Global warming science in full meltdown. Influential climate analyst Tony Heller exposes key errors made 115 years ago by the “grandfather” of greenhouse gas theory. The findings, say Heller, make the climate theory of Swedish Chemist Svante Arrhenius “inadmissible” and “junk science.”
Heller’s analysis could have huge implications. US President-elect, Donald Trump, given a populist mandate to dismantle the “hoax” of man-made global warming, is set to target the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) for its wasteful multi-billion dollar climate change boondoggle.
Leading Trump’s EPA transition team is Myron Ebell, the Director of Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). Ebell and Heller are long-time friends championing skepticism of establishment climate alarm.
President-elect Donald Trump’s senior space policy advisor, Bob Walker, recently observed to the Guardian newspaper that NASA has been reduced to “a logistics agency concentrating on space station resupply and politically correct environmental monitoring.”
Instead, “We see NASA in an exploration role, in deep space research.” He added, “Mr. Trump’s decisions will be based upon solid science, not politicized science.”
We should definitely expect a major budgetary realignment of NASA’s annual Earth Science Directorate funding which has increased 50{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} to a current $2 billion under the Obama Administration, compared with $2.8 billion for space exploration. A great place to start serious slashing will be with the ideologically corrupted NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).
The GISS, which inappropriately bears the distinguished name of father of modern rocketry Robert H. Goddard, should definitely not be confused with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, a major national scientific and engineering center.
Instead, this small enclave of temperature data modelers located in a midtown Manhattan office building relies primarily upon sparse surface data (not the far more reliable satellite measurements available since 1979) that is mostly supplied by others.
Check the issuing source the next time you hear media reports claiming that “NASA says that blah, blah year, month, day is hottest in record.” If mentioned at all, you should not be surprised to see that it came from the GISS.
Up until three years ago, the organization’s much-chronicled “top climate scientist” director was James Hansen, a politically protected Civil Service employee-cum-anti-fossil energy activist who was arrested four times for noncompliance with police orders during public demonstrations. On February 13, 2013, he was handcuffed in front of the White House alongside actress Daryl Hannah, Sierra Club founder Adam Werbach, 350.org founder Bill McKibben, former NAACP president Julian Bond, and a few dozen others protesting to block the Keystone XL pipeline.
Hansen first gained national media attention as star witness at then-Sen. Al Gore’s 1988 Committee on Science, Technology, and Space hearings where he famously testified that he was 99{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} certain that temperatures had increased under human-caused greenhouse influence. In 2009, Hansen’s former supervisor John Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works Committee that he had “embarrassed NASA” with his alarming claims which were not supported by scientific evidence.
As Theon noted, “NASA scientist James Hansen has created worldwide frenzy with his dire climate warning, his call for those who dissent against manmade global warming fear, and his claims that he was allegedly muzzled by the Bush Administration despite doing 1,400 on-the-job media interviews!” He added that “climate models are useless” because they “do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit.”
Theon continued, observing, “Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it.”
True to form, in January 2015 the GISS, now headed by climate alarm blogger Gavin Schmidt, rolled out a report that 2014 was the hottest year ever measured. That claim was presumably based upon available records dating back to 1880 . . . nearly a century before accurate global satellite records existed.
Schmidt has since admitted that the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}. Yet when asked by the Daily Mailwhether he regretted that his press release hadn’t mentioned this, they reported that he gave no response.
According to satellite measurements, 2014 (a major El Niño year) was actually the third-warmest in 36 years since satellite measurements have been recorded. John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, argues that any recorded temperature changes since 2001 are “statistically insignificant.”
It is tragic to see the agency that applied solid science to put humans the Moon become publicly identified with and misrepresented by a junk science-premised climate alarm propaganda machine. Nevertheless, in a recent interview posted in The Independent, a British online newspaper, NASA GISS Director Schmidt “warned” President-elect Donald Trump that government scientists are “not going to stand” for any interference with their work.
Asked if he would resign if the Trump Administration adopted an extreme form of “climate change denial,” Schmidt replied that this was “an interesting question,” but one which would not cause him to quit “in or of itself.”
Perhaps we might hope that the Trump Administration will solve Schmidt’s decision quandary by eliminating the GISS altogether. While no one I know denies that natural climate changes, it’s high time for a political climate change that gets NASA back to doing reliable science we can once again trust.
Is there any level on which a climate consensus can be said to exist? Only at the most obvious level, which is that everyone agrees that the climate changes. The realists know that the climate has always changed, drastically over millions of years of alternating Ice Ages and Warm Periods and within a narrower range over the warm last 12,000 years, with such periods as the Minoan Warm Period, the Roman Warming, the Medieval Warm Period, and the present warm period.
