the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion


Posted by Jeff Id on October 2, 2011

I’ve had a premonition. Using sophisticated computer modeling and regression analysis, I’ve used past IPCC conclusions as a temperature proxy and projected trends of the IPCC conclusions on the density of CO2 in the atmosphere. By applying an inertial consistency algorithm (based on past data autocorrelation), I’ve been able to project AR5 results a year ahead of schedule.

By happy coincidence, Donna Laframboise, from the well named nofrakkingconsensus blog, has done some research of her own to this effect. She has compiled the names and histories of the upcoming IPCC report AR5 on climate change and the doom they hope to provide in response to it. The links had to take her hours, so check it out.

We will be waiting on the edge of our seats to see what will comprise the summary for “policy makers” by such an august panel of minds. From my projections, were the IPCC reports published in movie format, we could make a college drinking game out of how many ways can they write “worse than we could have imagined”.

Thanks to Lubos again where I found the link.

I do need to point out for those who think I’m a conspiracy nut that both the WWF and the IPCC/UN have released documents expressing their role in the coming (very leftist) global government. I can’t wait until we sign up for that happy bit of paperwork.

Origin unknown but I like the crazy wizard with the crystal ball.

20 Responses to “Premonitions”

  1. WikiLeaks exposed and Nature published the Trojan Horse [1]:

    Environmentalism was the Trojan Horse we welcomed, unaware that science [2-10] would be sacrificed for the purpose WikiLeaks revealed: Redistribution of wealth [1] under a one-world government [11].

    1. “Clean-energy credits tarnished,” Nature 477, 517-518 (2011)

    2. “Sun’s motion and sunspots”, Astron. J. 70, 193-200 (1965)

    3. “Mass fractionation and isotope anomalies in neon and xenon,” Nature 227, 1113-1116 (1970)

    4. “The role of isotopic mass fractionation in the production of noble gas anomalies in lunar fines from the Apollo 15 mission”, Proc. 3rd Lunar Sci. Conf., vol. 2, 1927-1945 (1972)

    5. “Xenon in carbonaceous chondrites”, Nature 240, 99-101 (1972)

    6. “Excess 26Mg in the Allende meteorite,” Nature 251, 495-497 (1974)

    7. “Elemental and isotopic inhomogeneities in noble gases: The case for local synthesis of the chemical elements”, Trans MO Acad Sci 9, 104-122 (1975)

    8. “Strange xenon, extinct super-heavy elements, and the solar neutrino puzzle”, Science 195, 208-209 (1977)

    9. “The demise of established dogmas on the formation of the Solar System”, Nature 303, 286-286 (1983)

    10. “Solar abundances of the elements,” Meteoritics 18, 209-222 (1983)

    11. “Deep roots of Climategate” (2011)

    Click to access 20110722_Climategate_Roots.pdf

  2. Addendum:

    8a. “Is the Sun a pulsar?” Nature 270, 159-160 (1977)

  3. kim said

    Mercury Theatre.

  4. Bruce said

    I suggest AR 5’s catchphrase be: “Just cause AGW is sleeping don’t mean it won’t wake up and take a bite outta your butt!”

  5. Harry said

    Dear Jeff,

    As usual sharp as a razor. I like donna’s approach, I was one of the citizens to do the first screening of grey literature. But she has a truly shocking story now about the WWF power grab of the IPCC.

  6. M. Simon said

    “Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.”

    The only thing they can do is anger. Subtle is not in their toolbox.

  7. Old Hoya said

    On April 1 next year, IPPC will announce in AR5 that they are dropping the high end projection (5 and 6 degrees pr doubling) models from the model ensemble because they are proving to be utter BS.

    They will apologize for the past unscientific hype about hurricanes, malaria and rapid glacial disappearance etc.

    They will dismiss the politically-connected non-climate scientist writers who have composed the summary materials in the past and let the scientists themselves compose/approve any such summary materials.

    They will call for a broader, more inclusive discussion about the merits of adaptation versus mitigation and about the other human activities that affect climate other than CO2.

    Then after April 1, they will say “just kidding” and crank out more slanted, scary crapola and expect that the money will keep flowing from those institutions with a vested or ideological interest in the centralization of economic and political power.

  8. steveta_uk said

    The problem for folk like you, Jeff, and for Donna and Lubos, is that while it is obviously true to us that the IPCC cannot be impartial when so many lead authors are associated with the WWF, this will not even be seen as a problem to most people.

    I’m sure that if you asked the general public if being “in the pay of big oil” is likely to bias a scientist, they’d agree almost unanimously.

    And ask the same people if working for the WWF is a problem (you know, those nice people who are worried about pandas) they’d simple say either “So what” or even “That shows the scientists are nice guys”.

    So this won’t be seen as a conflict of interest – it’s seen as “shared interests” – and a few years ago I’d have completely agreed – I thought WWF were the good guys too.

  9. steve fitzpatrick said


    Yes, we already know (more or less) what will be in AR5 (and 6 and 7!).

    I just don’t think too many people are going to pay much attention to the content. If they continue to make predictions which are contrary to evolving reality, then they will continue to lose credibility with the public. If they have a bit of sense, then they will be a lot more circumspect with their predictions than in previous AR’s. But I don’t expect that will actually happen, since it is mainly a political exercise, especially the summary for policy makers.

  10. stan said

    I am certainly hoping that AR5 is an alarmist screed full of gloom and doom and raging against the dying of the light. The IPCC is a dying dinosaur. Credibility left and it ain’t coming back. Unfortunately, while it may be false and mistaken science like the Brontasaurus, it also packs an enormous tail that can scare the heck out of you until it finally dies off.

    Everyone will be better off if the creature comes to a quick and merciful end. The best way for that to happen would be for it to produce a complete laughingstock of excessive alarm. Otherwise, it may flail around in its death throes and cause injury to those unfortunate folks who are unable to get out of its way before it finally expires.

  11. Matthew W said

    “I just don’t think too many people are going to pay much attention to the content. If they continue to make predictions which are contrary to evolving reality, then they will continue to lose credibility with the public.”

    They don’t need a lot of followers.
    All it takes is a few high placed people and the myth will continue (along with TRILLIONS of wasted dollars).

    I agree that the IPCC is steadily losing credibility with the public, but I’m not sure what it will take to put a stake throw its heart.

  12. Neil said

    #11 The key thing that will slow or stop it, is that goverments are dealing with much bigger issues and can no longer afford the luxury of saving the planet. They are too busy trying to save their own hides!

  13. Matthew W said

    # 12
    To some degree, it is disappointing that “we” are making progress against the junk science only based on the idea that most countries are facing financial disasters !!

    I want this puppy put down on the facts and the bad science !!

    I don’t like the idea that we could accept wasting trillions of dollars and lose liberties because economic times are great.

  14. Mark T said

    To some degree, it is disappointing that “we” are making progress against the junk science only based on the idea that most countries are facing financial disasters !!

    The two concepts (junk science and financial disasters) are not entirely unrelated. Rather, the junk science is endemic to a world view that has also created the financial disasters most countries are facing. Those with such a world view are incapable of seeing why this is so – they can only see their desired outcome and have no idea why it cannot come to pass when its people have free will (even if they do not have true freedom).

    I don’t like the idea that we could accept wasting trillions of dollars and lose liberties because economic times are great.

    For most, it’s easy to ignore sacrifices in liberty when they don’t directly impact their own quality of life. Damn the consequences until the consequences have damned you.


  15. stan said


    So true. The sacrifice of our quality of life is one of those unfortunate burdens that they’re willing to shoulder. Just part of making the tough calls required of leadership.

    This is of the same mindset which Bubba Clinton demonstrated when he expressed his regret that the nation didn’t suffer a foreign policy crisis when he was in office. [Of course, we actually did. He was just too busy partying to notice.] No sacrifice is too great for us to bear, if it means more power and glory for them.

  16. Brian H said

    The financial crisis has had the crucial, but not likely yet sufficient, side effect of spawning an anti-waste movement in the US. You may know it as the Tea Party. It has flipped the House, and galvanized some (not yet enough) hard pushes to undo damage. The EPA is in its sights, and with it the entire manufactured climate crisis machine.

    So don’t discount the value of dispelling complacency. For an even more ambitious projection of causes and consequences, see VDH.

    But weathering the implosion of the EU may put some chop in the waters. Stay close to your lifejacket.

  17. Brian H said

    HL Mencken:

    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace in a continual state of alarm (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing them with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

  18. Sadly, what matters in the life of the IPCC is its UN sponsorship, and the number of governments that invest in it a belief that only it represents “the best available science.”

    I know an environmental lawyer who works for the US Department of the Interior. When ruling on the impact of global warming on endangered species like the alpine titmouse in Montana, they are required to use this standard. That is, to rely on the IPCCs representation of science. It is a de facto precautionary principle in institutionalized action.

    Until there is a real alternative to the IPCC, we will be ruled by pseudoscience.

  19. Mark T said

    Of course, we actually did. He was just too busy partying to notice.

    Didn’t Bubba actually create it in order to distract everyone from his Lewinsky testimony? 🙂


  20. kuhnkat said

    Mark T,

    well, the Lewinski bit was used to distract you from all the REAL scandals going on like hundreds of FBI files illegally ending up in the whitehouse being perused by yours truly’s staff. Then there was Ron Brown and the paid for seats on flights to get business pushed by the US gubmint, the dead guy disappearing from the white house without checking out through any of the security. Then there was the blood collected in Arkansas prisons and sold to Canada which infected haemophiliacs with Aids, Hepatitis and other fun stuff killing some of them. It is good to be a friend of Clintoon. They were shut down and were allowed to start collecting and selling blood again before the Canadians found out it was not screened appropriately.

    Whitewater was another red herring. They were selling plots on contracts that allowed foreclosure with ONE missed payment. Not illegal, but, might have made people have second thoughts about how sensitive the Clintoon’s were to others feelings. Any actual law breaking there was probably minor such as double billing by Hitlery at the law firm.

    Should be interesting to see if Obie can beat the Clintoon’s record for substantive criminal activity. Some people still wonder whythe Justice Department didn’t bring charges. Anyone else remember the JD head, Janet Reno, the best corrupt person Billy Boy could have appointed and the fact he cleaned the JD out and put all his own people in?? When Bush fired a FEW the media went nuts!!

    I’ll stop boring y’all now.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: