The Federal Climate Science Report Is Bunk; Trump Must Fire All the Charlatans Responsible

Climate protest
ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty

A bunch of alarmist holdovers from the Obama era released a report insisting that climate change is still just about the worst thing ever.

The Federal Climate Science Special Report from the U.S. Global Change Research Program – to give it its full grandiose title – was seized on by the liberal media as proof that President Trump is wrong on climate and that the “science” still supports all those greens, Democrats, RINOs and other pondlife demanding more action be taken to combat global warming.

Needless to say the report is bull from start to finish.

In a moment I shall thoroughly debunk it. (If you’re impatient, you can cut to the chase and skip straight to the paragraph below beginning “Here is why it cannot be trusted…”)

But first, if you don’t mind, I want to have a bit of fun at the expense of all those prize pillocks who for the last few days have been making hay with this alarmist propaganda.

Here is how the liberal media reported it. You can almost hear the trickle of their drool as they salivate over just how wrong and anti-science President Trump is.

The New York Times:

Directly contradicting much of the Trump administration’s position on climate change, 13 federal agencies unveiled an exhaustive scientific report on Friday that says humans are the dominant cause of the global temperature rise that has created the warmest period in the history of civilization.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

World’s Smartest Dog Peer-Reviews Science Papers

Staffordshire Bull Terrier
AP/Alastair Grant

Meet Dr Olivia Doll, the world’s smartest dog. Dr Doll is the formal professional name of Ollie, a Staffordshire terrier, who sits on the board of seven international medical journals and was recently asked to review a paper on the management of tumors.

According to Perth Now:

Her impressive curriculum vitae lists her current role as senior lecturer at the Subiaco College of Veterinary Science and past associate of the Shenton Park Institute for Canine Refuge Studies — which is code for her earlier life in the dog refuge.

Ollie’s owner, veteran public health expert Mike Daube, decided to test how carefully some journals scrutinised their editorial reviewers, by inventing Dr Doll and making up her credentials.

The five-year-old pooch has managed to dupe a range of publications specialising in drug abuse, psychiatry and respiratory medicine into appointing her to their editorial boards.

Dr Doll has even been fast-tracked to the position of associate editor of the Global Journal of Addiction and Rehabilitation Medicine.

Several journals have published on their websites a supplied photo of Dr Doll, which is actually of a bespectacled Kylie Minogue.

Professor Daube said none of them smelt a rat, despite Dr Doll’s listed research interests in “the benefits of abdominal massage for medium-sized canines” and “the role of domestic canines in promoting optimal mental health in ageing males”.

But just like the “penises cause climate change” hoaxers, Professor Daube is using humor to make a serious point about the reliability of research in academe.

The Canadian investigative journalist Donna Laframboise concluded something similar in a report last year for the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

“A journal’s decision to publish a paper provides no assurance that its conclusions are sound . . . Fraudulent research makes it past gatekeepers at even the most prestigious journals. While science is supposed to be self-correcting, the process by which this occurs is haphazard and byzantine.”

Laframboise was especially damning about the way “peer review” has been used to flatter dubious research in the field of climate ‘science’.

This has been a well-publicized problem with climate science ever since the Climategate emails leak showed the scientists at the heart of the global warming ‘consensus’ engaging in all manner of skullduggery in order to prop up their debased cod-scientific theory.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Great Barrier Reef Still Not Dying, Whatever Washington Post Says…

REUTERS/Getty Images

‘The Great Barrier Reef is dying’ claims the Washington Post.
This is classic fake news.

Like the thriving polar bear, like the recovering ice caps, like the doing-just-fine Pacific islands, the Great Barrier Reef has become a totem for the liberal-left not because it’s in any kind of danger but because it’s big and famous and photogenic and lots and lots of people would be really sad if it disappeared.

But it’s not going to disappear. That’s just a #fakefakenews lie designed to promote the climate alarmist agenda.

The annoying thing is, though, whenever I write another piece like this one – Shock Study: Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Doing Just Fine – I get besieged by greenies on Twitter telling me what an evil denier I am.

Meet, for example, my nemesis Tripp Funderburk.

Yes, if he didn’t exist you’d have to invent him. Tripp Funderburk describes himself as “a Duke football fan. Lover of coral reefs. Advocate for climate change solutions.”

There’s a big clue to where he’s coming from ideologically in that last sentence. Even so, it would be a mistake to dismiss him as just a random eco-loon with a funny name. As Tripp Funderburk thinks, so does pretty much everyone else in the entire greenie-left-liberal universe.

“Is the Great Barrier Reef dying due to climate change caused by man’s selfishness and greed?

I’ll lay money that if you asked this question to your kids’ biology teacher or to Bill Nye the Junk Science Guy or to that nice Richard Osman off Pointless or to Matt Damon or anyone else who would have voted for Hillary Clinton or to any Labour (and a good many Conservative) politicians or anyone who works for the ABC in Australia, the BBC, the Guardian, MSNBC, CNN and the New York Times or comedy Senator Al Franken or  Myles Allen, Professor of Geosystem science at Oxford University or pretty much any other science prof from Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or Yale or any marine biologist or a lawyer from a big City law firm or anyone who voted Remain in the EU Referendum, you’d get the same answer: “Yes.”

How do they know?

Have they been out there personally – as I have – to check?

No, of course not.

The reason all these people believe the Great Barrier Reef is dying is because they all get their fake news from the same green-left-liberal echo chamber.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Yippee ki yay, liberals! It’s Sarah Palin Month on Telegraph Blogs!

The new Margaret Thatcher?

Sarah Palin will be with us during February (Photo: Getty)
Sarah Palin will be with us during February (Photo: Getty)

Did any of you catch that brilliant Charlie Brooker demolition of Sarah Palin on Channel 4’s zappy, new, heavily promoted topical comedy/politics show 10 o’clock Live the other night?

For those who missed it, let me tell you what his insights were:

Sarah Palin is dumb.

Sarah Palin likes guns.

Sarah Palin is right wing and American.

But for all that, she’s really quite attractive.

You’ve no idea what paroxysms of consensual, right-on ecstasy these observations induced in the audience. That’s because Sarah Palin is to leftie comedy in this Teens decade what Margaret Thatcher was to leftie comedy in the Eighties: a target so unimpeachably politically correct you don’t even have to define what it is you dislike about. The very name is enough. A bit like when Ben Elton appeared in his spangly suit at the Comedy Store and just had to say “Thatch!” to have them all rolling in the aisles.

And it’s the same in America I’m quite sure. And that’s why I love Sarah Palin so much. Even, if she entered the White House in 2012 and proved the worst president in US history (quite a challenge, given the standards set by her immediate predecessor), even if she – “whoops” – accidentally pressed the red button that nuked North Korea leading to the global conflagration that destroyed most of the planet, even then I still think I would find it in my heart to love and forgive her. Why?

Because of all the many qualities Sarah Palin has, the best of all is this:

She drives liberals totally crazy. So crazy, in fact, that Washington Post libtard Dana Milbank is boycotting Sarah Palin for the month of February and urging other journalists to do the same. But here on Telegraph Blogs we’ve decided to do the opposite. Every day a blogger will mention her.

Welcome to Sarah Palin Month on Telegraph Blogs, everybody. It’s there to celebrate. It’s there to annoy.

Related posts:

  1. Why we still heart Sarah Palin
  2. Sarah Palin is a kingmaker, not the next US president
  3. Sarah Palin totally gets it
  4. 10 O’Clock Live is shedding viewers. Oh dear

12 thoughts on “Yippee ki yay, liberals! It’s Sarah Palin Month on Telegraph Blogs!”

  1. Bronny says:2nd February 2011 at 12:14 amJames,
    Can you see why you get so much grief about your views when you say you would choose a wholly inappropriate person as US President, just to piss off the liberals – regardless of the facts of her abilities? And you wonder why people question your decisions on global warming and your ability to evaluate those facts.Nothing to be proud of.
  2. Billy the Kid says:2nd February 2011 at 7:54 pmSarah Palin! SARAH PALIN!Just doin’ my part to help the Telegraph blogs.
  3. Nige Cook says:3rd February 2011 at 9:21 amBronny,That’s exactly what people said about Ronald Reagan! He seriously offended the left-wingers with his “evil empire” evangelism speech about the Soviet Union, while he reinstated the neutron bomb (550 warheads to deter the Warsaw Pact tanks) and initiated Star Wars/SDI.Sometimes, unpopularity with the lefties is not a bad thing. I think Sarah Palin is the kind of person who wouldn’t think twice about pressing the button to eliminate a nuclear threat that is growing, without trying to appease the left-wingers (and the enemy) for years while the threat evolves from a few fission devices to a large stockpile of thermonuclear devices. While I’ve blogged in detail about declassified documents like TM 23-200 that show most thermal, blast and fallout casualties can be averted by civil defence, WWIII would not be a picnic, and I think there is a risk of it “accidentally” emerging from weak, pro-appeasement leadership. Peace treaties get broken very easily, as occurred in the 1930s. Thugs respect strength, not diplomacy.
  4. Fearless Frank says:3rd February 2011 at 11:42 amReagan and Delingpole have nothing in comon. Reagan was the inventor of Reaganomics that broke the back of the Soviet Union and known as a the great communicator. Delingpole is just a hate peddler and mickey mouse denialist.
  5. Nige Cook says:3rd February 2011 at 12:33 pmAnonymous “Fearless Frank”, I wasn’t comparing investigative journalist James Delingpole to actor/president Ronald Reagan. I can’t believe you misunderstood my comment!James isn’t a hate peddler and mickey mouse denialist. It’s fact that the tree ring data doesn’t indicate temperature because tree growth depends on cloud cover (and other factors), not purely air temperature. Even mickey mouse could understand that, but it troubles you. Once you grasp that (and the fact satellites can’t measure global surface air temperature reliably due to cloud cover, while most weather station records were from towns and turned out to be measuring rises in direct city hot air pollution, unconnected to global CO2), you need to rely on measured sea level changes. The sea rose 120 metres over the past 18,000 years, or 0.67 cm/year on average, compared to just 0.20 cm/year over the past century. The maximum rate of rise of sea level naturally was even higher than 0.20 cm/year, so current rates of global climate change are well within natural limits, and relatively small. Dr Ferenc Miskolczi exposed the reason for this: H2O evaporation caused by CO2 causes more cloud cover, which cancels out the CO2 effect on temperature. Climatic researcher Dr Ferenc Miskolczi resigned from a NASA in 2006 when they used peer-review/groupthink politics to censor out his data. I wish James would write about this.
  6. Sebaneau says:4th February 2011 at 11:59 amAnyone with half a brain can see on a chart that there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature. But that is not even the issue. The fact is, that even if human activity was warming up the atmosphere, there is nothing anyone should do about it.
    Global warming is good –if only it were occurring– and even according to the IPCC’s doctored figures, no policy could change anything in a noticeable manner.
  7. anti-idiot says:4th February 2011 at 12:02 pmThis is has nothing to do with Sarah Palin but I don’t care. Just wanted to comment on the irony of keeping that book in the loo (with the toilet paper). I expect if would make a cheap alternative to toilet paper
  8. Fearless Frank says:5th February 2011 at 3:51 amNige, anonymous because Delingpole keeps getting my posts deleted. So much for freedom of speech. Let’s hope this one isn’t deleted.
  9. Colonel Sibthorp says:5th February 2011 at 10:03 pmI have got a funny feeling that Fearless Frank is ever so slightly dim. Could be wrong but I doubt it.
  10. Fearless Frank says:8th February 2011 at 2:52 pmWow, denialists that feel funny. I thought feeling stupid were your trademarks. Certainly true with delingpole’s gaff on tv.
  11. Nige Cook says:10th February 2011 at 7:09 am“Peer” (bigoted)-review at NASA caused the whole problem in the first place when it suppressed its own researcher Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi! Unlike the IPCC model which makes water absorb infrared and augment CO2 effects, water has a negative feedback on CO2 emissions, CANCELLING OUT the temperature “effect”, by preventing CO2 from driving climate change (climate change is driven naturally by other factors, such as Milankovich cycles, etc.).Dianna Cotter, “Hungarian Physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi proves CO2 emissions irrelevant in Earth’s Climate,” Portland civil rights examiner, http://www.examiner.com/civil-rights-in-portland/hungarian-physicist-dr-ferenc-miskolczi-proves-co2-emissions-irrelevant-earth-s-climate#ixzz1DXJY794q :“The most effective form of cooling is the evaporation of water, which takes heat energy from the surface and puts it into the air. Clouds form which do three things: 1) create more cloud cover reflecting solar radiation away from the planet which also 2) releases heat into the very high upper atmosphere where it too is radiated out into space as the clouds condense into precipitation, and 3) drops much cooler water back down to the surface cooling things even further.”The guy resigned from NASA when NASA suppressed his data.Climate scientist and fellow Hungarian, Dr. Miklos Zagoni in his paper “CO2 Cannot Cause any more “Global Warming”” dated December 2009 describes this discovery and its meaning. Dr. Zagoni beautifully sums it up all up:

    “Since the Earth’s atmosphere is not lacking in greenhouse gases [water vapor], if the system could have increased its surface temperature it would have done so long before our emissions. It need not have waited for us to add CO2: another greenhouse gas, H2O, was already to hand in practically unlimited reservoirs in the oceans.”

    Dr. Zagoni explains:

    “Earth type planetary atmospheres, having partial cloud cover and sufficient reservoir of water; maintain an energetically uniquely determined, constant, maximized greenhouse effect that cannot be increased further by emissions. The greenhouse temperature must fluctuate around this theoretical equilibrium constant; [change] is possible only if the incoming available energy changes.”

  12. Nige Cook says:10th February 2011 at 7:25 amHi James,I’m writing a physics pre-print server paper reviewing the evidence of H2O evaporation on blocking of CO2 temperature effects, in the papers by Dr. Miklos Zagoni and Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi, and their NASA censorship history. I’ll let you know if it is accepted and goes online, although I’m aware you’re a very busy author who must be tiring of this subject by now.

Comments are closed.