The catastrophic man-made global warming alarmists claim that the climate was very stable prior to the Industrial Age, which just happens to have had its start at the end of the Little Ice Age according to the Climate Realists. But, since man became powerful and plentiful with the Industrial Age, the alarmists say that climate change now occurs mostly due to man.
All life forms (on earth) rely on carbon (chemical symbol “C”) for their existence and functioning. From miniscule bacteria to giant sequoia trees, from worms to whales, no life on earth including humans would exist without “carbon” in various combinations with other elements, most notably hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and phosphorus.
Recent news speculate about hypothetical types of biochemistry and extraterrestrial life forms using a “silicon” based system, possibly akin to the Caltech artist’s rendering of such an envisioned life form shown nearby:
It may be difficult to figure out what’s front or back on that but it’s a lovely alien creature, isn’t it?
Researchers say in a new paper published in the journal Science that silicon can be made to bond naturally with carbon, which could open the door for many possibilities, not just with regards to alien life but also for human engineering. They term that process “directed evolution.”
Is the idea of “evolutionary tinkering” based on the claim that “silicon can form long chains of molecules, making it a potential building block for life” realistic or based on false assumptions? In order to evaluate that, one needs to look at the actual chemistry which I will try to explain in brief
How often have we heard that ‘climatechange’ is the greatest threat to mankind! How often have we heard that Global Warming will lead to an unprecedented rise in sea levels! – When what is the truth?
There is absolutely no truth whatsoever in these assertions, made by a coven of corrupt scientists, who have held the whole world in thrall. Not only is the Globe not warming, but we find that the books have been cooked on a truly massive scale.
So massive in fact, that even intelligent Members of Parliament with some scientific knowledge have been fooled. The world at large has been fooled, as witness the bizarre antics at COP22. Did you think that that was a Climate Conference? Think again! It was about nothing but money, and who could screw the most out of the supposedly rich nations.
The discovery of the shape and binding capability of epidermal cells could explain how skin maintains a barrier even when it is shedding.
The authors of the study say their new understanding of how epidermal cells form a barrier may explain the paradox of how we can shed them without compromising our skin’s integrity. It could also help us to understand what happens when it forms incorrectly, which could lead to conditions like psoriasis and eczema.
Humans lose 200,000,000 skin cells every hour. During a 24-hour period, a person loses almost five thousand million skin cells. It has been a challenge for scientists to explain how this colossal shedding process can occur without there being a break in the skin barrier.
Scientists have previously known the epidermis consists of a thick outer barrier of dead epidermal cells, which are constantly shedding. What they’ve known less about is a secondary barrier deeper below the surface in the epidermis that is made up of only a single layer of cells, which forms a much thinner, though no less important, protective barrier.
Now, a team from Keio University in Japan, working with a researcher at Imperial College London, have discovered that the shape of the epidermal cells combined with their ability to temporarily glue together, may explain how they form this strong barrier.
The researchers suggest that a shape of an epidermal cell is actually a flattened version of a tetrakaidecahedron — a 14-sided 3D solid made out of six rectangular and eight hexagonal sides. The authors came to their conclusion after studying skin cells in mouse models using a confocal and two-photon microscopes, and developing mathematical models.
The tetrakaidecahedron shape was first proposed in 1887 by William Thomson (Lord Kelvin), a Scotch-Irish mathematical physicist and engineer. He claimed that the tetrakaidecahedron was the best shape for packing equal-sized objects together to fill space with minimal surface area.
The team in today’s study say the epidermal cells’ unique tetrakaidecahedron-like geometry means that it can always form a very tight, cohesive bond with the epidermal cells surrounding it. This is because the mix of rectangular and hexagonal sides enables the cell to always be tightly connected to the cells surrounding it.
The team also discovered that these cells manufacture proteins, which act as a temporary glue that binds the cells together in what are called ‘tight junctions’. The combination of the cells’ geometry and tight junction formation means that the skin barrier can maintain its integrity even though it is very thin.
When new cells underneath form the new tight junctions, this pushes the older cells upwards towards the surface of the skin, and the older cells lose their tight junctions. In this way, the tight junction barrier in the cell sheet is always maintained.
The team suggest that ‘malfunctions’ in the production of the tight junctions may be a contributing factor that explains why some people have conditions such as eczema, where the skin barrier is weakened, which leads to bacterial infiltration, inflammation, scratching and further infection. In other cases, fails in the interlocking barrier between cells — the tight junctions — may partly explain why in psoriasis there is an overproduction of epidermal cells, causing thick patches of skin on the surface.
Dr Reiko Tanaka, one of the study’s authors from the Department of Bioengineering at Imperial College London, said: “It is amazing to think that an abstract concept for a shape devised by the mathematician Lord Kelvin over a century ago may be an important shape in nature, helping our skin to maintain its effectiveness as barrier.
“Our study is also helping us to see how the cells that make up our skin can switch on a mechanism to make a kind of glue, which binds the cells together, ensuring that our skin maintains its integrity.
“Our skin is the largest organ in our body and it is vital that we completely understand how it works, so when it doesn’t work as it should, such as in eczema or psoriasis, we can understand the mechanisms that might be causing the problems.”
The study is published in the journal eLIFE.
The next steps will see the team analysing how skin thickness is determined and how the balance between cell growth and cell shedding is maintained. Faults in this process can lead to a thickening of the skin, leading to conditions like psoriasis. The team will also determine why skin thins as we get older, providing new insights into aging, or when it thins because special treatments like steroids are administered to treat eczema.
Story Source:
Materials provided by Imperial College London. Original written by Colin Smith. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Journal Reference:
Mariko Yokouchi, Toru Atsugi, Mark van Logtestijn, Reiko J Tanaka, Mayumi Kajimura, Makoto Suematsu, Mikio Furuse, Masayuki Amagai, Akiharu Kubo. Epidermal cell turnover across tight junctions based on Kelvin’s tetrakaidecahedron cell shape. eLife, 2016; 5 DOI: 10.7554/eLife.19593
“We estimate that the warming slowdown (< 0.1 K/decade trend beginning in 1998) could persist, due to internal variability cooling, through 2020, 2025 or 2030 with probabilities 16{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}, 11{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}, and 6{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}, respectively.” – Knutson et al.
A new paper by Tom Knutson, Rong Zhang and Larry Horowitz of NOAA GFDL has just been published in Nature Communications [link to full manuscript]. The authors take a well-balanced approach to seeking possible explanations for global mean surface temperature (GMST) increasing at a much lower rate from around the turn of the century than over the late 20th century, and consider the possibility that it may continue for some time.
There is no empirical evidence of man-made Global Warming whatsoever. There never has been and there never will be. Oh yes! There is a theory and plenty of scientists have an ‘opinion’ on the matter. But opinion is not science. A great number of apparatchiks also ‘believe’ that the Globe is getting hotter and hotter and indeed only today I read in the BBC Science section that we are near to reaching that famous tipping point. But belief is not science either.
Of course the Globe warms every day and cools every night. The weather likewise changes every day and the seasons are rotating all the time. The temperature is different in different places all over the globe – watch the Meteo on EuroNews or watch CNN or the BBC. They all show magnificently the different and ever-changing temperatures throughout the world. That is empirical. Those temperatures are taken by thermometers at some 5ft above the ground.
If a burst pipe in your house is flooding your basement, you’re probably going to be more worried about that than the couple termites you previously spotted. But multiply those termites times a thousand and suddenly the bigger threat to your house might be, well, the little things.
The same holds true for science. Science fraud draws urgent attention whenever it comes to light, the equivalent of a busted pipe emergency. But it turns out, most scientists think it’s a far lesser threat to their field than the small, but legion, instances of under-reporting of negative findings and scientists’ use of shoddy methodology.
And — although it may be surprising coming from two people who run a blog that often focuses on scientific misconduct — we agree.
We have today one of the most astonishing examples of a regression in scientific education. It used to be common knowledge and taught in schools at all levels that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a vital, airborne plant food, but it is currently being condemned as being a “pollutant” because many people have come to believe, due to a massive disinformation campaign, that higher levels of this plant food would be harmful to the biosphere. So pervasive, so effective is this ongoing disinformation campaign that it is now considered by many to be a moral imperative for humanity to abandon the use of its primary source of energy—burning hydrocarbons—because doing so produces CO2.
Let me say that again. So pervasive, so effective has been the campaign that has demonized CO2—the gas that feeds the biosphere—that it is now generally accepted that humanity has a moral obligation to limit its production of it, even if doing so would cause a profound regression in global economic development! They say that they have “science” on their side but do they? Let’s review what science “knows” and what it doesn’t.
Winter is coming. Or at least that’s what weather forecasters are predicting for the second week of December.
Dr. Ryan Maue, meteorologist with WeatherBell Analytics, posted a weather forecast showing “extreme cold” building in Alaska that’s going to swing southeast in the coming days and bring freezing weather to the lower 48 states. While the cold won’t necessarily be record-breaking, it will surely bring some record lows and maybe even some snow. Maue said “that over 75{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of the USA will be below freezing for overnight lows on December 8th” based on forecasts.
[December 2 2016] Forget the swimsuits for Hawaii and pack raincoats and winter parkas.
The National Weather Service just issued a winter-storm warning until 6 p.m. Saturday local time, with heavy, flooding rainfall across the chain of Pacific islands and up to 30 inches of snow on the peaks of the Big Island.
Drifting snow, freezing fog and gusting wind are forecast for the summits of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa volcanoes above 11,000 feet. Visibility could be less than a quarter-mile, making driving and hiking dangerous.
Scientists have taken spectroscopic snapshots of nature’s most mysterious relay race: the passage of extra protons from one water molecule to another during conductivity.
The finding represents a major benchmark in our knowledge of how water conducts a positive electrical charge, which is a fundamental mechanism found in biology and chemistry. The researchers, led by Yale chemistry professor Mark Johnson, report their discovery in the Dec. 1 edition of the journal Science.
For more than 200 years, scientists have speculated about the specific forces at work when electricity passes through water — a process known as the Grotthuss mechanism. It occurs in vision, for example, when light hits the eye’s retina. It also turns up in the way fuel cells operate.
But the details have remained murky. In particular, scientists have sought an experimental way to follow the structural changes in the web of interconnected water molecules when an extra proton is transferred from one oxygen atom to another.
“The oxygen atoms don’t need to move much at all,” Johnson said. “It is kind of like Newton’s cradle, the child’s toy with a line of steel balls, each one suspended by a string. If you lift one ball so that it strikes the line, only the end ball moves away, leaving the others unperturbed.”
Johnson’s lab has spent years exploring the chemistry of water at the molecular level. Often, this is done with specially designed instruments built at Yale. Among the lab’s many discoveries are innovative uses of electrospray ionization, which was developed by the late Yale Nobel laureate John Fenn.
Johnson and his team have developed ways to fast-freeze the chemical process so that transient structures can be isolated, revealing the contorted arrangements of atoms during a reaction. The practical uses for these methods range from the optimization of alternative energy technologies to the development of pharmaceuticals.
In the case of the proton relay race, previous attempts to capture the process hinged on using infrared color changes to see it. But the result always came out looking like a blurry photograph.
“In fact, it appeared that this blurring would be too severe to ever allow a compelling connection between color and structure,” Johnson said.
The answer, he found, was to work with only a few molecules of “heavy water” — water made of the deuterium isotope of hydrogen — and chill them to almost absolute zero. Suddenly, the images of the proton in motion were dramatically sharper.
“In essence, we uncovered a kind of Rosetta Stone that reveals the structural information encoded in color,” Johnson said. “We were able to reveal a sequence of concerted deformations, like the frames of a movie.” Johnson’s lab was assisted by the experimental group of Knut Asmis at the University of Leipzig and the theory groups of Ken Jordan of the University of Pittsburgh and Anne McCoy of the University of Washington.
One area where this information will be useful is in understanding chemical processes that occur at the surface of water, Johnson noted. There is active debate among scientists regarding whether the surface of water is more or less acidic than the bulk of water. At present, there is no way to measure the surface pH of water.
The paper’s first author is Conrad Wolke, a former Yale doctoral student in Johnson’s lab. Co-authors of the paper are from the University of Chicago, Ohio State University, the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Washington, the University of Leipzig, and the Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society.
Financial support for the research came from the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, the Ohio Supercomputing Center, and the Collaborative Research Center of the German Research Foundation DFG.
Story Source:
Materials provided by Yale University. Original written by Jim Shelton. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
“The bast place to hide something is right out in the open.”
[editor note: sarcasm throughout] Some of you may be aware that there is a major revolution happening in science right now, where the public is slowly being leaked information by whistle-blowers from NASA about the true shape of the Earth. We have been being lied to by the intellectual elite and the Freemasons for centuries, all as a ploy by the Illuminati to hijack our reality and create a simulacrum in which the Catholic Church and the Pope gain almost full control over our minds. If we believe that the Earth is a round ball in space then we will believe it to be possible that aliens can come visit us, and this is all in preparation for the false flag alien invasion that the Money Masters are planning for us with HAARP and Project Blue Beamin order to implement the New World Order with the Antichrist at its head with all humans enslaved to the new Satanic World Religion.
One of the most cherished misunderstandings, if not delusions, of the social engineer – the individual who would presume to attempt to remake society through conscious and planned design – is the confident belief that he (and those like him) can ever know enough to successfully remold mankind and human institutions.
An appreciation of how limited is our individual knowledge and abilities to intentionally try make a “better world” through government regulation, control and central planning has been slow in fully developing, and still eludes too many among what is sometimes referred to as the “intellectual class” who influence and often seem to direct the social policy discourse in the modern world.
