Climate For All

An All Around Science Blog

Monthly Archives: April 2011

MSNBC promotes Republicans and Climate Change Skeptics as Pathological

Those Damn Pathological Republican Skeptics !

On April 28th, Chris Hayes, the guest host for ‘The Last Word’ on MSNBC, likened  Birthers to Skeptics.

Joining Chris on the show were Chris Mooney, a political journalist for Mother Jones magazine, and Jonathan Kay, a managing editor of Canada’s National Post newspaper, who also wrote a book about conspiracy theorists.

Here is some excerpts from that program:

Mooney: There is a science of why we deny science, right? There are facts about why we can’t accept facts. Basically, it’s a theory called motivated reasoning. What it does is it takes modern neuroscience and shows, you know, how our processes of reasoning are actually driven by emotion. And we make up our minds subconsciously before we are even actually consciously thinking what we think and then we are down a path and we’re already rationalizing.

Hayes: People who are watching this are trusting that I’m not lying to them. And when I read a newspaper or when I read the Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change report from the UN, I trust that the whole thing isn’t a fabricated hoax. So how different is – John, maybe you can answer this. Is there something that delineates conspiracist belief formulations from sort of normal belief formation, with all of its biases, et cetera?

Kay: Yes, there is. And that is the fact that if you take a normal, rational person and you give them contrary evidence to what they believe, they will re-examine their original hypothesis. Whereas if you take a conspiracy theorists and give them contrary information, they will always simple expand the circle of conspirators. So, for instance, in the case of the Birthers, if you way, well, you know, the secretary of health and the governor, they have all said the birth certificate is legitimate, they will simply draw a bigger circle around the conspiracy and say, well, they’re in on it too; the media is in on it too; the justice system is in on it too. It’s a pathological way of thinking, which is utterly different from rational thought. I actually compare it to religion, in the sense that if you’re a committed Christian or a committed Jew or a committed Muslim, it doesn’t matter what your faith is. If someone gives you contrary evidence to your beliefs, you wont simply say, well, I guess I’ll re-examine my religious beliefs. You’ll say I take this on faith. And that’s the way I believe. Conspiracy theories, in many ways, are a religious faith for a secular age.

Later in the show, Hayes asks:

Hayes:  The question is, is Robert Gibbs right that the nature of American public life at this moment makes these problems worse, exacerbates them as opposed to mitigates them?

Kay: I think the big problem is the technology. Because this has always been part of human psychology. The problem is now technology, in particular the media on the Internet, allow people to inhabit their own reality on websites. The conspiracy theorists that I interviewed don’t watch shows like this. They don’t watch the mass media. Typically, they are in their own little self- contained Internet bubble of people who think like they do. So in their mind, they are not outsiders because they are surrounded every day, virtually, by people who think the way they do. This has never existed in American society prior to the Internet. Conspiracy theorists always had to go outside, interact with people, turn on the mass media, read a newspaper eventually, because that’s the only way to get news. And so they were confronted with the fact that they were outsiders. That reality doesn’t exist now. They can go into a custom made reality, inhabited only by people who share their esoteric beliefs. That is new.

Chris goes on and makes the leap here that its Republicans that are pathological:

Mooney:  I think there’s a reality gap between the parties. Republicans and Democrats believe different things about a lot of issues and it turns out Republicans are more likely to wrong. We can talk about that. But one of the factors is, you know, everyone has their own experts now. There’s been a 30, 40-year campaign to build right wing think tanks to fight back against academic experts. And so, you know, everyone can say I’ve got a PhD who thinks this. And for every PhD, there’s an equal and opposite PhD.

Hayes:  In the case of global warming particularly, which is a very, very high-stakes conspiracy theory, that a majority of Republicans out there share – John, what did you learn about how you break – you sort of break this kind of vicious cycle that conspiracists are under?

Kay:We have to teach people that conspiracism is a way of thinking that is pathological, and you have to exercise your mental self-discipline to try to get around it.

So there you have it.

A left wing show, with left wing hosts, questioning left wing supporters, to come to the conclusion that Republicans are pathological.

And in case you just skimmed over the excerpts, let me re-print what Mooney said about Republicans, “Republicans and Democrats believe different things about a lot of issues and it turns out Republicans are more likely to wrong.”

So, Birthers are no different than Skeptics, and they are both pathological Republicans.

Well, there you have the definitive summation of liberal media. Blame the Republicans and case solved.

Is there no end to the insanity.


On The Front Lines of Climate-Gate

Climate-Gate: News From The Front Lines.

While most of Main Stream Media would like to suggest to you that Climategate is behind us, some interesting new articles are making their way on the web.

Environmental shock and awe


Ted Lapkin

It was just a little too convenient. A little bit too self-serving. An internally commissioned investigation into the ‘Climate-gate’ scandal at the University of East Anglia that exonerated the alleged malefactors, despite evidence indicating serious impropriety.

I originally assumed that the whitewash – or should I say greenwash? – of the university’s Climactic Research Unit was the product of simple ideological bias. After all, the chairman of the Scientific Assessment Panel, Lord Ronald Oxburgh, is himself an outspoken global warming activist.

But then the plot thickened…..

Lobbyists who cleared ‘Climategate’ academics funded by taxpayers and the BBC

A shadowy lobby group which pushes the case that global warming is a real threat is being funded by the taxpayer and assisted by the BBC.

By Jason Lewis, Investigations Editor 9:00PM BST 23 Apr 2011

The little-known not-for-profit company works behind the scenes at international conferences to further its aims.

One of its key supporters headed the official investigation into the so-called “Climategate emails”, producing a report which cleared experts of deliberately attempting to skew scientific results to confirm that global warming was a real threat.

Another scientific expert linked to the group came forward to praise a second independent investigation into the Climategate affair which also exonerated researchers.

Set up with the backing of Tony Blair, then the Prime Minister, and run by a group of British MPs and peers the organisation, Globe International, started life as an All Party Group based in the House of Commons.

It is now run as an international climate change lobbying group flying its supporters and experts club class to international summits to push its agenda….

Many have already commented on those websites. So, for those that thought this kind of news would go away, seeing over 300 comments at both of these websites suggests that this far from being a non-story.

To give you an idea why Lord Ronald Oxburgh should never had been on that panel, becomes quite clear when we see the associations with whom partnered with GLOBE, whom Oxburgh is associated with:


  • The Senate & Congress of Mexico
  • The National People’s Congress of China


  • The European Union
  • The Government of the United Kingdom
  • The Government of Japan
  • The Government of Denmark

International Bodies:

  • The World Bank
  • The Global Environment Facility
  • The United Nations Environment Programme


  • The Zennström Philanthropies

It is seeing that makes one believe. How can there have been a unbiased investigation, when the commissioner of that investigation represents financial institutions and governments and himself, that would profit financially from the desired decision he would make from those investigations.

Enjoy !


Why Tamino’s ‘Open Mind’ Isn’t

This is what denial looks like.

Tamino is your garden variety environmental alarmist. His blog sites header says OPEN MIND, but beyond that, you will only find closed doors to reality.
A few days ago I had made yet another adventure to the ‘other side’, and decided to test the waters of reason with an alarmist.
Tamino had written a blog called, “Jerk.”
The opening remark went like this:
“In the last post I showed that not only is CO2 increasing, its growth rate is also increasing. So, the growth rate of CO2 is faster now than it was just a few decades ago. Significantly so.”
Having just posted my own  article on the deceleration of sea levels, despite rising levels of Co2, I thought I would post a comment about his assumption.
My Comment was this:

 ClimateForAll | April 17, 2011 at 2:55 am |

“I hope you are as ‘open-minded’ as such that your blog suggests, because I would like to challenge that theory with a question.
You stated:

‘I showed that not only is CO2 increasing, its growth rate is also increasing. So, the growth rate of CO2 is faster now than it was just a few decades ago. Significantly so.’

Many of the CAGW predictions from noted scientists and panels around the world, have come under attack from many sectors.
Co2 has been used in climate models to explain, rising temperatures, melting sea ice, more hurricanes, and my personal favorite, rising sea levels.
Many environmental impact studies have predicted that as Co2 increases, many coastal areas will be inundated with erosion and flooding, due to rising sea levels.
And MSM continues to quote scientists and environmental talking heads that suggest, ‘it’s worse than we thought,’ because we should expect anywhere from 2-6 feet of rise by centuries end.
On 2-23-11, In the Journal of Coastal Research, Houston & Dean had this to say in their published paper::

Without sea-level acceleration, the 20th-century sea-level trend of 1.7 mm/y would produce a rise of only approximately 0.15 m from 2010 to 2100; therefore, sea-level acceleration is a critical component of projected sea-level rise. To determine this acceleration, we analyze monthly-averaged records for 57 U.S. tide gauges in the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) data base that have lengths of 60–156 years. Least-squares quadratic analysis of each of the 57 records are performed to quantify accelerations, and 25 gauge records having data spanning from 1930 to 2010 are analyzed. In both cases we obtain small average sea-level decelerations.

It is essential that investigations continue to address why this worldwide-temperature increase has not produced acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years, and indeed why global sea level has possibly decelerated for at least the last 80 years.

My question to you is this:

If Co2 rise is ‘faster’, ‘larger’, ‘increasing’ or whatever term you wish to use for the acceleration of CAGW, where is the evidence, in regards to sea level rise?”

Here is his response:

Read more of this post

More On Sea Levels

Sea Level Predictions Revisited

UPDATE #1: A more succinct paper written by Nils-Axel Morner further supports my claim on sea level deceleration can be found in this PDF :

Here is Morners Bio:

Renowned oceanographic expert Nils-Axel Mörner has studied sea level and its effects on coastal areas for some 45 years. Recently retired as director of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, Mörner is past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project.

UPDATE #2: In addition to both Nils-Axel Morner and Houston & Dean, a supporting paper on sea level deceleration comes from Australia:

Is There Evidence Yet of Acceleration in Mean Sea Level Rise around Mainland Australia?
by P. J. Watson

Here is excerpt of that abstract:

“These long records have been converted to relative 20-year moving average water level time series and fitted to second-order polynomial functions to consider trends of acceleration in mean sea level over time. The analysis reveals a consistent trend of weak deceleration at each of these gauge sites throughout Australasia over the period from 1940 to 2000.”

So what we have here is 3 papers, all showing a deceleration of sea levels, in 3 different regions around the globe, an no one is talking about it.

Hence, I will talk about it here.

Since my last post, Sea Level Predictions, I felt it was necessary to key in on some new key points.

Reuters released this ‘alarmist’ article by Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent, entitled:

Rising seas threaten 180 U.S. cities by 2100: study

WASHINGTON | Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:51pm EST

“(Reuters) – Rising seas spurred by climate change could threaten 180 U.S. coastal cities by 2100, a new study says, with Miami, New Orleans and Virginia Beach among those most severely affected.”

Yeah, whatever.

But on the other side of the issue comes a scientific article from the Journal of Coastal Research:

Sea-Level Acceleration Based on U.S. Tide Gauges and Extensions of Previous Global-Gauge Analyses

ABSTRACT HOUSTON, J.R. and DEAN, R.G., 0000. Sea-level acceleration based on U.S. tide gauges and extensions of previous global-gauge analyses. Journal of Coastal Research, 00(0), 000–000. West Palm Beach (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Without sea-level acceleration, the 20th-century sea-level trend of 1.7 mm/y would produce a rise of only approximately 0.15 m from 2010 to 2100; therefore, sea-level acceleration is a critical component of projected sea-level rise. To determine this acceleration, we analyze monthly-averaged records for 57 U.S. tide gauges in the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) data base that have lengths of 60–156 years. Least-squares quadratic analysis of each of the 57 records are performed to quantify accelerations, and 25 gauge records having data spanning from 1930 to 2010 are analyzed. In both cases we obtain small average sea-level decelerations. To compare these results with worldwide data, we extend the analysis of Douglas (1992) by an additional 25 years and analyze revised data of Church and White (2006) from 1930 to 2007 and also obtain small sea-level decelerations similar to those we obtain from U.S. gauge records. ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Global climate change, Sea level rise.

The one statement that stands out is, “…. we obtain small average sea-level decelerations.”

And in their concluding statement, this quote is made:

“It is essential that investigations continue to address why this worldwide-temperature increase has not produced acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years.”

 Read more of this post

Those Pesky Sunspots

Those Pesky Sunspots

Hiding the Decline!

The earliest surviving record of sunspot observations dates from 364 BC, based on comments by a Chinese astrologer named Gan De. But it wasn’t until 1610 that daily observances were being recorded. And yet still, it wasn’t until 1848 that Rudolf Wolf started a systematic  approach to numbering sunspots, for which we now call the ‘Wolf Number’.

Two centuries later, we still count sunspots using that system, but because of technology and politics, how we count sunspots today has become a hot topic. Literally.

Lets begin with this press release from 2006:

Scientists Issue Unprecedented Forecast of Next Sunspot Cycle

Two striking comments are made in the article. The first one is this:

The next sunspot cycle will be 30-50% stronger than the last one and begin as much as a year late, according to a breakthrough forecast using a computer model of solar dynamics developed by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).

The next one is this:

The scientists expect the cycle to begin in late 2007 or early 2008, which is about 6 to 12 months later than a cycle would normally start. Cycle 24 is likely to reach its peak about 2012.”

The next few graphs I want to share are predictions from NOAA. Notice how, over time, the predictions become lower and lower and…. :

Read more of this post

Permafrost – The Cold Hard Facts

Permafrost – The Cold Hard Facts

Permafrost, the ‘frozen soil in a thermal state’, is likely the least studied phenomena in all of the environmental studies to date. After having read a dozen or so peer-reviewed papers, almost in each instance, those papers would include in their introduction or conclusion that more study and grants are needed to fully understand the science.

My purpose for bringing this subject up, is that a AP writer, Dan Joling, wrote a article on Monday, March 28th entitled ,”Warming brings unwelcome change to Alaskan villages.”

Joling, like so many others before him, write about environmental impacts as a result of man-made global warming, without discussing both sides of the story. Facts are rarely used and a single quote or two is made by some noted scientist that warns us that ‘climate change’ is to blame. Joling’s article bares this same resemblance.

The truth is, the town discussed in the article, Kivalina, is a coastal town that suffers from sea wave erosion. The city is currently seeking to relocate because of the erosion and had sued 24 companies in order to relocate. Kivalina cites that greenhouse gases are to blame. Kivalina also claims that a Canadian oil company is responsible for polluting its water source. Currently the suit is under appeal, after having been dismissed.

Neither the subject of sea wave erosion or the class action suits are mentioned in Jolings report, and both of these discoveries could very well contribute to a very different story, if Joling bothered to research the story at all.

Melting permafrost , due to global warming, is only a smoke screen for the real story. Sea wave erosion and soil contamination is more likely the issue, and greed could very well be the motivating factor for the city of Kivalina in order to blame global warming as its cause.

Yet, permafrost and its understanding deserves our attention as more and more stories like this continue to run in the main stream media.

The rest of my post will focus on the facts about permafrost and how some wish to manipulate those facts.

Read more of this post