What is post normal science such as climate science?
(It is proving a hypethesis by counting published papers.)
The following from "Climate Change Now Questioned At German Universities" (No Tricks Zone)
"Many meteorologists say about climate science: "That’s political and has nothing to do with science."
Dr. Kirstein: “Climate change? – That’s political and has nothing to do with normal science, it’s post-normal science.” With post-normal science, politics is at the forefront and science is just a tool to promote and drive “good” policy” by spreading fear and sticking to a dogma. In the early 1980s, “scientists” projected that all trees would die in Europe by 2005. Dr Kirstein then quotes Hans von Storch:
Climate science is not normal. It’s post-normal.
Post-normal science is always for a good cause or a political agenda. The target is to achieve de-industrialiasation – The Green Economy – The Great Transformation. The modus operandi: by spreading fear. Kirstein then quotes Maurice Strong, John Houghton, Stephen Schneider, and explains some of the recent and infamous PR scare campaigns. There’s even a Climate Change Hotel and tourism in Greenland where you can actually “see climate change taking place”.
After viewing Dr Kirstein’s presentation, it is absolutely no wonder that Hal Lewis called “climate science” the greatest fraud he’s ever seen. Dr Rahmstorf, Dr Schellnhuber, your sham is up."
Know your enemies II
Grand Theft Economics how the goyim get gutted.
(Full series starts here.)
Wind Farm Revolts Spread Across Britain
Wind energy is a means to get money from the public purse into investors' accounts with only negative benefit to the taxed and billed, let alone the climate.
Wind Energy: The Truth Blows
by Tony Rose and Michael J. Economides
List of UK Windfarm Action Groups
(Updated 1st November 2010)
Bird and bat kills,
link1(100,000), link2 (9,500), link3 (75,000 - 275,000 birds) link4 (16,000)
From Lubos' ~daily updates
Steven Goddard shows James Hansen's NASA GISS graphs of the temperature change between 2000 and 2009. You see that Central Europe has seen no change while most (larger Western part) of the North America cooled by more than 0.5 °C. The bulk of Alaska even cooled by more than 1 °C in the decade.
Other places on the globe warmed. The places that cooled down and those that warmed up are pretty much balanced. Parts of the Arctic show a "dramatic" warming but it is also one of the least reliable parts of their datasets. Link
Alarmist wikipedia replaced its AGW asshole with two: William Connolley was just replaced by Tony Sidaway and Stephan Schulz
William Connolley, the climate propagandist-in-chief at Wikipedia, has been officially denied the right to edit articles related to the climate for half a year.
I was somewhat skeptical about the results of this gesture but I still tried what it meant. The first action I took was to restore the section about the ClimateGate and the tree reconstructions at the page about Keith Briffa because it's clearly the most important section of that page that actually justifies why Keith Briffa deserves his own Wikipedia entry.
The section was quickly erased by a user called Stephan Schulz. He threatened me with some sanctions if I edited the article again and so did another jerk called Tony Sidaway (a notorious transvestite and scientologist) - on my talk page. This nasty scum never hesitates to spread lies about distinguished scientists - e.g. the NIPCC members - and blackmail everyone who is inconvenient for them. Link
Links to items re the Klaus talk at the Global Warming Policy Foundation
Václav Klaus at the GWPF Inaugural Annual Lecture: quasi-live blogging (Omniclimate, Maurizio)
Klaus: Billions wasted for new technologies (The Times)
Klaus denounces global warming dogma (Prague Daily Monitor)
Climate change is no threat (Reuters)
What is up with this?
Climate change fraud letter - a Martin Luther moment in science history
Reversing the direction of the positive feedback loop
The forthright Dr Judith Curry discusses at length the dilapidated CO2 did it scam.
(In the essay she tells how some in the climate scam clan view her)
- I been duped by big oil and/or right wing think tanks
- I have opened my mind so wide to skeptics that my brains have fallen out
- I’m in the pay of big oil or right wing think tanks
- I’m being blackmailed
- I have become either physically or mentally disabled
Meanwhile another renown female in the fray, Dr Jennifer Marohasy is to debate:
The Future of the Murray Darling Basin
John Williams, Wentworth Group, to debate Jennifer Marohasy, Australian Environment Foundation
Alarmed that public policy on environmental issues is increasingly driven by moral crusading rather than objective science, Jennifer seeks to provide a counterpoint in public debate.
Radio destroys ozone
"Electron precipitation also known as Relativistic Electron Precipitation (REP) disrupts the hydrodynamic equilibrium that the ozone layer depends on for its balance.
This electron precipitation funnels into the polar vortex where it’s effects are indistinguishable from solar proton events which have been known to slash ozone levels up to 70% and repair after about 8 months. Yet where solar proton events are passing, electron precipitation occurs constantly with patterns of variation and cause permanent electron loss. The electron precipitation that is lost to the loss cone of the polar vortex interacts with the lower atmosphere and forms NO2 along with hydrogen ions that form OH, both of which are the most abundant ozone regulators in the atmosphere.
Scientists believed that electron precipitation was ‘natural’ for a decade until the mid 80’s when experiments were done at the HAARP and EISCAT scientific transmitter facilities in Alaska and Norway. These showed that radio waves perturbed areas of the ionosphere causing plasma waves to propagate along magnetic field lines toward the polar regions, where they cause ion outflows and electron precipitation. These studies show a dramatic increase in REP which is now commonplace in ionosphere measurements using VLF transmitters. When the handful of scientific transmitters in the world contribute negligibly to the total amount of Radio Frequencies that are put into the atmosphere from man made sources and all of these experiments have been conducted in the thick of radio pollution that has been nonstop since 1909 when AM stations first came over the airwaves we can not know what ‘natural’ is.
Through further research I learned that specific frequencies known as gyrofrequencies are major players in this process. Of these, the cyclotron frequency at 1.45 MHz (which falls in the AM broadcast band) and cyclotron maser 2.45 GHz drive fluctuations in electron precipitation. Our broadcast regulations are based on receiving quality, not the effects of gyrofrequencies on ozone depletion and ion outflow from the ionosphere. FCC’s allocation of radio frequencies doesn’t take this into consideration at all! The foundations of AM radio that go back 70 years have never changed. The FCC has no idea."
Broadcast Theory Abstract
This report compiles scientific data going back over 30 years and traces the path of energy from the broadcast transmitter to its effects on ozone depletion through electron precipitation. It takes into consideration the most recent studies with the effects that different frequencies have on electron precipitation and combines the physics of this process with historic broadcast and weather records to show how broadcast frequencies may contribute to the global rise in temperature through ozone depletion and the greenhouse effect.
This report will also show how broadcast energy may indirectly cause ozone depletion through solar proton events, as broadcast generates a flow of oxygen ions from the ionosphere that go up magnetic field lines toward the sun. This O+ gas injects into the convective zone of the sun forming sunspots which in turn throw ozone depleting energy back at earth.
Not wishing to comment on FM radio signals causing sunspots, I find some of the claims to be reasonable. Certainly O3 is a major factor in "alarming warming" of the tropospheric air by its control of UV-B. Radio signals interacting with the atmosphere above the stratosphere, reacting as described in the theory play a part in the formation of O3 depleting molecules. However the weight given to the impact caused by radio signals seems a little top heavy.