Monthly Archives: October 2011

New Satellite Data Contradicts Carbon Dioxide Climate Theory

Industrialized nations emit far less carbon dioxide than the Third World, according to latest evidence from Japan's Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA).

 Global warming alarmism is turned on its head and the supposed role of carbon dioxide in climate change may be wrong, if the latest evidence from Japan's scientists is to be believed.

Japanese national broadcaster, NHK World broke the astonishing story on their main Sunday evening news bulletin (October 30, 2011). Television viewers learned that the country's groundbreaking IBUKI satellite, launched in June 2009, appears to have scorched an indelible hole in conventional global warming theory.

Standing in front of a telling array of colorful graphs, sober-suited Yasuhiro Sasano, Director of Japan's National Institute for Environmental Studies told viewers, "The [IBUKI satellite] map is to help us discover how much each region needs to reduce CO2 [carbon dioxide] emissions."

 Industrialized Nations World's Lowest CO2 'Polluters'

 Indeed, the map at which JAXA spokesman Sasano was pointing been expected by most experts to show that western nations are to blame for substantial increases in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, causing global warming. But to an officious looking TV interviewer Sasano turned greenhouse gas theory on it's head.

 According to UN science the greenhouse gas theory says more CO2 entering the atmosphere will warm the planet, while less CO2 is associated with cooling.

 Gesturing to an indelible deep green hue streaked across the United States and Europe viewers were told, "in the high latitudes of the Northern hemisphere emissions were less than absorption levels."

Sasano proceeded to explain the color-coding system of the iconic maps showing where regions were either absorbing or emitting the trace atmospheric gas. Regions were alternately colored red (for high CO2 emission), white (low or neutral CO2 emissions) and green (no emissions: CO2 absorbers).

Bizarrely, the IBUKI maps prove exactly the opposite of all conventional expectations revealing that the least industrialized regions are the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases on the planet.

Yes, you read that correctly: the U.S. and western European nations are areas where CO2 levels are lowest. This new evidence defies the consensus view promoted by mainstream newspapers, such as the New York Times.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had long claimed that, "there is a consensus among scientists that manmade emissions of greenhouse gases, notably carbon dioxide (CO2), are harming global climate."

The Japanese satellite map shows regions colored the deepest leaf green (net absorbers of CO2) being predominantly those developed nations of Europe and North America; thus indicating built up environments absorbed more CO2 than they emitted into the atmosphere.

By contrast the bulk of the regions colored red (so-called 'carbon polluters') were in undeveloped, densely forested equatorial regions of Africa and South America.

Huge Headache for Climate Policymakers

JAXA boasts that, "we can reduce the error of the estimated values when we introduce IBUKI's observation data compared to that of the values calculated in a conventional way based on ground observation data."

 To all policymakers who study the Japanese maps it is apparent that the areas of greatest CO2 emissions are those regions with least human development and most natural vegetation: Equatorial Third World nations.

The Japanese evidence also disproves the often-cited hypothesis that Siberia and other areas of northern Russia were natural vents for large scale CO2 outgassing, exacerbating global warming fears.

 In effect, this compelling new data appears to show that the ashphalt and concreted industrial nations are 'mopping up' carbon dioxide faster than their manufacturers and consumers can emit it. If this is confirmed, it means a cornerstone of man-made global warming may be in serious doubt.

Can Western Nations Still Proceed with Carbon Taxes?

But now that these so-called "global warming gases" have been precisely measured across the planet the quandary for international policymakers is what to do about plans to further implement international targets for CO2 reduction.

 World leaders are getting set to face the latest round of UN climate change talks in Durban next month and must discuss a replacement for the soon to expire Kyoto Protocol, which binds nations to limited CO2 emissions.

The dilemma is whether the established UN global warming policy of the 'polluter pays' can any longer be sensibly upheld. Conventional political thinking at previous UN climate conferences was to 'offset' carbon emissions by making the worst polluters pay higher 'carbon taxes.'

 But that theory now appears to be rendered redundant being that western economies, believed to be the worst offenders, are in fact, contributing either negligible or no measurable CO2 emissions whatsoever.

Indeed, the IBUKI data indicates that the areas of highest CO2 emissions are precisely those regions with most vegetation and least industry and thus less able to pay.

 Thus, the unthinkable could be made real: the greenhouse gas theory of climate change may collapse in the face of empirical evidence that industrialization is shown to have no link to global warming.

 For more information the IBUKI achievement is published in the Scientific Online Letters on the Atmosphere (an online thesis magazine) issued by the Meteorological Society of Japan.

Sources:

JAXA, Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, Greenhouse Gas Observation Satellite 'IBUKI' (GOSAT), accessed online: October 30, 2011.

Gillis, J.,'Study Affirms Consensus on Climate Change,' New York Times, (nytimes.com: accessed online: October 30, 2011)

 

Copyright. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

8 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Michael ‘Climategate’ Mann Suffers Three Legal Blows in Court Escapade

Discredited global warming scientist, Michael Mann, sees his last-ditch efforts to hide data fall apart as legal experts reveal a mountain of legal precedents against him.

In his recent court papers (filed on September 2, 2011) Mann claims ‘academic freedom’ and ‘proprietary materials’ as his defense. But legal experts who have since reviewed Mann’s submission to the Circuit Court of Prince William County, Va., say they are so full of holes they are doomed to fail.
 
In this article we show why the Virginia court isn’t likely to give Michael Mann a ‘get out of jail free’ card when it comes to covering up what looks increasingly like a monumental climate conspiracy.
 
Mann has been under fire since a U.S. Congressional investigation in 2007 affirmed grave flaws in his controversial ‘hockey stick’ graph’ that was trumpeted as the key evidence of unprecedented human-influenced global warming. Mann has spurned all requests to submit his data to independent expert analysis.
 
The three facts likely to be fatal to Mann’s case are:

 
1.)    Of more than 240 reported cases involving professor-v-university disputes the university almost always wins (note: Mann’s former university employer has already agreed to surrender Mann’s files).

2.)    Freedom of speech for professors at state universities has been restricted in a series of U.S. Supreme Court case rulings since 1977.

3.)    No American court has ever ruled to protect a former employee (Mann is no longer employed in Virginia).

Doomsayer’s Defeat Looms in Hockey Stick Face Off

 
The match summary so far: Professor Mann played ‘home ice’ advantage last year when three friendly ‘independent’ inquiries gave him temporary respite when they cleared him of foul play. But none had examined Mann’s hidden data.
 
Mann has been skating on thin ice ever since November 2009 when he and a clique of global warming colleagues were caught personal fouling freedom of information (FOIA) requests in the Climategate scandal.
 
Leaked emails proved global warming climatologists had been getting away with cynically hiding unfavorable key data concerning past global temperature proxies for years.
 
But late in the game (May 2011) Mann’s former employer, the University of Virginia (UVa) agreed to comply with a court order to submit all such data as per a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request. The university was given 90 days to release from their computer files allegedly dodgy data kept hidden for over a decade.
 
Then, deep into overtime (September 2, 2011), Mann flew off the bench with a blocking defense asserting ‘academic freedom’ plus his ‘private ownership’ of such data which he claims trumps the FOIA rights of taxpayers.
 

Academic Freedom: A Quasi-legal Concept

However, with a hard-hitting tackle on Mann’s claims comes a leading authority on education law, Ronald B. Standler. His research shows that academic freedom has been nothing but an amorphous quasi-legal concept since it first appeared in American courts in the late 1950’s. [1.]
 
Courts have consistently upheld that the fundamental principle in America is that the law applies equally to everyone. A mountain of U.S. case law shows that academic freedom is nothing more than any citizen’s right to free speech on issues including: (i.) political free speech (ii.) freedom of association and (iii.) religious expression [2.]
 
For any arrogant academic to claim that their occupational group should have greater rights than any other occupational group is, by definition, discriminatory.
Standler’s reasoning is a telling assist to the climate skeptics’ legal playmaker, Chris Horner of ATI who now looks set be the attorney who scores the courtroom winner.
 
First Amendment Free Speech Extols Openness Not Censorship
 
The case boils down to a personal interest versus public interest question: are voters more entitled to see all the scientific evidence that their taxes paid for so that they may knowledgably apply their free speech in the debate over so-called man-made climate change?
 
The real perversity in Mann’s legal position is that he argues for free speech in reverse – he wants courts to keep key data hidden and thus chill debate over the climate controversy and not let voters be properly informed.
 
In his court papers Professor Mann argues for censorship to suit him. He is seeking a NEGATIVE application of a POSITIVE right. Indeed, it may be shown that Mann’s application of his ‘right’ is as a tool to aid and abet a cover up of misconduct and/or fraud.
 
But in no small part, academics in a democracy have a moral imperative to not undermine openness and transparency for all. Professors should never abuse their position by claiming any special personal privilege to facilitate censorship and contradict freedom of information laws.
 
Along the theme of skewed reasoning, Mann’s attorneys disingenuously cite Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234 (1957), being that the ‘Sweezy’ case addressed freedom of association rather than free speech. And when we examine ‘Sweezy’ this is what we find:

“Teachers and STUDENTS [my emphasis] must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate, to gain new maturity and understanding; otherwise our civilization will stagnate and die.”

Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234, 250 (1957).
 
Mann may now wish he hadn’t cited ‘Sweezy.’ That case was specifically about freedom of association; upholding the interests of the community in the cause of open debate and free speech such that we can all be better informed to make democratic decisions on a contentious public policy (e.g. climate taxes).
 
Mann’s ‘hockey stick’ graph has been an instrument of governments worldwide seeking to impose swinging climate taxes on electorates ill-informed on the science.
Correctly applying ‘Sweezy’ requires the court to also address the needs of all us “students” seeking to know more of the science of climate change so that we may all gain “maturity and understanding.” But how can we do this when our “teacher” [Mann] refuses to permit his “students” (us voters) to see how he arrived at his conclusions?
 
When we are not allowed to carefully weigh our “teacher’s” line of reasoning, so as me may apply our own interpretations of the evidence, it is voters who are the ultimate victims here; denied fair and reasonable understanding so as to engage meaningfully in informed free speech on decisions that impact future generations.
 
Academic Freedom is Subordinate to Function of Educators
 
This is where Standler offers us the case law to rebut Mann’s perversion of academic freedom with Stastny v. Central Washington University [3.]. Applying the more recent case of ‘Stastny’ (1983) as opposed to the outmoded ‘Sweezy’ (1957), Standler reveals:
 
“Academic freedom is not a license for activity at variance with job related procedures and requirements, nor does it encompass activities which are internally destructive to the proper function of the university or disruptive to the education process. …. Academic freedom does not mean freedom from academic responsibility to students, colleagues and the orderly administration of the university.“
 
‘Stastny’  thus trumps Michael Mann and explicitly requires academics in public universities to abide by their contractual commitments (i.e. Mann must respect Virginia’s freedom of information laws). Professors cannot flout the normal orderly functions of their (ex) university. Thus Mann cannot interfere with his former employer’s duty to comply with lawful requests to disseminate publicly owned information.
 
The ‘Proprietary Materials’ Argument Exposed 

The ‘proprietary materials’ argument is the easiest prong of Mann’s case to defeat because he offers no evidence to back his opinions. The law has long protected inventors and innovators so as they may legitimately claim entitlement to ‘proprietary materials.’
 
But Mann’s intervention papers provide the court with not a shred of proof that he is an inventor or innovator who actually ‘owned’ the work he did while an employee at UVa.
 
In addition, UVa employment contracts are also especially unavailing. Significantly, the Virginia Personnel Act is an unassailable obstacle for Mann because it states:
“No user shall have any expectation of privacy in any message, file, image or data created, sent, retrieved, received, or posted in the use of the Commonwealth’s equipment and/or access.”
 
Moreover, under the Act, “electronic records may be subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).”
 
Thus, the aforementioned body of facts proves there is nowhere for Michael Mann to hide his decline. Indeed, if we equate the law courts with the frozen pond game, we may conclude nimble footwork by attorney, Chris Horner, has caught out the flat footed hockey sticker in overtime. But don’t expect any post game handshakes from the sour grapes loser of this contest.
 
References:
 
[1.] Standler, R. B., ‘Academic Freedom in the USA’ (2000), www.rbs2.com (accessed online: September 23, 2011).
 
[2.] (i) (publicly criticizing school administration) Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968); (ii) (loyalty oaths e.g. Communist Party) Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589, 603 (1967);Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U.S. 479 (1960);
Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234 (1957); Slochower v. Board of Higher Education, 350 U.S. 551 (1956);Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183 (1952); (iii) (Biblical theory of creation) Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987);Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968).

[3.] Stastny v. Central Washington University, 647 P.2d 496, 504 (Wash.Ct.App. 1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1071 (1983).
 
 
 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

MORE HOT AIR THAN SCIENCE IN GLOBAL WARMING THEORY

Article written by Dr Martin Hertzberg  (co-author: ‘Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’)
 
“Cherish your doubts, for doubt is the handmaiden of truth” — Robert Weston.

Since I am a long-time denier of human-caused global warming and have been described as an “inaccurate” and “irresponsible” “fool” by Scott Glasser's commentary in Monday's Vail Daily, I feel compelled to respond.

I am a research scientist who also served as a meteorologist for the U.S. Navy. I am also a lifelong progressive Democrat.

For the 25 years that I have been studying the theory that human emission of carbon dioxide is causing global warming and climate change, it has never ceased to amaze me how many otherwise intelligent people, including our president, have been taken in by that scam.

There is a simple way to tell the difference between scientists and propagandists. If scientists have a theory, they search diligently for data that might actually contradict their theory so that they test it rigorously or refine it. If propagandists have a theory, they carefully select only the data that might agree with their theory and dutifully ignore any data that might contradict it.

The anecdotal drivel cited in the Glasser article regarding atmospheric carbon dioxide, average global temperatures, ice area coverage and rate of sea-level rise was carefully cherry picked or is totally false.

For the totality of the available data for the past several decades, go to www.climate4you.com. The data show nothing remarkable — just the normal variability in all those weather-related parameters.

Knowledgeable scientists, including the more than 30,000 such as myself who have signed the Oregon Petition, know that changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide do not correlate with human emission of carbon dioxide, that human emission is a trivial fraction of sources and sinks of carbon dioxide, that the oceans contain about 50 times more dissolved carbon dioxide than is present in the atmosphere, that recycling of carbon dioxide from the tropical oceans where it is emitted to the arctic oceans where it is absorbed is orders of magnitude more significant than human emissions, and that the carbonate-bicarbonate buffer in the oceans makes their acidity (actually their alkaline pH) virtually insensitive to changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide.

The data for the glacial coolings and interglacial warmings for the past 500,000 years always show that temperature changes precede atmospheric carbon-dioxide changes by about 1,000 years. That indicates that temperature changes are driving carbon-dioxide changes and not the reverse as the Gore-Hansen-IPCC clique claims. As oceans warm for whatever reason, they emit carbon dioxide, and as they cool they absorb carbon dioxide.

The carbon-dioxide “greenhouse effect” argument on which the fearmongering hysteria is based is actually devoid of physical reality. The notion that the colder atmosphere above can reradiate its absorbed infrared energy to heat the warmer earth below violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. For details, see “Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory,” co-authored by myself and several other scientists, which was published earlier this year by Stairway Press.

In any case, if one compares the effect of water in all of its forms (polar ice, snow cover, oceans, clouds, water vapor in the atmosphere) with that of human emission of carbon dioxide, the carbon-dioxide emission is about as significant as a few farts in a hurricane.

Glasser, who calls me a fool, really tips his hand by defending the notoriously fraudulent “hockey stick” curve of Professor Mann. That curve has the shape of a hockey stick, flat for the past 1,000 years with a sharp rise during the past few decades. It was fabricated from carefully selected tree-ring measurements with a phony computer program.

Every knowledgeable climatologist knows that tree rings are unreliable proxies for temperature because they are also sensitive to moisture, sunlight, pests, competition from adjacent trees, etc. Furthermore, when those same tree-ring data actually showed a decline in temperature for the past several decades, Mann and his co-authors simply “hid the decline” by grafting direct measurements (inadequately corrected for the urban heat island and other effects) to his flat tree-ring line.

Knowledgeable climatologists knew that the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings settled Greenland and grapes grew in northern England, was much warmer than today and that its presence in all regions of the world was overwhelming. Similarly for the Roman Warm Period that preceded it and for a whole series of natural warmings and coolings until one gets back to the big one: the interglacial cooling of about 20,000 years ago.

And that all happened without any significant human emission of carbon dioxide.

The conclusions being promulgated by the scientifically illiterate diplomats who control the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are fraudulent concoctions that have already been denounced by many of its scientific members.

Those diplomats, like the bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency, have huge egos and a lust for power. That is far more important to them than the triviality of scientific truth. Once committed to one side of such an issue,

they will rarely admit that they have made a mistake. Once having invested their political capital and our economic resources to start the huge, massive inertia wheel turning, it takes too much courage, energy and loss of face to stop it.

That was the case with the war in Vietnam and currently with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The conclusions of the IPCC need to be repudiated lest they continue to discredit the United Nations' legitimate functions: its programs to improve the standard of living of the underdeveloped nations, its programs to combat hunger and poverty, its support of the conventions against genocide and torture, and its support of the International Criminal Court's prosecution of war criminals.

Dr Martin Hertzberg writes from Copper Mountain.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized