Princeton University physicist William Happer is not a fan of models used to predict future manmade global warming, and stars in a new educational video laying out the reasons he believes climate models are faulty.

“And I know they don’t work. They haven’t worked in the past. They don’t work now. And it’s hard to imagine when, if ever, they’ll work in the foreseeable future,” Happer said in a video produced by PragerU.

In the old Soviet Union, science was subverted to promote failed socialist policies. The results were disastrous to both Russian society and to Russian science itself.

Everything scientists did was for the advancement of the state, meaning the dictators. Individual scientists were imprisoned under torturous conditions, even murdered, if their science did not comport with official propaganda.

Of course, in the end, the USSR collapsed. Incredibly, the same failed trend toward politicizing science has resurfaced right here in the United States.

Cosmic rays from supernovae can influence Earth’s cloud cover and thereby climate according to new research from a team from Denmark.

The study reveals how atmospheric ions, produced by the energetic cosmic rays raining down through the atmosphere, helps the growth and formation of cloud condensation nuclei – the seeds necessary for forming clouds in the atmosphere. When the ionization in the atmosphere changes, the number of cloud condensation nuclei changes, affecting the properties of clouds.

We will enter a new dark age of unreason if universities are afraid of debate. –– John Roskam, Institute of Public Affairs, 1 February 2018

Most disappointing of all is the way that science – especially the leaders of the world’s science academies – have joined the climate campaign, not just demonizing those who say they are not convinced we face catastrophe, but turning a blind eye to the distortion and corruption of the scientific process itself. –Matt Ridley, Global Warming Policy Foundation, November 2015

Science Matters features a monthly update on ocean SST averages from HadSST3 (latest is Oceans Cool Off Previous Three Years). Graeme added this comment:
I came across this today (link here). Can you comment on why your studies seem to show the reverse! Regards, Graeme Weber

While thinking about a concise, yet complete response, I put together this post. This is how I see it, to the best of my knowledge (emphasis added):

Among the long-standing ‘proofs’ of Einstein’s relativity is the alleged time dilation effect that muons created during cosmic ray collisions with particles in our upper atmosphere experience as they plummet downward at nearly the speed of light.

That is, an unexpectedly large number reach sea level despite the very short half-time for decay, as allegedly ‘proven’ by Frisch and Smith in 1963.  Alternate, non-relativistic explanations have been offered, including the one I examine here – the possibility that the muons are created by cosmic ray collisions with particles throughout our atmosphere, not just at a single altitude.

Over the past months, a spate of scientific papers published shows sea level rise has not accelerated like many climate warming scientists warned earlier. The reality is that the rise is far slower than expected, read here and here.

Scary scenarios abound

The latest findings glaringly contradict alarmist claims of accelerating sea level rise. For example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) here wrote sea levels would “likely rise for many centuries at rates higher than that of the current century”, due to global warming.

The onset of La Niña in the tropical Pacific Ocean has caused temperatures to drop to levels not seen in six years, according to satellite temperature data.

“Note that La Niña cooling in the tropics has finally penetrated the troposphere, with a -0.12 deg. C departure from average,” wrote atmospheric scientists John Christy and Roy Spencer, who compile satellite data at the University of Alabama, Huntsville.

Faced with toxic fluorides destroying food crops, animal and human life, and with law suits piling up, atomic scientists decided they could distract the nation by promoting fluorides as a beneficial tooth treatment.

Occasionally, I reprint this article. I wrote it some years ago, during research on toxic chemicals pervading the landscape. I used to send the piece to mainstream reporters, but I eventually gave that up as a bad bet.

They’re dedicated to fake news…and now they’re losing control over public consciousness. Losing badly. Independent media are in the ascendance, and rightly so.

Everything is either heating up or cooling down. This is just simple observation.  It is a law. Anybody can verify this for themselves quite easily by watching a bonfire. Heat is generated by combustion inter alia, and what is hot rises up and cools down.

If any climate scientist says otherwise you know he is a fraud. You know very well also that if he says heat is trapped he is not only a fraud but is after government funding.

Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt today here are asking how sea level rise is doing because as have not heard much about it lately. A good place to start is at Climate4You.

Strangely the data go only until December 2016. And if you look at the data from the source form the University of Colorado, we find the same. So what’s with 2017?

Dear Cousin Punxsutawney Phil,

Cordial thanks for your response to my letter of last year to our Aunt Climate. I think you were right on target and our great aunt has listened to our gripes. Of course, she’s not alone; as you know the U.S. President, in his speech on the State of the Union, a couple of nights ago, did not even mention “climate change” once. Presumably, he had read the letter too and him and aunty agreed to finally boost the production of that formerly claimed “evil-extraordinaire,” the trace gas carbon dioxide, also known as CO2 in the atmosphere.

Injecting minute amounts of two immune-stimulating agents directly into solid tumors in mice can eliminate all traces of cancer in the animals, including distant, untreated metastases, according to a study by researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine.

The researchers believe the local application of very small amounts of the agents could serve as a rapid and relatively inexpensive cancer therapy that is unlikely to cause the adverse side effects often seen with bodywide immune stimulation.