Saturday, March 28, 2015

There Are Billions of Dollars for Climate Alarmism

The tip of the climate spending iceberg. 
How your tax and consumer dollars finance Climate Crisis, Inc. and hobble America 
 by Paul Driessen 

     A recent Washington Post article notes, Lockheed Martin is getting into renewable energy, nuclear fusion, “sustainability” and even fish farming projects, to augment its reduced defense profits.
     The company plans to forge new ties with Defense Department and other Obama initiatives, based on a shared belief in man-made climate change as a critical security and planetary threat. It is confident that its expertise, lobbying skills will land it plentiful contracts and subsidies.
     90% of the titanic climate funding iceberg is invisible to most citizens, businessmen and politicians. The mult-billion-dollar agenda reflects the Obama Administration’s commitment to using climate change to radically transform America. It reflects a determination to make the climate crisis industry so enormous that no one will be able to tear it down, even as computer models and disaster claims become less and less credible – and even if Republicans control Congress and the White House after 2016.
     A long list of regulators, researchers, universities, businesses, manufacturers, pressure groups, journalists and politicians have such reputational and authority interests in alarmism that they will defend its tenets and largesse vigorously.
      With no transparency and no accountability for damage they inflict on disfavored industries and families, they pursue this agenda despite global warming being dead last in the latest Gallup poll of 15 issues of greatest concern to Americans.

To read this report -

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Public Concern About Climate Change Remains Low

According to a recent poll by Gallup, the public's concern for environmental issues concern to drop. 

Global Warming remains at the bottom of the list.

Thursday, March 12, 2015

APS Workshop on Climate Change

     In January, 2014 the American Physical Society (APS) held a one day workshop on climate change and invited six climatologists to participate.  A full transcript of the workshop can be found here. The six speakers are all very eminent climate scientists.  The discussion was limited to the physical basis of climate change and atmospheric physics was the predominant topic.  Three of the speakers lean to the alarmist view. That is they think we are headed toward a climate catastrophe due to man-made Carbon Dioxide. These are Dr. Held, Dr. Collins, and Dr. Santer.  The other three lean to the skeptical view and do not think we are headed to a climate catastrophe caused by man-made carbon dioxide. These are Dr. Curry, Dr. Lindzen and Dr. Christy. (click here for a brief bio of each)
     Climate science and the debate about it are much more complex than the media, the politicians and public know. This workshop drilled down to the root of the disagreements and reading it reveals the considerable uncertainty in estimates of both climate sensitivity to CO2 and the effect of natural long term climate cycles.
      This transcript (click here) is as good at explaining the issues. Professor Judith Curry said, “ This is a remarkable document… it provides in my opinion what is the most accurate portrayal of the scientific debates surrounding climate change.”

Saturday, March 7, 2015

Failure of the Electronic Medical Records Mandate

     On Friday March 6, 2015, NPR had a piece on electronic medical records (EMR) as mandated under the Affordable Care Act.  The "hoped for" advantage of such systems would be the ability to share records, thereby enabling cross-referencing of symptoms and attempted remedies between practitioners and eliminating duplicated effort.  At great expense hospitals and medical practitioners have digitized their records, but the goal of sharing has not happened.  Thus far, it has been a waste of billions of dollars
     These EMR systems are unable to share information; thereby not enabling the industry to cross-reference and expedite. That totally defeats the potential gains through EMR.  The interviewee on NPR described how he checked into a “retirement” home and how they retyped into their computer system print-outs of his doctor’s computer system.

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Climate Change Statement

      In the May/June 2007 issue of the Skeptical Inquirer, the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (known at that time as the Committee for Scientific Investigation for the Claims of the Paranormal) issued a Position Statement on Global Warming.  It caused quite an uproar among a previously loyal following.  Nevertheless, Middle Tennessee Skeptics chose to evaluate this position statement and not simply to march "lock step" with the country's premiere skeptics organization.  Our goal was to offer EVIDENCE to support this position statement.
     As we examined arguments both pro and con, we found the most often repeated claim that "the science was solid and the debate was over" to be fallacious.  Even to make such a statement about such an immature research topic was preposterous and an embarrassment to the skeptical community.  To make matters even worse, the Skeptical Inquirer has persisted with very one-sided and biased publications with "strawman" arguments demeaning and disrespecting scientists with credible challenges to prevailing theories of anthropogenic global warming.
     Although we continue to purchase the Skeptical Inquirer (which we have for twenty years), we no longer offer financial support as an associate member.  Because of this obvious failing to provide a true skeptical platform for fair debate on this climate change, we likewise question many of the less official positions the Committee has on other topics.
     We have added our position on the Climate Change page of this website.  We have made it our policy to share evidence (not opinion pieces) that challenges prevailing theories on climate change.  The debate is hardly over.  Real science continues to improve our understanding on climate change, so responsible, fair, and balanced policy decisions can be made by political leaders.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Mixed Results on Polar Ice

Here is more proof that claims that Climate Science is settled is WRONG.  Whereas the measurements of Arctic ice reasonably match the models,
 Models of Antarctic Ice isn't even close to what is happening