except instead of “dry” the effect of the maths on paper is to make sunshine cold.  I mean come on – it’s day and night people!

In the graphic below is how they dilute sunshine over the entire surface of the Earth at once.  The accompanying mathematics is taught to students in physics classes throughout the world, and I myself was taught this exact thing in my own first-year of undergraduate university physics education for my B.Sc. degree.

Dictionary.com defines junk science as: “faulty scientific information or research, especially when used to advance special interests.” Junk science is going strong. Many junk science enterprises are deeply embedded in universities, the federal government and the public consciousness.

Some junk science is very bad science that is just wrong and can be easily dismissed. For example, the theories that vaccines cause autism or that power lines cause cancer. Some junk science lacks scientific support but catches the public imagination and is used by special interests to make money. An example is organic food. Organic food is food grown by methods popular prior to 1930.  The theory is that the old ways were somehow more pure and noble than modern methods. This is only carried so far. The shoppers at Whole Foods aren’t wearing homespun clothes. The government has generated regulations defining organic food and thus has bestowed legitimacy on a fad with little scientific basis. Next our representatives may be licensing psychics and promulgating standards for snake oil. If you want to have a laugh, or get some natural herbs to supposedly improve your sex life, browse the quack medicine aisle at any Whole Foods market.

The new film Vaxxed (trailer) highlights one whistleblower, researcher William Thompson, who publicly admitted he and his CDC colleagues lied, cheated, and committed gross fraud in exonerating the MMR vaccine and pretending it had no connection to autism.

Now we have another: Dr. Peter Fletcher. The Daily Mail has the story (3/29/16): “Former [British] science chief: ‘MMR fears coming true’”. 

“A former Government medical officer responsible for deciding whether medicines are safe has accused the Government of ‘utterly inexplicable complacency’ over the MMR triple vaccine for children.”

“Dr Peter Fletcher, who was Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health, said if it is proven that the jab causes autism, ‘the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history’.”

“He added that after agreeing to be an expert witness on drug-safety trials for parents’ lawyers, he had received and studied thousands of documents relating to the case which he believed the public had a right to see.”

 

If you’ve ever used a Hydro Flask, you are probably as enamored with this product as I am.  Hydro Flask makes the claim that their containers will keep your chilled beverage cold for up to 24 hours and your heated beverage warm for 6-12 hours.  By my experience, this is not an exaggeration.  Imagine the pleasure of indulging in 40 ounces of ice cold beer at the end of a six hour hike into desert wilderness.  In fact, don’t imagine it, do it!  So good!

In this paper, I am going to reveal the secret of the Hydro Flask.  In order to do so, I must subject you to a fair bit of science.

To understand what it takes to keep things hot for 6-12 hours compared to keeping things cold for 24 hours requires a basic understanding of thermodynamics.  Sadly, much of this may be new to you.  This knowledge will also serve you well in understanding the natural forces which really do affect our climate.

Heat can only flow in one direction, from warmer to cooler.  It’s never the other way around. To do otherwise would violate the Laws of Thermodynamics. There are four methods by which heat can flow and each method has its own efficiency and hierarchy which is dependent on the environment in which it operates.  These four methods are evaporation/condensation, conduction, convection and radiation.

A joint UK-US-led expedition has got under way to drill into the Chicxulub Crater off the coast of Mexico.

This is the deep scar made in the Earth’s surface 66 million years ago by the asteroid that scientists believe hastened the end of the dinosaurs.

Today, the key parts of the crater are buried beneath 600m of ocean sediment.

But if researchers can access its rocks, they should learn more about the scale of the impact, and the environmental catastrophe that ensued.

Does carbon dioxide have the physical properties of heat trapping/delayed cooling as alleged by climate scientists? Well, according to experiments conducted by experts in the ‘hard’ sciences at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory CO2 just doesn’t do what climate science says it does.

For three decades now academics have been warning governments and scaring the bejesus out of policymakers about the ‘dangerous’ warming properties of CO2 and other ‘greenhouse gases’ if we allow human emissions to build up in the atmosphere.

But in their study Berkeley laboratory test experts Reilly, Arasteh and Rubin revealed something truly remarkable when setting out to apply those assumed properties of carbon dioxide – enshrined in climate change theory – to create better performing insulated double-glazing window manufacture.

What was discovered was that under stringent lab conditions it can be shown that regular air delays/traps heat better than greenhouse gases such as CO2!