From the reports I’ve been reading it is turning into a disaster for the climate alarmists out in San Francisco.
The kinds of errors I’m seeing are errors of arrogance, errors of hubris, and errors of overconfidence. The Climate “Experts” are making the Keystone Kops look competent. My impression is that because they were in San Francisco’s 9th District they would automatically be assigned a sympathetic liberal nitwit for a Judge, and all they would need to do is show up. The one “expert” Oxford Ph.D. Myles Allen even though he could slip a graphic demonstrating CO2’s concentration looking to be more 10,000 ppm than 400 ppm by the judge. How stupid do these people think liberal judges are?
Oxford Professor Myles Allen was illustrating how much Co2 was now in the atmosphere when the judge rebuked him for using a misleading illustration that made the atmosphere appear to have more than 400 parts per million of CO2.
“It’s 400 parts per million but you make it look like it’s 10,000 part per million,” he said.
Professor Allen was forced to admit his slide was misleading. “Your honor is quite right,” he agreed.
Integrity is defined as doing the right thing when no one is looking. Climate science has no integrity so that is where they are most likely to make their mistakes. In the Climategate emails, it was exposed that the Mt Kilimanjaro Glacier is disappearing due to sublimation, not melting, yet the “experts” did nothing to dispell the lie and even perpetuated (See An Inconvenient Truth).
The problem with founding something on a lie, and especially a lie this big, is that you have to control the lie over so many different areas. The Liberal Media, the Liberal Universities, the Liberal Politicians, the Liberal NGO’s are all easy to get to walk in lockstep. Collusion and unifying the message is easy with those groups, that is what they do. The problem comes when you step outside of the liberal Echo Chamber and face the real world. That is exactly what is happening in San Francisco. The Echo Chamber malfunctions in a court of law, even one as liberal as the 9th Circuit. No matter how many times the Climate Alarmists repeat the garbage they spew at their cocktail parties to the overwhelming praise of the other drunken nitwits, in a court of law, someone actually gets to punch back and challenge the nonsense. You can’t censor debate in a court of law, the entire purpose of the trial is to facilitate debate. For that very reason Climate Alarmists, who survive by silencing opposition, are complete fools to think they can survive in a debate.
One of the best examples of big lie problem are the disclosures for various California Municipal Bond Issues. When it is to the liberal’s advantage, they downplay the risks of climate change. Trumping up the risks of climate change would make the bonds riskier, and therefore demand a higher interest rate be paid. That is not in their favor, so they simply change their position. When they stand to make a fortune by suing the Big Oil Companies, they trump up the dangers. This is very strange for a “settled” science.
The other key issue San Francisco is exposing is that liberal judges aren’t a stupid, gullible, corrupt and easily manipulated as the climate alarmists seem to think they are. The climate alarmists aren’t throwing red meat to their kool-aid drinking believers, they are defending lies to a judge that risks having his decision overturned. The mistakes being made by the Climate Alarmists are as stated above, mistakes of extreme arrogance or extreme incompetence. Showing a graph that is off by 10^2 is simply unheard of for any serious trial.
The other big mistake the Climate Alarmists made was allowing Toto to look behind the curtain, they allowed a little boy to make the observation that the Emperor has no clothes. The judge exposed the weaknesses of the Climate Alarmist’s arguments and provided insight into how real climate scientists can fight this fight in the future.
Key Defense Tactics for Arguing Against the Climate Alarmists:
- Use the words and documents of the alarmists against them. The bond issue is pure genius.
- The Climate Alarmists relied upon misleading graphics and discredited research like the “Hockeystick.” That alone proves they don’t have much supporting their arguments.
- CO2 is 400 ppm, or 1 out of every 2,500 atmospheric molecules. Is it even plausible that my activating 1 out of every 2,500 molecules you can materially change temperature? There is a reason they used a misleading graphic regarding this issue.
- The models used by the IPCC have failed miserably. If something is understood, it can be modeled. The Climate Alarmists can’t model the climate using CO2 as a significant variable.
- Mt Kilimanjaro’s glacier isn’t melting, it is essentially evaporating. Asking a Climate Alarmist how a glacier melts in sub-zero temperatures would be game over.
- Controlling for all factors but CO2, temperatures show no increase with the increase in CO2 over the past 50+ years. Antarctica is the ideal laboratory for identifying the CO2 signature, and it shows no relationship between CO2 and temperature.
- Using MODTRAN, there is no CO2 signature observed below 3 km. H20 dominates the Troposphere where all ground measurements are taken. Troposphere warming simply isn’t due to CO2.
- The oceans are warming. CO2 and LWIR between 13 and 18µ won’t warm water. If you can’t tie ocean warming to CO2, you can’t tie atmospheric warming to CO2.
- CO2’s only mechanism by which to affect climate change is by thermalizing LWIR between 13 and 18µ. There is no defined mechanism by which CO2 would suddenly increase to warm the globe to leave an ice age, and there is no mechanism by which once warming started for CO2 to stop the warming. Once warming starts the oceans would degas CO2 creating a death spiral as the globe warms. That has never happened in 600 million years of geologic history.
- CO2 has been as high as 7,000 ppm and the earth has NEVER experienced catastrophic warming, life has always survived. Coral reefs developed during periods of much higher CO2. Ocean acidification was never a problem in the past during periods of much higher CO2. pH is a logarithmic function so huge amounts of CO2 would be required to materially change the pH of the oceans. No mass extinction has been blamed on CO2.
- Courts of Law are the Skeptic’s home court. Ad Hominin attacks, censorship, ostracism, bullying, peer pressure and coercion don’t work in a court of law. In a court of law, the Climate Alarmists are judged by the quality of their arguments, and their arguments are pure horse manure.
- Science isn’t determined by “consensus,” science is done by shattering the consensus. Einstein was never part of the “consensus” and that is why he is remembered today.
- There is no such thing as a “settled” science, and “settled” sciences certainly don’t continually “adjust” their data and estimates. Continually adjusting data and estimates defines the “settled” Climate Science.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and the courts are bright UV bacteriocidal spotlights. Climate Alarmists, relying on liberal judge shopping as their key tactic, made a serious tactical error. They exposed to the entire world how truly incompetent they are. They essentially hosted a joint military exercise and were beaten back to the stone age (or Dark Ages). The opposition learned far more than the Climate Alarmists did. The defense relied upon facts, logic, reason, science, and most importantly common sense. The Climate Alarmists acted as if the judge was a member of their corrupt “peer/pal” review consensus, and they bet wrong.
Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment