the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Backlash Continues

Posted by Jeff Id on October 8, 2010

We do indeed live in interesting times.  As sent to me by email bu a reader and as usual already covered at WUWT, yet another scientist has expressed his contempt for the obvious biases which pervade government funded sciences. Hal Lewis, resigned from the American Physical Society over the blatant exaggerations and corruption exposed by paper after paper in government science.

It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

There has been a wave of backlash since climategate which continues to build momentum.  As papers critical of the consensus shove relentlessly against biased peer review, negative feedbacks to warming are discovered, and models overpredict trends the momentum has built this year.  My own prediction was that we would be back to business as usual by now but not so.   There was too much corruption in the attempted coverups of cliamategate such that only the most devoted can write about the reviews in a positive light.  It turns out that most people really don’t like blatant corruption.

Eisenhower’s farewell address is referenced in the letter, it’s worth taking a moment to read.  It was one of the most visionary speeches you will ever find with these two paragraphs explaining much of the problem in climate science.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

In reading the letter below, note his description the blatant corruption of the APS in ignoring its own constitution in order to prevent the AGW issues from coming to light.   Note how he accuses them of going around their own rules to maintain the status quo.   It’s not a small thing IMO and shows the breadth to which the money of AGW has corrupted the discussion.

His complete letter of resignation is reproduced below from the GWPF:

 

From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara

To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society

6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.

Hal

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)


46 Responses to “Backlash Continues”

  1. Brian H said

    “It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.”

    Gotta love the man. Truth to power, or what?

  2. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    He is doing the right thing. History will treat him well.

  3. Jeff Id said

    Steve,

    Yessir, I believe you are right.

  4. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    Jeff,

    One thing I have noted: those who doubt or reject outright the teachings of climate science are mostly very old farts like me. Why is that? Is it that they come from a less politically correct generation? Or perhaps they are at a point in their lives where conforming to ‘norms’ is of no import?

    These people tend to hale from ‘hard science’ fields, and I suspect they are offended by the ‘politically informed’ nature of climate science…. coupled with being old enough to not care about future funding.

  5. kdk33 said

    I wonder what he thinks of ensemble averaging (just kidding)🙂.

    Here’s hoping the dam soon bursts. There must be many many more of similar mind.

  6. Paul Linsay said

    I never heard of the man during my career in academic physics, but he’s clearly a heavy weight. JASON was a group that advised the military on very difficult technical questions. More than one winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics was a member of that group.

    Here’s an interview with him. He seems to have been as much an administrator as scientist. http://www.aip.org/history/ohilist/4742.html

  7. GregO said

    I woke up after Climategate and at one point thought to myself, “this is the biggest fraud in the history of science and the biggest public scam in my lifetime.” It just struck me one day. Of course, I don’t know all and have worked at disproving it to myself but to read a master such as Hal Lewis say the exact same thing is actually a bit frightening. I mean, what drives the CAGW crowd? Is the corruption and filth really this bad? I fear it is worse than we thought.

  8. Aesop said

    Climate science fraud is destroying science. It’s like the boy who cried wolf, the next time something real and dangerous is announced by scientists, no one is going to pay any attention.

  9. TGSG said

    I’m not a scientist, educated nor garage. I am skilled in several trades. I’ve been around a lot of smart people in my life. I was a looooong time lurker here and at WUWT and Steve M’s place etc.

    I could smell something wrong with the whole mess when everything bad under the sun was blamed on “global warmining”, when the MWP was dissapeared, and the IPCC began digging their toes into the sand. I was stunned, saddened, and outraged when I read the files that were freed from the e-mail horde. Maybe the worm really will turn and all this will come out in the wash. I hope so. I’ve been highly tuned to BS my entire life (thanks Dad) and can smell sanctimonious shitpilers a mile away.

    After the whole shebang began to come to light it seemed as if some “climate scientists, stunk to high Heaven. Until that attitude of self rightousness gets drowned in the tears of recrimination I’ll call out those who would bastardize science for monetary ends. A pox on their houses.

    I’m just sick of the whole mess and glad to see some more respectable people getting that same feeling.

  10. Thank you, Professor Lewis, for having the courage to speak out.

    Steve (#2) is right, history will treat Professor Lewis well.

    GregO (#7) asks “Is the corruption and filth really this bad?”

    Yes. Climatologists simply followed the template of astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, nuclear, solar and space physics.

    See, for example, this short (<1 min) video of unwelcome experimental data from 1975:

    Thanks to Climategate, we may yet break the chains that have held us "captive of a scientific-technological elite" [See Eisenhower's farewell address of 17 Jan 1961 above].

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo

  11. ArndB said

    # 10. Oliver K. Manuel said October 9, 2010 at 12:19 am
    ”Thanks to Climategate, we may yet break the chains that have held us “captive of a scientific-technological elite” [See Eisenhower’s farewell address of 17 Jan 1961 above].”

    At the start of Climategate was also a “Open Lette” addressed to 18 leading US scientific societies, which AIR VENT published on 13Nov.2009 : https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/open-letter/, and to which the Climategate Files where placed in Comment 10 (FOIA, 17 Nov.) with the notion:
    _____“We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps.
    _____We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents.
    Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.” https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/open-letter/#comment-11917

    In his letter to APS, Prof Hal Lewis calls it: “3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.”

    The frustration by Prof. Hal Lewis is shared by many. One reason was raised in the mentioned “Open Letter” to the US scientific societies in November 2009, that climate sciences is working with inadequate terminology. E.g. “Climate changes” and ”climate system” are completely meaningless, and using them as scientific terms must lead to severe misunderstanding and confusion. More at http://www.whatisclimate.com :
    Instead the discussion should be about the physics of the atmosphere and the oceans, which H. Lewis presumably addresses in this way:
    ___“It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.”
    A science which is not able to define in a reasonable and clear scientific manner the subjects of interest is a pseudo-science. Over the last 20 years climate science has been living very happy and extremely successful with that. Who demands a better, scientifically related terminology? Did FOIA chose the “Open Letter” for this reason?

  12. Geoff Sherrington said

    As another of the old codgers from a hard science who comments on the philosophy of climate science, my comments derive from extensive reading of the history of science; and from a career in which mistakes soon became obvious to colleagues, who could be quite caustic.

    The reading started almost accidentally through my surname being the same as a Nobel Laureate, Knight and two times President of the Royal Society, Sir Charles Sherrington. Although he died in 1953, when I was 12, the common surname gave me added interest to read his philosophy, which is both deep and meaningful. I have little doubt that his moral approach would be similar to that expressed by Prof Lewis. The motto of the RS, “Nullius in Verba,” would have been taken seriously.

    As to my work in mineral resources, we had the advantage that much of our work was able to be retested, validated, verified and if needed, improved. There was absolutely no post modernist talk that 2 + 2 might not equal 4. We were humble enough to know that few scientific deductions attain the status of “fact”, so our work was divided into measurement and interpretation, mostly with an extra note when or if subjectivity was applied. So, although we used words like “might” and “it is possible that”, they reflected that facts were not a usual outcome of science; where possible, uncertainties were quantified and included. Such expressions were not used as weasel words to leave a back door open if you were caught guessing or building edifices on sand instead of rock.

    My main introduction to modern climate science came after a hiatus when I worked in different endeavours. When I came back, I was astounded by the numbers of further irregular results. The more I looked, the more irregularities I found. From the start, I did not regard climate science as a new branch of old science that was suffering immaturity. It looked suspiciously bad from the start and I was reluctant to name it science. Subsequent events have simply shown the dangers of working to an ideological agenda. It remains my belief that the cause is driven by money. We already know of some people who have prospered enormously from moving money around on the back of climate science. To the extent that some have control over mainstream media, we have a problem of communication.

    The question now facing readers of these pages is whether the ideological agenda style of science is transforming to the norm; or whether people like Prof Hal Lewis will, by increaing weight, cause a reversion back to what (to me) is the correct scientific method.

    I do not know the answer to that question.

  13. Geoff,

    “The question now facing readers of these pages is whether the ideological agenda style of science is transforming to the norm; or whether people like Prof Hal Lewis will, by increaing weight, cause a reversion back to what (to me) is the correct scientific method.”

    This old codger will do everything possible to make it possible for future generations to have a chance to enjoy – as I have – a life of continuous and honest discovery!

    That is why I am currently in battle with the editor of Nature and the NPG Executive Committee. Some of our earliest and most important discoveries were reported there three or four decades back [“Mass fractionation and isotope anomalies in neon and xenon,” Nature 227, 1113-1116 (1970); “Xenon in carbonaceous chondrites”, Nature 240, 99-101 (1972); “Noble gases in an Hawaiian xenolith”, Nature 257, 778-780 (1975); “Xenon record of the early solar system”, Nature 262, 28-32 (1976); “Isotopes of tellurium, xenon and krypton in the Allende meteorite retain record of nucleosynthesis”, Nature 277, 615-620 (1979)].

  14. Patagon said

    Steve, at 9:54 pm

    Garth Paltridge in “The Climate Caper” tells you a few things about working climatology and political pressure and why people wait until after retirement to be openly critical. I am convinced that if research projects approval were independent from proponents’ opinions, a lot more people would be openly critical. A good beginning would be to end reviews secrecy and make public both reviewers’ names and reviews. I have seen some reviews that are extremely biased and truly appalling, funding bodies would be more careful to accept those if they were open to public scrutiny.

  15. kim said

    Hello Hal Lewis,
    So pleased to meet you this way.
    Horatio at Bridge.
    ========

  16. Phillip Bratby said

    I first came across Prof Hal Lewis at a conference in, I think it was 1976. I will never forget the talk he gave after dinner one evening. He spoke for an hour without any notes and was truly inspiring; the room was packed and all there were enthralled. A scientist of honour and integrity. He is one of the last survivors of the great physicists of the second half of the 20th century.

    His words of wisdom should be widely disseminated.

  17. kim said

    ‘SkepticGate’. Hah, poor fools. This budges no thermometer, no feedback of water vapor, no stat of Mann, no echo in the chamber.
    =============

  18. kim said

    Oops, so caught up with feeling sorry for a&l I’ve trumpeted in the wrong room. Seventeen was for ears in the next room, CopyGate.
    ==============

  19. Beth Cooper said

    A commentator on WUWT, Berenyi Peter, has provided an Oral History Transcript of Prof Hal Lewis remakable career and it is compelling reading.

  20. Matt Y. said

    Unfortunately, there are plenty of up-and-coming young scientists to take his place with families to feed who won’t be as reflective and altruistic.

  21. Brian H said

    Beth;
    Can’t find it. Links are helpful. And polite.

  22. Phil R said

    Geoff Sherrington said
    October 9, 2010 at 6:18 am

    “The reading started almost accidentally through my surname being the same as a Nobel Laureate, Knight and two times President of the Royal Society, Sir Charles Sherrington. Although he died in 1953, when I was 12, the common surname gave me added interest to read his philosophy, which is both deep and meaningful. I have little doubt that his moral approach would be similar to that expressed by Prof Lewis. The motto of the RS, “Nullius in Verba,” would have been taken seriously.”

    Being Latinally illiterate (and an American to boot), I never knew what “Nullius in Verba” meant or that it was the motto of the RS. So I did a quick search on the phrase and found a link to another blog, http://adamant.typepad.com/seitz/2006/11/nullius_in_verb.html, that I was not familiar with (though I will bookmark it now). One paragraph refers to Bob Ward of the RS and to me is of particular concern.

    “The Royal Society’s senior manager for policy communication, Bob Ward, has tried to browbeat Exxon Mobil into blacklisting 39 groups whose inconvenient dissent casts doubt on the policy agenda shared by the Society and the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change. A letter from Mr. Ward to Exxon leaked to The Guardian reveals that he wants those he deems to have “misrepresented the science of climate change” put on a Do Not Fund List because “[t]he next IPCC report gives people the final push that they need to take action and we can’t have people trying to undermine it.”

    If I’m not mistaken, the next report is not due for several years, but the results are already known.

  23. kim said

    Brian H @ 2:21 PM

    It’s at 3:13 AM on 10/9/10, comment by Berenyi Peter.
    ===========

  24. Brian H said

    Kim;
    IN WHICH ARTICLE? WUWT has dozens. It’s not in the Tips & Notes. Or main page. And ‘Search’ returns no hits.

    LINK please?

  25. kim said

    It’s in the article about Hal Lewis. I’m a Luddite, and don’t link. They deteriorate anyway, and if your argument depended upon the link, there goes your argument. Can’t have that.
    ================

  26. Brian H said

    Commenters who can’t link or even copy/paste an address should be barred! 😡

    This is the comment: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/08/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/#comment-503323
    And this is the History: http://www.aip.org/history/ohilist/4742.html

    It turns out the reason my Searches for Berenyi Peter didn’t work is that he’s actually Berényi Péter, and the search function distinguishes them. 8-\

  27. Brian H said

    For those like me who didn’t know what the “JASON” was that is mentioned in all Lewis’ credits, here’s a summary:
    http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/

  28. kim said

    Heh! So that explains the Pharyngulist Strangular.
    =====================

  29. The sad history of distorting experimental data is documented here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=AQZe_Qk-q7M

    The story of CO2-induced climate change is simply Part IV of long-term efforts by the NAS-led consensus science community to distort experimental observations.

    The rest of the story is summarized in the introduction section to the above video of a four part series on Scientific Intricacies of Genesis: The Origin of the Solar System.

    Part I: The first clear clue was united efforts to ignore experimental data from a 1975 analysis of the Allende meteorite.

    Part II: The next sign of a serious problem was efforts to ignore a 1983 finding that mass fractionation in the Sun systematically enriches lightweight isotopes in the elements implanted in Apollo samples by the solar wind.

    Comments and suggestions for improving the video would be appreciated, as would assistance in getting the story out for others to consider and comment on.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo
    http://www.omatumr.com/

  30. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=omatumr#p/u/0/AQZe_Qk-q7M

  31. Derek said

    What….no Dim Witt comment – I am surprised – NOT.

  32. Peter P. said

    Hi Folks!

    HAPPY CLIMATE FOOLS DAY!

    To commemorate the 10:10 eco-snuff movie, I would like to suggest that October 10 henceforth be celebrated worldwide as Climate Fools Day.

    Let this day forever be a reminder of how the eco-fascists blew themselves up with their own hateful propaganda, marking the beginning of the end of the global warming scam.

    Can our internet-savvy friends please help create a website–something along the lines of “climatefools.org”–with links to the 10:10 eco-snuff movie. The objective is to shame these green bullies and remind them that civilized people won’t tolerate their unacceptable fascist behavior.

    e.g. text on website page:
    ***************************************

    [Ticking countdown] LEFT TO CLIMATE FOOLS DAY!

    CLIMATE FOOLS DAY is a day of peace and sanity where the free peoples of the world celebrate:

    – The end of eco-fascism
    – Electricity and all its life-enriching benefits
    – Oil and coal and all their life-enriching benefits
    – Cows and all their tasty benefits
    – All the good things about protecting and caring for our environment, minus the fraud that is carbon taxation, emissions trading, biofuels and other unproven renewable energy technologies

    But No Pressure!

    LESS WE FORGET

    [10:10 eco-snuff video]

    [Franny Armstrong’s Half-assed Hahaha Apology]

    [10:10’s follow-up whiny “I just got a baby” apology]

    [Sony statement]

    [Kyocera statement]

    [Mind-boggling hypocritical statement by 350.org’s Bill McKibben, condemning the 10:10 movie while calling those who question the science of global warming “deniers”]
    ***************************************

    And maybe at the next Climate Fools Day, we could have a big event like the Burning Man Festival–where a giant UPSIDE DOWN MANN made out of watermelons is blown sky high at the push of a button. That would be a sight to behold.

    Possible activities and merchandise:
    – Hot air balloon rides
    – Mike’s Magic “Trick” show (will attempt to make Ken Cucinelli disappear)
    – Hold your breath competition (sponsored by EPA)
    – Sugababes and Sting in concert, featuring the hit singles “Push The Button” and “Every Breath You Take”
    – Haunted Hothouse featuring demons like James Hansen, John Holdren, Al Gore, Osama bin Laden, etc.
    – Franny Armstrong blow-up doll (for men who have the urge to screw watermelons)
    – Phil Jones FOI Request Blocker and Auto-delete Email software
    – Rajendra Pachauri voodoo science doll (comes with IPCC approved temperature spikes)
    – Warm beer

    IMHO this event would really make a killing. The sales of t-shirts and hockey sticks could really blow up.

    PS
    And look at what’s happening in Germany–Where is the outcry and condemnation of the 10:10 eco-snuff movie by German leaders? Germany is so heavily invested in the carbon trading scam that they are now ignoring exactly the same type of behaviour that led to WWII. Will failure to act against the global warming scam lead to WWIII? How ironic would that be? A war brought on by the fraud of a noble peace prize winner.

  33. Peter P. said

    Hi Folks!

    HAPPY CLIMATE FOOLS DAY!

    To commemorate the 10:10 eco-snuff movie, I would like to suggest that October 10 henceforth be celebrated worldwide as Climate Fools Day.

    Let this day forever be a reminder of how the eco-fascists blew themselves up with their own hateful propaganda, marking the beginning of the end of the global warming scam.

    Can our internet-savvy friends please help create a website–something along the lines of “climatefools.org”–with links to the 10:10 eco-snuff movie. The objective is to shame these green bullies and remind them that civilized people won’t tolerate their unacceptable fascist behavior.

    e.g. text on website page:
    —————————–

    -Ticking countdown- LEFT TO CLIMATE FOOLS DAY!

    CLIMATE FOOLS DAY is a day of peace and sanity where the free peoples of the world celebrate:

    – The end of eco-fascism
    – Electricity and all its life-enriching benefits
    – Oil and coal and all their life-enriching benefits
    – Cows and all their tasty benefits
    – All the good things about protecting and caring for our environment, minus the fraud that is carbon taxation, emissions trading, biofuels and other unproven renewable energy technologies

    But No Pressure!

    LESS WE FORGET

    – 10:10 eco-snuff video

    – Franny Armstrong’s Half-assed Hahaha Apology

    – 10:10’s follow-up whiny “I just got a baby” apology

    – Sony statement

    – Kyocera statement

    – Mind-boggling hypocritical statement by 350.org’s Bill McKibben, condemning the 10:10 movie while calling those who question the science of global warming “deniers”
    —————————–

  34. Peter P. said

    CLIMATE FOOLS DAY FACEBOOK PAGE:
    http://www.facebook.com/people/Climate-Fools-Day/100001675988958

    Friend me now–No Pressure!

  35. Brian H said

    Peter: Edit note.
    “A war brought on by the fraud of a noble peace prize winner.”
    That would be, “A war brought on by the fraud of an ignoble Nobel Peace Prize winner”, surely? 😀

  36. Peter P. said

    Wow, Brian, I learnt a new word today–Thanks!

    And you’re absolutely right🙂

  37. Brian H said

    Peter P.;
    then you will be delighted to know of the Ig Nobel Prize! They’re called “Igs” for short, and are usually but not always received gratefully.

    Example prize: current (2009)

    PHYSICS PRIZE: Katherine K. Whitcome of the University of Cincinnati, USA, Daniel E. Lieberman of Harvard University, USA, and Liza J. Shapiro of the University of Texas, USA, for analytically determining why pregnant women don’t tip over.
    REFERENCE: “Fetal Load and the Evolution of Lumbar Lordosis in Bipedal Hominins,” Katherine K. Whitcome, Liza J. Shapiro & Daniel E. Lieberman, Nature, vol. 450, 1075-1078 (December 13, 2007). DOI:10.1038/nature06342.
    WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Katherine Whitcome and Daniel Lieberman

    😀

  38. russell said

    some more really interesting information from manuel here.

    Global warming when will they ever give it up

  39. DeWitt Payne said

    Re: Brian H (Oct 13 15:40),

    This one from 2000 is still my favorite for Ig Nobel prizes:

    MEDICINE
    Willibrord Weijmar Schultz, Pek van Andel, and Eduard Mooyaart of Groningen, The Netherlands, and Ida Sabelis of Amsterdam, for their illuminating report, “Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Male and Female Genitals During Coitus and Female Sexual Arousal.” [Published in British Medical Journal, vol. 319, 1999, pp 1596-1600.]

    This one from 2010 runs a close second though:

    MANAGEMENT PRIZE: Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda, and Cesare Garofalo of the University of Catania, Italy, for demonstrating mathematically that organizations would become more efficient if they promoted people at random.
    REFERENCE: “The Peter Principle Revisited: A Computational Study,” Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda, and Cesare Garofalo, Physica A, vol. 389, no. 3, February 2010, pp. 467-72.
    WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda, and Cesare Garofalo.

  40. Brian H said

    DeWitt;
    That Management Prize entry is a real breakthrough! I bet it would apply a fortiori to elected officials …

  41. Those who want to show support for Professor Lewis can do so in comments on the Physics World news story, “APS responds to climate-change accusations”:

    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44024

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel

  42. Feet2theFire said

    Jeff:

    My own prediction was that we would be back to business as usual by now but not so. There was too much corruption in the attempted coverups of cliamategate such that only the most devoted can write about the reviews in a positive light.

    You know, once a good portion of your captive audience wakes up to your “tricks,” their now-turned-on skepticism turns them into a tough audience. And then if you try to go back to “business as usual,” they look at you like, “Holy crap! You expect us to believe it is real NOW?! Get real, Man!”

    You can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube.

    They had things their way so long, they not only can’t believe they lost the audience’s attention and good will, but they think more of the same is the way to get that good will back.

    Back in the mid-1980s, when they tried their acid rain b.s. and actual filed testing proved it was non-existent, they had the hole in the ozone that they could sink their teeth into. When THAT sold well, they went for the big Kahuna – AGW.

    Aftah dis, dey got nuttin’. (but expect them to shift over to peak oil.)

    [The thing is, that someone on the INSIDE realized they had nuttin’. That someone leaked the CRU files. It seems his conscience was bothering him…)

  43. Joe said

    Hi Great informational Blog!

    I have been working in Bio Fuels in Africa since 2008 I am posting to warn people about “Dr” Peter McHendry who has taken over R3,000,000 from investors into his Global BioDiesel, Omnium investment Trust, Akula Trading 227 PTY compaines.

    He is also responsible for a Voulenteer Scam “Great Earth Safari” and Christian Ski – He ran away from America after his property there was forclosed

    full details including contact numbers for the Police in South Africa can be found here;

    http://www.petermchendryisafraudster.blogspot.com

    We cannot let the BioFuel Industry get tarnished by people like “Dr” Peter Mc Hendry

  44. Brian H said

    Since the entire BioFuel industry is a criminal scam, it hardly matters, does it?

  45. John said

    If you are interested in visiting Africa on a Volunteer program, for heaven’s sake do not go any where near “Dr” Peter Mc Hendry or Global Adventures, Christian ski or any other companies run by “Dr” Peter McHendry – have a look at what he did to this poor chap!

    http://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/thread.jspa?threadID=1987623

    Peter McHendry is a fraudster who has been deported from Zambia for breeching labour laws (not paying his poor village staff) and failing to register any sort of business interest in Zambia, he does not legally own any land there, only the President of Zambia can grant a lease in Zambia, most of his deceptions are based on owning things he quite clearly cannot and does not!

    The Police in South Africa are looking for McHendry in regards to Insurance Fraud and conning investors into his failed Global Bio Diesel and Akula Trading 227 PTY Companies.
    This man is very dangerous and is believed to have several personality disorders, such as Jerusalem syndrome, his wife and other girls have complained of violent behaviour and at nearly 60 “Dr” Peter McHendry has an unhealthy interest in young vulnerable women and strippers as the Lonely Planet article shows.

    http://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/thread.jspa?threadID=1987623

    The Lonely Planet confirms that “Dr” Peter McHendry had not paid his staff for at least two months when the volunteers’ had paid over $2500 US each to live in a tent with no food!

    BEWARE PETER MC HENDRY IS A FRAUDSTER IN LEAUGE WITH SATAN!

    He steals from poor African Villagers this is why a deportation order was issued by the Zambian government and why the South African Police are looking for him!

    response@saps.org.za

    Do not give him any money it will not go on any sort of good, it will all be spent on young girls that “Dr” McHendry has no chance of sleeping with, you can see lots of them on his website which makes many, many, false claims all of which are badly spelt!

  46. Rickey said

    Hi,

    Great Blog!

    The world needs to stop conmen like Peter McHendry from preying on AIDS Victims

    Here are some very homophobic comments made by chode Peter McHendry

    http://saigonolpc.wordpress.com/2010/12/12/fraud-in-volunteer-world

    You can see this Australians experience of Peter McHendry’s luxury holidays with “Global Adventures” another non existent Peter McHendry Global business….

    http://www.travelblog.org/Topics/10074-1.html

    Comment 17 describes various lies and misrepresentations from “Dr” Peter McHendry who thinks it is reasonable to charge $2500 for a month in a field that mcHendry does not even own (with no food)


    http://florida.arrests.org/Arrests/Peter_Mchendry_1485135

    More homophobic rantings from Peter McHendry on his arrest record from the USA…

    Ricky B
    http://satanicliesofpetermchendry.blogspot.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: