the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Putting the K back in Skeptic

Posted by Jeff Id on July 2, 2012

I received this email today.   It’s kind of humorous except that I do agree with a common sense approach to energy that has a lot less government involvement. — Jeff.


Dear Sceptic,  (I think he means me. It could be one of you guys though 🙂  )

due to your high profile interest in the climate through your blog, we thought you would be interested to hear about the formal setting up of the Scottish Climate and Energy Group, so, we are sending you a our Press Release announcing this. We would be grateful if you could make your readers aware of this new organisation and would be very pleased if you could put a link on your site to ours. For information, now that SCEF is formally constituted we are inviting those with an interest to become members (cost £10). See website for joining instructions.

Mike Haseler
Chairman of the Scottish Climate & Energy Forum

Press Release

For immediate release: 2/7/2012

New Association to push for common sense on Scottish Climate & Energy policy.

A new organisation was created in Dunblane, Scotland to advocate a pragmatic approach to issues like Global Warming and renewable energy.

“Scotland was literally and physically made by our climate: The ice ages formed our valleys; our cuisine of porridge from oats is because our climate doesn’t suit wheat; and it was the colder climate of the 1690s & the famine that followed, that led to our loss of our independence. According to historians, up to a quarter of Scots died in just a few years. Imagine if it happened today? That is why climate and energy are so important in Scotland” said Mike Haseler, the newly appointed chairman.

The Scottish Climate & Energy Forum plans to take on “the pernicious groups” which appear to want to tear up the Scottish landscape and destroy our economy. “They have got away with this so far because pragmatic people like us haven’t had an organisation to ensure the public were told the truth about the real science. The physics of CO2 is that doubling this trace gas will only warm the world by around 1C. This is not a catastrophe. It isn’t unprecedented. It isn’t even bad in a cold country like Scotland” said Mike Haseler who has a Physics and Electronics degree from St. Andrews University.

Whilst Scotland is the home of some prominent climate Sceptics like Lord Monckton, who has been on numerous speaking tours, and Andrew Montford, author of the “The Hockey Stick Illusion; Climategate and the Corruption of Science”, the Scottish Climate & Energy Forum is the first Scottish organisation which aims to represent the pragmatic scientific view on climate and energy which almost all “sceptics” support.

The association now plans to develop educational material. “It doesn’t need a rocket scientist to explain that the claims of doomsday warming are not based on sound science. They are only computer projections. In 2001, they predicted warming. It has not warmed since. This scientific evidence tells us we should reject these flawed models which are based on a doomsday global warming theory. That is how real science works. That is why Scotland needs the Scottish Climate & Energy Forum.”

Notes for Editors

  • The Scottish Climate & Energy Forum is an Association which aims “to support government, communities and the people of Scotland to make the best decisions on climate and energy for the benefit of us all.”

For more information see:

36 Responses to “Putting the K back in Skeptic”

  1. omanuel said

    Hi Jeff, I am still mining information from post-Climategate event of 2009 and posting the results here

    Please let Mike Haseler (Chairman of the Scottish Climate & Energy Forum) know that

    1. Distorted information on energy was promoted after the United Nations was established on 24 Oct 1945 out of fear of the “nuclear fires” that consumed Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 Aug 1945 and 9 Aug 1945, respectively.

    Then world leaders started to provide research funds to test government approved models of Reality, rather than to make unbiased observations of Reality.

    2. Mankind will return to the energy (E) stored as mass (m) in the cores of heavy atoms, because that is where energy is stored.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Emeritus Professor of
    Nuclear/Space Science

    • Mike Haseler here.

      Very much appreciate the Air Vent making sceptics aware of the association.

      It’s really great having a group of like minded people you can work with.


      • omanuel said

        The Scottish Climate and Energy Group will do the entire world society a favor if they insist on scientific veracity in the use of renewable energy:

        1. Energy (E) is stored as mass (m) in cores of atoms, stars, galaxies and perhaps planets.

        “Neutron repulsion,” The Apeiron Journal 19, 123-150 (2012)

        2 The most profitable form of nuclear power comes from the fission of thorium, uranium, plutonium – without disposing of the waste products.

        3. Fission products are concentrated sources of energy that can be encapsulated and used to generate more power, instead of storing in barrels for the next generation to dispose.

        4. Nuclear industry must not be allowed to generate additional radioactive waste unless it is ready to encapsulate and use the waste to generate more power.

        5. That will ensure prompt detection of any leaks of radioactivity from the encapsulation.

        6. Japan has allowed some nuclear reactors to resume operation, hopefully with more scientific veracity and less collusion with politicians.

        More references:

    • Oliver, on the specific point about the change of the science, I think you are right. WWII dramatically changed the way science was viewed in the west. It stopped being a “gentleman’s club for natural philosophy” with doddery professors and became a sausage machine churning out “scientists” with little or no understanding of the philosophical nature or foundation of science.

      Then the cold war created a need to develop nuclear rockets at a time of growing anti-nuclear, anti-war rhetoric and the US needed a way to justify absolutely massive civil spending on rocketry technology — from which was born NASA. Right from the beginning NASA saw “the environment” as a way of promoting itself. I suspect NASA were instrumental in changing the bending the rules of real science to allow these non-science environmental academics to claim to be “scientists” – when they clearly aren’t (more like economists or geographers).Then later NASA got heavily into the ozone “problem”, then when that faded, along came the next funding stream for new satellite projects: the CO2 “problem”. Each time it promoted itself as the lead agency to which huge amounts of money were needed to launch this or that satellite.

      It’s no coincidence that Hansen is at NASA. Until I read the evironmental history of NASA, I didn’t realise that Hansen hasn’t been so much slighly promiting global warming on the side, but he is actively encouraged by NASA to spread alarm: that’s what he is employed to do! Justify the need to solve this “problem” … and hence justify the need for NASA’s projects in this area.

      Talk of the moon-landings being a scam. The real scam is that much of NASA appears to be little more than a publicity machine whose whole aim is to promite scares to justify its own existence.

      But the real scam, is that the whole nature of “science” has been changed from one of a lab-based “beyond reasonable doubt based on the evidence” to a model-based “it’s OK if it uses maths and long scientific sounding words and can’t be proved wrong (before they retire)”

      • omanuel said

        Thanks, Mike, for your reply.

        NASA is capable of distorting information, but the Moon landing was real. I know that because analysis of lunar soils revealed clear evidence that the interior of the Sun in mostly iron, as Fred Hoyle and other leading astronomers knew before 1946!

        NASA hid 1995 data from the Galileo probe of Jupiter that confirmed the Sun’s iron-rich interior and was captured on CSPAN News belatedly releasing the data in 1998 [1].

        The AGW crowd are trying to deny the discovery that started the scientific revolution four hundred and sixty years (2012-1543 – 469 yrs) ago when Copernicus found this massive fountain of energy at the center of the Solar System !

        1543: The Rise of Reason and Human Dignity
        1945: The Return of Dogmatic Totalitarianism

        1. Scientific Genesis: Science versus Propaganda (1961)

      • omanuel said

        1. By a strange coincidence, today I am unable to connect to the web page or blogs of Australia’s most effective “denialist”/”skeptic” of world-wide AGW dogma. –

        Hopefully this is a strange coincidence, not the last gasping breath of defeated Goliath of AGW dogma

        2. Sciences and religions teach us all to be “denialists”/”skeptics” of those fighting “Truth, Reality, God, What Is, The Law of Nature, Sattva,” etc.

        World leaders and paid proponents of AGW dogma are losing the battle because they do not grasp the law (“sattva”) of warfare.

        As David said to Goliath on the battlefield (~1000 B.C.): “Who is this that defies Truth, Reality, God, What Is, The Law of Nature, Sattva ?” (Bible, I Samuel 17)

        As the Goliath of AGW dogma collapses – the conclusion is already written – it is even more important that we act appropriately.

        The Bhagavad Gita describes the “sattva”, and also warns that the message cannot be perceived when the mind is agitated.

        E.g., this quote from Eknath Easwaran’s commentary on the Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2.45:

        “Though there is a vital need for hard work, we should take care in our fast-paced modern world to see that we do not get caught in work.”

        “The characteristics of the man established in sattva are calmness, compassion and complete fearlessness.

        ” When the mind is agitated, judgement is likely to be clouded; therefore the Gita says we should not undertake any action when angry or afraid. Such action is not likely to be correct or effective.”

        ” Any time our mind is agitated, the repetition of the mantram is a great help in calming our agitation, and when the mind is calm, judgement is clear.”

        With kind regards,
        Oliver K. Manuel

        • kakatoa said


          Thanks for noting Eknath Easwaran’s thoughts on the Bhagavad Gita. I was taken back to my Eastern Religions class (1979). I found

          ” When the mind is agitated, judgement is likely to be clouded; therefore the Gita says we should not undertake any action when angry or afraid. Such action is not likely to be correct or effective.”

          to be particularity insightful and true in my personal endeavors.

  2. M Simon said

    I love the Brit spelling myself. Since high school. More or less I have always been a sceptic. It comes with the engineering territory.

  3. lucia said

    Happy 4th of July!

    My high school English teacher was from England. She prohibited British spelling for her American students living in the US. I’m a poor speller and was taking French. What with British spelling often matching French spelling, and Mrs. Jackson’s reading selections being nearly 100% British literature, I often got dinged . (Oddly, she didn’t take points off. She just made editorial marks.)

  4. omanuel said

    Today’s science news from observations of the Sun [1] and theoretical models of the cosmos [2] again confirms the loss of

    a.) Basic principles of science after 1945 and our
    b.) Constitutional rights after 1945, for reasons documented here:


    1. Anthony Watts, “Another regime change – this time in solar data” (4 July 2012)

    2. CERN’s Large Hadron Collider Announcement, “Its A Boson! ” (4 July 2012)

  5. Brian H said

    Another great sckeptical study, in effect:

    We’ll wallowing in Peak Oil Glut by 2020.

  6. Brian H said

    typo: We’ll be wallowing..

    Follow me, follow,
    Down to the hollow
    Where we can wallow
    In gloooorious Mud Oil!

  7. Alan D McIntire said

    I stick with “skeptic”. In my mind, I pronounce “sceptic” SEPTIC, and assoicate the word with septic tanks and septic ulcers.

  8. dearieme said

    “Oddly, she didn’t take points off.” Since she was English you’re lucky that she didn’t take a cane to your posterior.

  9. lucia said

    Mrs. Jackson was very nice!

    She’d met her American husband when he attended Oxford on a Fullbright scholarship, married and moved to the US.

  10. j ferguson said

    Neighbours were the ones I liked.

  11. Don keiller said

    @Alan, coming from England I am aware of a type of dialect called “rhyming slang”.

    Thus “Can you Adam and Eve it?” translates to “Can you believe it?”

    True aficionados will drop the rhyming bit- i.e “Would you Adam it?”

    “Septic Tank” is also rhyming slang. I’ll leave it up to you and other posters to work out
    what a “Septic” is 🙂

  12. omanuel said

    The Rise of Reason in 1543; The Return to Feudalism in 1945

    The concurrent rise (~1543) and fall (~1945) of the
    scientific revolution and constitutional government:


    Society lives in fear of leaders like Pope Alexander VI

    Copernicus discovers Sol – solar system’s fountain of energy

    On July 4, declaration of human rights in the United States

    Einstein finds energy (E) stored as mass (m); Therefore, m => E powers the fountain of energy that sustains our lives.

    Hiroshima is destroyed; The United Nations is established
    to save mankind from destruction by m => E

    Society now lives in fear of Monsanto’s GM foods

  13. timetochooseagain said

    11-Cockney rhyming slang or as they called it in the third Ausrin Powers movie “English English”-it is actually quite impressive to see people converse in such a strange manner and yet be completely understood-at least by each other. Which is probably the point.

  14. Alif said

    Thanks for the info… Please visit back

  15. gallopingcamel said

    Brian H said (July 4, 2012 at 3:24 pm).

    Follow me, follow,
    Down to the hollow
    Where we can wallow
    In gloooorious Mud

    Oh how I miss Flanders & Swann. My favorites were the “Reluctant Cannibal” (I won’t eat people, eating people is wrong) and “Misalliance”:

    Together, they found them, the very next day,
    They had pulled up their roots and just shrivelled away.
    Deprived of that freedom for which we must fight,
    To veer to the left or to veer to the right!

    • timetochooseagain said

      I’m rather fond of “The Gasman Cometh” and “The Laws of Thermodynamics” even if the latter only covers half of the full set.

    • Ah. The Cannibal Song. I was introduced to it when I worked as an engineer at WFMT in the early 60s. The Midnight Special. I was going to UChicago at the time.

  16. omanuel said

    A new study to be published in the PNAS will show that solar plasma motion is more than a 100 times slower than expected!

    These results falsify the cornerstone of the standard solar model, namely the transfer of heat, the origin of magnetic fields, and the supposed mixing of heavy elements with lighter elements in the sun.

  17. stan said


    Karoly, one of the authors of the Gergis garbage, has reviewed Michael Mann’s marvelous new book.

    “Unfortunately, the frightening aspects of this story are the details of the Climate Wars, of the repeated attacks on Mann’s research by climate change confusionists. Commentators with no scientific expertise, ranging from politicians such as Republican congressman Joe Barton from Texas, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, or Republican Senator James Inhofe from Oklahoma, to blog writers Stephen McIntyre and Marc Morano, have repeatedly promulgated misinformation and sought to launch formal investigations into Mann’s research, claiming professional misconduct or worse, even though it had been peer reviewed and confirmed by other scientists. They found a group of media reporters and commentators ready to repeat these claims without question and to amplify them. The blogosphere and some media outlets can be very effective echo chambers for communicating misinformation.”

    I think Mr. Karoly done stepped in it.

  18. Anonymous said

    Septic tank?

    Come on guys.

  19. stan said


    Do you or anyone else have any idea what is up with the moderation at CA? I’d say that lately half my comments end up in permanent moderation. The other half get published immediately. That is, once in moderation they never leave. And I can’t figure out what triggers the “moderation” tag.

    The current discussion about Karoly and suing for defamation is an example. As a lawyer, I answered a question someone asked about the need to establish actual financial damages in order to sue. I wrote that the common law had categories of defamation — libel per se — where the subject matter was such that it wasn’t necessary. These included things like crime, loathsome disease, etc. This got put in moderation and then simply deleted. What could be objectionable about noting the existence of a common law doctrine in a thread discussing lawsuits?

    Now this 2d comment is stuck in moderation purgatory (it’s a response to a claim that proof would be a swearing contest between experts). I wrote:

    “The alleged defamatory statements would be:

    1. That Steve has no scientific expertise, and
    2. Repeatedly promulgated misinformation

    The first is a slam dunk. The published studies would likely do, but a parade of expert academics all vouching for Steve’s expertise would nail it for certain. That alone makes the case a winner.

    But Steve is justifiably upset about the 2d statement because of its ugly implications. The second would require proof from Karoly that would be very difficult to come up with. While plaintiff ordinarily has the burden of proof, no one can prove a negative. Karoly would have to identify repeated instances of Steve spreading misinformation. Simply showing that people disagree with Steve wouldn’t likely suffice.”

    I’m reading thru the thread and there is all kind of snippy personal crap going back and forth in the comments and THIS gets stuck in moderation? Anyone else have a curious experience over there lately?

    • timetochooseagain said

      Steve is, in my experience, deliberately tougher on friendly posters than hostile ones. I used to be a lot more hot headed than I am now, Steve reigned me in quite frequently and I’m thankful for that. Jeff did the same thing for me a couple times. If I had to guess: Steve really wants to discourage comments that might be construed as advocating legal action against Karoly. That’s quite understandable. Be very careful. Steve knows that the other side is prone to picking up on what is said in comments and then putting those words in Steve’s mouth.

      • Brian H said

        Re: timetochooseagain (Jul 16 12:53), I doubt he reigned you or anyone in. Can’t imagine what that means, anyway.
        It’s “reined in”. Horses, not kings.

        After my use of the word “fraud” re CGI, I was banned for some time. When I got back, I asked if subsequent developments hadn’t rather justified the term. That seems to have resulted in a lifetime ban. SM has his own little ways, it seems.

    • Stan,

      I have found in my experience that Steve will explain his reasons by email. Like most of us in business, he has substantial experience in legal matters and may be concerned about implications of a comment. I haven’t even read a climate blog in the last 2 weeks so I am very much out of the loop. The next several weeks will likely get worse as we are relocating our business a significant distance.

  20. stan said

    Uh oh. Back in moderation purgatory again.

    “So — we have a database where the sources of 90% of the data are known to produce bad data a significant portion of the time. We don’t know which sources are good and which are bad. We don’t know by how much any of the bad data is bad. We don’t know how much the bad data varies in the amount that it is bad or when it is bad at these various bad sources that we haven’t identified.

    But we got a superduperpooperscooper algorithm that will turn all this stuff into pure 24K gold data. Rumpelstiltskin was a piker.”

    I guess ‘superduperpooperscooper’ failed the proper decorum standard. Surprised he didn’t just snip the one word. I think the rest of it is a reasonable summary of the algorithm. If you can only be sure that 10% of the data is reasonably accurate and you don’t know which parts of the data are the 10%, I don’t think there is any possible way to turn that stuff into gold. I believe that Lucia had a thread on this a long time back and IIRC she didn’t think much of it either.

    thanks for the replies and Jeff, good luck on the move.

  21. omanuel said

    Jeff, there is an urgency to getting beyond Climategate.- ASAP:

    Society is frightened and crumbling;
    Congress is
    caught in a bind and cannot:

    a.) Evaluate the merits of new science and technology
    b.) Trust the US NAS to make future funding decisions

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: