If Society Can’t Trust Scientists, Who Can They Trust? Climate Sophist is Playing San Francisco Judge as a Complete Fool

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Dr. Myles Allen must think that the San Francisco Judge is a complete fool. I just finished a post refuting many of his claims, but one example needed to be singled out. In his presentation, Dr. Myles Allen replaced the poster child Mt. Kilimanjaro, which was exposed as a fraud in the Climategate emails, with the Glacier National Park Glacier. He claimed that man-made global warming is the cause of the decline of the glacier. The problem is, Glacier National Park is in the middle of nowhere, and there is no urban heat island effect. There has been no warming in that area since 1994 and temperatures have actually been in a slight DOWNTREND!!! The judge needs to ask Dr. Myles Allen how does a glacier melt due to man-made warming when there is no warming? Just what evidence does he have to support his claim? Show me the data!!! The following headline from 1923 predicted all the glaciers would be gone from Glacier National Park by 1948.

Glacier

This highlights the main source of Climate Sophistry, the selective use of the ground measurements corrupted by the urban heat island effect. They find warming, and deliberately misattribute it to CO2. That tactic was highlighted in an earlier post Click Here. As long as this fraud is not thoroughly exposed, the Climate Sophists will always be able to make there case using Cherry-Picked Corrupted and Adjusted Ground Measurements. This is truly the scientific fraud of the ages.

Additionally, while I wasn’t able to find a pre-1960’s Sperry Glacier Photo, I was able to find one of Gulkana Glacier. That photo shows much of the glacier being gone by the early 1950s. You can cherry-pick glacier photos to make any story you want. Some glaciers are larger today than back in the 1960s. There is also plenty of evidence glaciers were disappearing well before the 1950s.

BTW, Dr. Myles Allen is from Oxford and should know better. He must be one of those people that used Orwell, Rand, Huxley, and Vonnegut as instruction manuals, not warmings. Allowing this kind of corruption, dishonesty, and deception to undermine science is one of the worst things society can do. If we let people like this punish legitimate companies producing an essential quality of life improving commodity, it will be a huge step back for all of us. Without oil, the global economy will collapse. Without climate sophistry, the world is a far better place. The astronomical costs of following these false scientific prophets far outweigh their benefits.

More Posts on the Issue:

CO2 Can’t Explain Ground Measurement Variations

Isolating the Contribution of CO2 on Atmospheric Temperature

Ceteris Paribus; Less is More, Use Only Data Sets That Don’t Require “Adjustments.”

Climate “Science” on Trial; Temperature Records Don’t Support NASA GISS

Climate “Science” on Trial; The Criminal Case Against the Alarmists

4 Graphs That Demonstrate Why The IPCC Climate Models Will NEVER Be Accurate

Congress Should Investigate RSS Data “Adjustments”

Climate “Science” on Trial; How Does Ice Melt In Sub-Zero Temperatures?

Climate “Science” on Trial; Cherry Picking Locations to Manufacture Warming

CO2 Can’t Cause the Warming Alarmists Claim it Does

Please Like, Share, Subscribe, comment and forward to the San Francisco Judge and Exxon. This madness has to be stopped. Court Rulings based upon Fraud is one of the quickest ways to break down society and trust in our country’s foundation and essential institutions. Once we lose trust in our judicial system, truth and justice, and the rule of law we will quickly degenerate into anarchy. Progressives may want to live in the world of Mad Max/Road Warrior…I sure as hell don’t.

Note: The one introductory graphic is of Gulkana Glacier, and it shows that much of the glacier was gone by the early 1950s. It is the only graphic I could find specifically labeled pre-1960.

Advertisements

21 thoughts on “If Society Can’t Trust Scientists, Who Can They Trust? Climate Sophist is Playing San Francisco Judge as a Complete Fool”

  1. I have cross-posted this at NoTricksZone, in reply to your comment, but it is currently “in moderation.”

    Myles Allen has lots of form:

    http://mfgaccountabilityproject.org/2018/01/07/activists-hope-use-climate-attribution-take-manufacturers/

    “Allen first got the idea of going after manufacturers back in 2003 when he was told it would be “impossible to attribute this particular event [floods in southern England] to past emissions of greenhouse gases.” Allen disagreed. According to Climatewire, Allen saw “the possibility of massive class-action lawsuits—carrying the potential for ‘up to six billion plaintiffs’ around the world—attempting to hold greenhouse gas emitters liable for damages.”

    It was several years later that Allen would attend the exclusive summit of anti-fossil fuel activists in La Jolla, California, where they would lay out their plans to take down energy manufacturers.

    The summit, hosted by the Union of Concerned Scientists and Climate Accountability Institute, was attended by many activists with whom Allen would later co-author several papers that attempt to attribute specific climate damages to individual companies.”

    There is a lot more background on Allen here:
    “Playing Climate Games – The Latest Attempt to Blame Carbon Dioxide for Extreme Weather” 2011.

    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/science-papers/originals/playing-climate-games

    “However, he (Allen) is also trying to produce a credible model to support the insurance industry and the NGO’s who are trying to sue countries for having had the gall to have a decent standard of living. This was his message in a BBC interview in 2003:

    “The vast numbers affected by the effects of climate change, such as flooding, drought and forest fires, mean that potentially people, organisations and even countries could be seeking compensation for the damage caused.”

    “It’s not a question we could stand up and survive in a court of law at the moment, but it’s the sort of question we should be working towards scientifically,” Myles Allen, a physicist at Oxford University, UK, told the BBC World Service’s Discovery programme.”

    “Some of it might be down to things you’d have trouble suing – like the Sun – so you obviously need to work how particularly human influence has contributed to the overall change in risk,” the scientist, who has worked with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said.”

    “But once you’ve done that, then we as scientists can essentially hand the problem over to the lawyers, for them to assess whether the change in risk is enough for the courts to decide that a settlement could be made.”

    “This next decade is going to see quite a lot of climate change cases around the world”, said environment lawyer Peter Roderick, who runs the Climate Justice Program for Friends Of The Earth International.

    That is Allen’s UN agenda, and he had used this legal compensation approach with the European Heat Wave, when claims of 30-40,000 deaths were made. Allen and Richard Lord, a London lawyer, published “The Blame Game”, again in the journal Nature, linking responsibility for the European heat wave of 2003 to greenhouse gas emissions.”

    The sad thing is that Allen was a PhD student under Professor Richard Lindzen. He must have cut a lot of classes.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. dennisambler said:

    Some of it might be down to things you’d have trouble suing – like the Sun

    Maybe, but the owner of the sun can most certainly be sued, maybe for not taking due care of the behaviour or permformance of her property, or having inadequate or improper control of her property, or permitting it to create a nuisance or something similar.
    By claiming ownership, she could be held responsible. Dog owners in many parts of the world are held responsible for their pets, so why not Sun owners?

    Like

  3. Don’t overlook the fact that there are two angles to this and other global warming lawsuits: 1) “the science is settled”. 2) “Oil & coal companies knew this all along, but paid skeptic climate scientist ‘shills’ to lie.” As an ordinary citizen with no climate science expertise, I leave the dissection of the science to the experts, it’s fascinating to watch AGW skeptic experts take apart AGW material. But as I’ve said more than once, you don’t have to be a climate scientist to check the veracity of the evidence behind the ‘crooked skeptics’ politically-based accusation.

    If you aren’t aware of it, my “SEPP is exploring if, as a party possibly slandered in the City of Oakland complaint …” blog post ( http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6478 ) is the latest in a series of post dissecting the fatal fault found in all of these lawsuits, namely how they are devoid of any real evidence of a pay-for-performance arrangement existing between skeptic climate scientists and industry people. After 20+ years of the accusation, the only “evidence” which remotely sounds plausible is a subset of leaked industry campaign memos which are NOT what Al Gore and its few other main pushers say it is.

    Like

    1. Yep, it would be great for the judge to demand transparency, and disclosure of conflict of interests. Courts are a great place to dispel myths.

      Like

  4. If you check historical photos of the glacier you’ll find most of he receding was already in place by the early 1920s. Go back to the late 19th century and the glacier was HUGE during the Little Ice Age, which ended bout 1880-1900. Shades of the fake photo of “smoke” from a power plant that is actually steam.

    Like

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 )

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