Canada about to expose the global warming hoax

[BranchDavidian]

Could this be true?

 

Michael Mann, the man-made climate change guru, decided to sue a climate scientist who challenged his data and said that Mann "belongs in the State pen, not Penn St." in a Canadian court.

Well, that decision turned out to be not too smart for Mr. Mann, who has now refused the court's order to turn over his data so the court can see if he cherry-picked the data.  Seems like the real climate scientist can actually produce real data that shows Mann's data is false - and he has been caught.

 

 

 

Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann

July 5, 2017 Larsen BREAKING! 138

Written by John O’Sullivan

Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball (above, right) is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.”

As can be seen from the graphs below; Mann’s cherry-picked version of science makes the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) disappear and shows a pronounced upward ‘tick’ in the late 20th century (the blade of his ‘hockey stick’). But below that, Ball’s graph, using more reliable and widely available public data, shows a much warmer MWP, with temperatures hotter than today, and showing current temperatures well within natural variation.

Michael Mann, who chose to file what many consider to be a cynical SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) libel suit in the British Columbia Supreme Court, Vancouver six long years ago, has astonished legal experts by refusing to comply with the court direction to hand over all his disputed graph’s data. Mann’s iconic hockey stick has been relied upon by the UN’s IPCC and western governments as crucial evidence for the science of ‘man-made global warming.’

As first reported in Principia Scientific International (February 1, 2017), the defendant in the case, Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball, had won “concessions” against Mann, but at the time the details were kept confidential, pending Mann’s response.

The negative and unresponsive actions of Dr Mann and his lawyer, Roger McConchie, are expected to infuriate the judge and be the signal for the collapse of Mann’s multi-million dollar libel suit against Dr Ball. It will be music to the ears of so-called ‘climate deniers’ like President Donald Trump and his EPA Chief, Scott Pruitt.

As Dr Ball explains:

“Michael Mann moved for an adjournment of the trial scheduled for February 20, 2017. We had little choice because Canadian courts always grant adjournments before a trial in their belief that an out of court settlement is preferable. We agreed to an adjournment with conditions. The major one was that he [Mann] produce all documents including computer codes by February 20th, 2017. He failed to meet the deadline.”

Punishment for Civil Contempt

Mann’s now proven contempt of court means Ball is entitled to have the court serve upon Mann the fullest punishment. Contempt sanctions could reasonably include the judge ruling that Dr. Ball’s statement that Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn. State’ is a precise and true statement of fact. This is because under Canada’s unique ‘Truth Defense’, Mann is now proven to have wilfully hidden his data, so the court may rule he hid it because it is fake. As such, the court must then dismiss Mann’s entire libel suit with costs awarded to Ball and his team.

The spectacular rise and fall of climate alarmism’s former golden boy is a courtroom battle with even more ramifications than the infamous Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925. To much fanfare at the time, Mann had sued Ball for daring to publish the damning comment that Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn. State.” Dr Ball brilliantly backed up his exposure of the elaborate international money-making global warming scam in his astonishing book, ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science‘.

In his books, articles, radio and television appearances, Dr. Ball has been resolute in his generation-long war against those who corrupted the field of science to which he had selflessly dedicated his life. Now aged 79, Ball is on the cusp of utter vindication. Despite the stresses and strains on himself and his family, Tim has stood at the forefront of those scientists demanding more openness and transparency from government-funded researchers.

As Ball explains:

Likely Repercussions for Science & Climate Policy

“We believe he [Mann] withheld on the basis of a US court ruling that it was all his intellectual property. This ruling was made despite the fact the US taxpayer paid for the research and the research results were used as the basis of literally earth-shattering policies on energy and environment. The problem for him is that the Canadian court holds that you cannot withhold documents that are central to your charge of defamation regardless of the US ruling.”

A bitter and embarrassing defeat for the self-styled ‘Nobel Prize winner’ who acted as if he was the epitome of virtue, this outcome shames not only Michael Mann, but puts the climate science community in crisis. Many hundreds of peer-reviewed papers cite Mann’s work, which is now effectively junked. Despite having deep-pocketed backers willing and able to feed his ego as a publicity-seeking mouthpiece against skeptics, Mann’s credibility as a champion of environmentalism is in tatters.

But it gets worse for the litigious Penn State professor. Close behind Dr Ball is celebrated writer Mark Steyn. Steyn also defends himself against another one of Mann’s SLAPP suits – this time in Washington DC. Steyn boldly claims Mann “has perverted the norms of science on an industrial scale.” Esteemed American climate scientist, Dr Judith Curry, has submitted to the court an Amicus Curiae legal brief exposing Mann. The world can now see that his six-year legal gambit to silence his most effective critics and chill scientific debate has spectacularly backfired.

But at a time of much clamor about ‘fake news,’ it seems climate scare stories will have a new angle now that the United States has officially stepped back from the Paris Climate Treaty. President Trump was elected on a mandate to weed out climate fraud so his supporters will point to this legal outcome as vindication for a full purge. It makes a mockery of statements made by Mann last February when PSI’s Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan publicly backed their colleague, Dr Ball and endorsed the revelations in his book. Mann reacted by moaning:

The perpetrator of the biggest criminal “assault on science” has now become clear: Dr Mann, utterly damned by his contempt of the court order to show his dodgy data.

“It is difficult to keep up with this dizzying ongoing assault on science.”

There can be little doubt that upon the BC Supreme Court ruling that Mann did commit data fraud, over in Washington DC, the EPA’s Scott Pruitt will feel intense pressure from skeptics to initiate a full investigation into Mann, his university and all those conspiring to perpetuate a trillion-dollar carbon tax-raising sting on taxpayers.

With the scent of courtroom victory invigorating pensioner Ball, he reveals he is determined to go for a second such court win this coming Fall. Then he defends a similar libel lawsuit in Vancouver, filed against him by fellow Canadian climate scientist, Andrew Weaver.

On that case Tim reports:

As a career-long defender of the scientific method, embracing open and transparent verification of important government research, Ball makes this promise to his loyal supporters:

“The second defamation lawsuit involves Andrew Weaver and is scheduled for court in October 2017. We are not sure what will happen as Weaver, who was a lead author for the computer model chapter of four IPCC Reports (1995, 2001, 2007, and 2013), became a politician. He ran for and was elected leader of the British Columbia Green Party and is a sitting member of the provincial legislature. We must continue to prepare for the trial, but it is the prevailing view in the court system that if a scientist becomes a politician their scientific objectivity is compromised – it is considered the bias of a ’noble cause’.”

“Regardless of the outcomes I am planning a major campaign to expose to the world how they used the court system to silence me because I dared to speak out against their claims and actions. I am not particularly bright but I had two major threats, I was qualified, and I had an ability to explain in a way the public could understand. These latter abilities were honed in teaching a science credit for arts students for 25 years.”

Saving a final word for his friends and colleagues at Principia Scientific International (PSI) Dr Ball concluded:

“It goes without saying that I could not have done any of this without the support of people [like Gregg Thomspon] who gave money and John O’Sullivan who gave superb advice from a legal and life experience perspective.”

Dr Ball and his PSI colleagues are among those now calling for governments to set aside proper funding for ‘blue team’ scientists and experts skilled in critically examining claims made by so-called government ‘experts’ where they impact public policy. In the final outcome, these ‘devil’s advocates’ of science (or ‘skeptics’) are the best defense against waste and corruption.

To that end, Australian Astronomer and entrepreneur Gregg Thompson has been crucial in providing resources that helped establish PSI as a registered UK charity devoted to this public service. PSI is urging more charitable donations from ordinary citizens to help further the cause of creating more ‘blue team/red team’ initiatives devoted to monitoring government science and prepared to bravely expose negligence and intentional misconduct on the public dime.

Read more from Tim Ball at his website: drtimball.com. Buy on Amazon Tim’s ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science‘

 

 

 

[BranchDavidian]

Hey Timely, isn't this where you come in to post that 97% or more of the scientific community is in agreement ?

[Cop]

Anybody with a brain knows it's a sham. These liberals are so gullible.

[LCD]

Hey Timely, isn't this where you come in to post that 97% or more of the scientific community is in agreement ?

Uh because that would be true.  There's been a number of attempts at "exposing" this guy saying he manipulates data, starting with the CRU emails.  None have worked.  Not sure a long retired Professor of Geography at the 38th best university in a small population country and a probable Creationist should be your go to guy in climate professor takedown.

 

It would be great if there was a Trumptard who hated:

 

NigNogs

Spics

TowelHeads

Libtards

The Clintons

CNN

The Washington Post

The New York Times

Fake News

and

Obamacare

 

But actually believed in climate change.

 

There's another guy.  He's not a "climate" guy either.  He's an economist who specializes in climate change.  He teaches at Yale.  And he's a conservative.  He's not a loony tune Canadian whacko.  Here's his book:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Climate-Casino-Uncertainty-Economics-Warming/dp/030018977X/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=&dpID=51idSjcvq0L&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=detail

 

You can be a conservative and still believe in climate change.  You don't have to punch every ticket.  Light can be both a particle and a wave.  You can be a Trumptard and still believe in science.  Science isn't just another fake news scam.

 

It also makes you kind of an asshole to post this bullshit while people are dying because of things probably related to global warming like hurricanes and fires.

 

Here's a good article.  It's from MIT which might be a fake university and probably not as reliable as your expert.

 

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609111/did-climate-change-worsen-californias-devastating-fires-probably/

 

[Bfo]

That’s fucking Pedo St right there for you.

[RDTrains]

Nice source for your argument.

 

 

"Ball has been represented in the media as a climatologist (Canada's first, don'tcha know?) who has held a professorship for upward of twenty-eight years. However, he carefully omits this in his curriculum vitae. In fact, he was a professor of geography with a focus in historical climate who retired in 1996. When the Calgary Herald published a letter that questioned the credentials listed for Ball (in an article in which Ball attacked Tim Flannery, Ball sued for libel, while admitting that he had not been a professor for twenty-eight years. (Don't think too hard about that or it might make your head hurt.) Before the suit was dropped (against 3 defendants), Tim Lambert of Deltoid dared Ball to sue him, too. Lambert also expressed doubt over the relevance of Ball's research:

 

”However, hardly any of those 51 publications are in scientific journals but include things like gardening magazines. I looked in Web of Science and could only find four papers by Ball, all on historical climatology, none on climate and atmosphere. I don't see how Ball can possibly win his case, but I guess that's not the point.

 

Eli Rabett has created the "Tim Ball Award for Resume Stretching" in his honor."

[BranchDavidian]

Uh because that would be true.  There's been a number of attempts at "exposing" this guy saying he manipulates data, starting with the CRU emails.  None have worked.  Not sure a long retired Professor of Geography at the 38th best university in a small population country and a probable Creationist should be your go to guy in climate professor takedown.

 

It would be great if there was a Trumptard who hated:

 

NigNogs

Spics

TowelHeads

Libtards

The Clintons

CNN

The Washington Post

The New York Times

Fake News

and

Obamacare

 

But actually believed in climate change.

 

There's another guy.  He's not a "climate" guy either.  He's an economist who specializes in climate change.  He teaches at Yale.  And he's a conservative.  He's not a loony tune Canadian whacko.  Here's his book:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Climate-Casino-Uncertainty-Economics-Warming/dp/030018977X/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=&dpID=51idSjcvq0L&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=detail

 

You can be a conservative and still believe in climate change.  You don't have to punch every ticket.  Light can be both a particle and a wave.  You can be a Trumptard and still believe in science.  Science isn't just another fake news scam.

 

It also makes you kind of an asshole to post this bullshit while people are dying because of things probably related to global warming like hurricanes and fires.

 

Here's a good article.  It's from MIT which might be a fake university and probably not as reliable as your expert.

 

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609111/did-climate-change-worsen-californias-devastating-fires-probably/

 

 

Your second cite is nothing but opinion.  The damn title even says "probably".  And, what a surprise that after a wet year with lots of undergrowth the following dry summer had fires.  This is what happens on a regular basis.  Every other year we have the worst ever in some western state.

 

None of the attempts to discredit Mann have worked?

 

Here are a few claims about Mann - just like you can find hits on Ball.  It isn't Ball that wants to shut-up anybody with a different opinion, it is Mann.

Global Warming Alarmist Tries Suing Critics into Silence Climate change researcher attacks skeptics, refuses to comply with court order to produce 'hockey-stick' data

 

Six years ago, climatologist Dr. Tim Ball challenged the data and scientific methodology of Michael E. Mann’s (in)famous “hockey-stick” temperature graph. As did several other climate observers. But for his harshest critics, Mann took the unusual step of suing them for libel.

Ball, a Canadian citizen, wrote an op-ed in which he wrote that Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn State.” The suit alleged that Ball’s statements were factually untrue and defamatory.

In the op-ed, Ball was referring to Mann’s hockey-stick graph, which eliminated the widely accepted Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of 950-1250 A.D. and introduced a pronounced uptick in temperatures in the late 20th century.

Mann is a professor of meteorology at Penn State University and a well-known climate activist. His bread and butter comes from the many books he’s written on the hockey-stick graph and global warming, paid speeches, and federal research grants, along with his university salary.

 

Mann's graph was widely hailed when first published and was incorporated into reports published by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Western governments, including the U.S., used it as evidence that man-made warming was occurring at a much faster rate than traditional measuring devices were recording. It was used as a bulwark for draconian regulations and costly U.N. policies.

A Disgrace to the Profession

To rebut Mann's claims, Ball created his own graph, which relied on land, sea, and satellite temperature data — and showed a much warmer MWP with current temperatures well within normal ranges.

Along with Ball, Mann also sued columnist Mark Steyn for libel after he wrote an op-ed in National Review disparaging his hockey-stick graph. The D.C. Court of Appeals is overseeing that case. Mann also filed separate hockey-stick suits against National Review, Rand Simberg, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

The Circuit Court ruled in Dec. 2016 that Mann's defamation suits could go to trial, despite dissenting amicus briefs from a host of news outlets such as Time, NBC News, The Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune, and the Los Angeles Times.

Dave Neese of the Trentonian wrote that "Should Mann ultimately prevail, the long-time favorable legal jig will be up for the media."

So why did his legal team choose Washington, D.C., to file their suits, a district where neither Mann nor Steyn resides? Likely because it has one of the most liberal benches in the country, stuffed to the rafters with progressive judges President Obama appointed.

In one of the court's more bizarre decisions, it ruled that Steyn wasn't entitled to Mann's underlying data or methodology, calling it his 'intellectual property.' But things are different in Canada.

As Ball points out, "This [suppression] ruling was made despite the fact the U.S. taxpayers paid for the research, and the research results were used as the basis of literally earth-shattering policies on energy and environment."

And in Canada, you can't "withhold documents that are central to your defamation regardless of any U.S. rulings."

A Self-Described Nobel Laureate

When Mann began his multimillion-dollar lawsuits six years ago, his complaint hinged on the defendants committing the libelous crime of "defaming the reputation of a Nobel Prize recipient."

Mann premised his lawsuits on the fact that he was a Nobel Laureate and had the right to sue the aforementioned writers (plus three other entities) for assailing his character.

But after inquiring with The Norwegian Nobel Institute, it was revealed Mann neither won the Nobel Peace Prize nor was a co-recipient.

As others questioned his "Nobellian" claims, Mann defiantly tweeted, "IPCC certificate acknowledging me 'contributing to award of the Nobel Peace Prize.' Do they want my birth certif too?"

At the time, the IPCC issued certificates that thanked participants "for contributing to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize." As such, he lied on a legal affidavit submitted to the court under penalty of perjury.

All of which calls into question what else may be untrue in his complaint and the highly publicized, discredited hockey-stick graph.

The Nobel prize claim has subsequently led to innumerable delays — since Mann had to resubmit his previous complaint without the statement that he was a "self-inferred Nobel Laureate."

Steyn wrote in his brief that "Mann's fraudulent claim should cause him embarrassment, but it should surely not justify resetting the procedural clock back to the beginning on this case," which it did.

Contempt of Court

Meanwhile in Canada, the British Columbia (B.C.) Supreme Court had given Mann a generous adjournment for a trial scheduled to begin on Feb. 20, 2017. Ball says Canadian courts "always grant adjournments before a trial" as they believe an "out-of-court settlement is preferable."

Before agreeing to the adjournment, Ball's legal team specified a few conditions that Mann agreed to and which were legally binding. The most important was that "Mann produce all documents including computer codes by February 20, 2017."

However, Mann failed to comply and did not provide a single shred of evidence to back up his hockey-stick graph. By his intentional failure to provide the court with these documents, Mann is now officially in 'contempt of court.'

In Canada, contempt sanctions mean the judge must grant Ball whatever reasonable remedy he requests to rectify the contempt. Accordingly, and upon Ball's application, the court can make a finding that Ball's statement that Mann "belongs in the state pen, not Penn State" is a "precise and true statement of fact." (go to page 2 to continue reading)

[LCD]

BD I dont have any interest in Mann.  He seems like a tool.  Just like Ball seems like a tool.  It's going after one guy repeatedly and unsuccessfully and using that as a takedown of a scientific theory that the vast majority of scientists and the leaders of other industrial nations believe in that is nutty.

 

There is no certain evidence yet that directly ties the present fires in the Bay Area and the huge number of very large fires in the northwest and Canada this year that the mainstream media didn't really report on because they were obsessed with hurricanes.

 

As for hurricanes, the ocean temperatures are rising.  The rising of water temperature will create stronger and stronger hurricanes.  It seems like theres more and stronger hurricanes than previously.  It might be an anomaly.  I don't think we need to wait until the ocean temperatures reach a certain point and we have to start worrying about hypercanes to finally admit that the present environment is greatly affected by what humans do.

 

If you just go by what you see, what I've seen where I live in the past year is a massive amount of rain, the almost failure of a dam that was going to kill a lot of people if it failed because of that snow and rain and now catastrophic fires which has forced people I know to evacuate their homes and is making 50% of the people where I work not show up.  That's not science.  I read the science and it seems to give me a convincing explanation of what is happening.

 

The literature and explanations from the other side is just to deny.  The denials aren't compelling and are pretty much a joke.

 

And dinosaurs weren't around 4000 years ago.  They didn't go on Noah's ark.  They weren't created on the sixth day.  If any one actually believes this then they're a moron.

[Timely Hitting]

Lol you cant fix ignorance.

[Heartman]

Future generations will pay the price because of Dumbfucks like branchlimbaugh!

[Cop]

without drastic measures, the planet would reach a “point of no return” in a decade.

 

Al Gore 2005

[BranchDavidian]

The polar ice caps are melting, the sea will cover the Earth!!!  The alarmist have been telling us for how long now?

 

Yet, the ice is increasing in the Antarctic - and the Arctic ice cap floats and will not affect sea level if it evaporates.

Is there one single prediction that has been accurate?

[BranchDavidian]

 

 

As for hurricanes, the ocean temperatures are rising.  The rising of water temperature will create stronger and stronger hurricanes.  It seems like theres more and stronger hurricanes than previously.  It might be an anomaly.  I don't think we need to wait until the ocean temperatures reach a certain point and we have to start worrying about hypercanes to finally admit that the present environment is greatly affected by what humans do.

 

 

 

And dinosaurs weren't around 4000 years ago.  They didn't go on Noah's ark.  They weren't created on the sixth day.  If any one actually believes this then they're a moron.

 

The climate is changing, just as it has since the beginning of time, and if hyper-canes are the result - that does NOT mean that humans are the cause.  We only contribute around 0.5% of the CO2 that you believe is the culprit.  You can send all the money you want from the United States to  third world countries and the Earth will not stop warming.

 

Cute that you think I'm a Bible thumper.

[BranchDavidian]

Well now.  NASA has published some interesting data recently.  Seems that over the last couple of years, the SEA LEVEL has actually decreased rather than increase.

 

 

 

• Ice Age Now: NASA Confirms - Sea Levels Falling Across the Planet
• AFP: Thousands of Penguin Chicks Starve in Antarctica

[jasson621]

BranchDavidian a bible thumper

 

[mikeman]

Anyone think it's been hot recently, the last 10 years or so?  I live in Mn and i can tell you summers haven't been hot, very, very few really hot days(upper 90's), used to get 1 or 2 hot spells every year, now it happens every 2 or 3, or 4 years, it was much hotter in the 70's and 80's.

 

Then you have the morons that say "gee, it seems like there have been more hurricanes lately", yea, this year...but before this year we went through a 10+ year period with hardly any, people are so dumb, they see what they want to see.

 

You guys reading these stories about these iron age artifacts being found in the alps, from like 4000+ years ago? The global warming nuts are saying  " the ice is melting", except 4000 years ago when those guys were wandering around the alps, there was less ice than there is now, which means at least in the alps it hasn't got any warmer in 4000+ years.

[Balco]

The polar ice caps are melting, the sea will cover the Earth!!! The alarmist have been telling us for how long now?

 

Yet, the ice is increasing in the Antarctic - and the Arctic ice cap floats and will not affect sea level if it evaporates.

Is there one single prediction that has been accurate?

This is exactly right.

[Balco]

Common problems with media personalities is actually multifaceted. They tend to market to their base and they tend to not understand the science and confuse the issue. This results in a battle of science vs. rhetoric.

Last Winter we had near record low temperatures and snowfall. It already snowed yesterday leads me to believe we are in for an early Winter here in the Pacific Northwest.

[BranchDavidian]

Uh because that would be true.  There's been a number of attempts at "exposing" this guy saying he manipulates data, starting with the CRU emails.  None have worked.  Not sure a long retired Professor of Geography at the 38th best university in a small population country and a probable Creationist should be your go to guy in climate professor takedown.

 

It would be great if there was a Trumptard who hated:

 

NigNogs

Spics

TowelHeads

Libtards

The Clintons

CNN

The Washington Post

The New York Times

Fake News

and

Obamacare

 

But actually believed in climate change.

 

There's another guy.  He's not a "climate" guy either.  He's an economist who specializes in climate change.  He teaches at Yale.  And he's a conservative.  He's not a loony tune Canadian whacko.  Here's his book:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Climate-Casino-Uncertainty-Economics-Warming/dp/030018977X/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=&dpID=51idSjcvq0L&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=detail

 

You can be a conservative and still believe in climate change.  You don't have to punch every ticket.  Light can be both a particle and a wave.  You can be a Trumptard and still believe in science.  Science isn't just another fake news scam.

 

It also makes you kind of an asshole to post this bullshit while people are dying because of things probably related to global warming like hurricanes and fires.

 

Here's a good article.  It's from MIT which might be a fake university and probably not as reliable as your expert.

 

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609111/did-climate-change-worsen-californias-devastating-fires-probably/

 

 

 

Lol you cant fix ignorance.

 

 

Future generations will pay the price because of Dumbfucks like branchlimbaugh!

 

Hahaha - "settled science".

Can't you libs understand that this term is an oxymoron?  Science is never settled!  Or up for a vote!!

But, never change no matter how how many times your assumptions are proven wrong.

 

 

A Startling New Discovery Could Destroy All Those Global Warming Doomsday Forecasts

 

Climate Change: Scientists just discovered a massive, heretofore unknown, source of nitrogen. Why does this matter? Because it could dramatically change those dire global warming forecasts that everybody claims are based on "settled science."

The researchers, whose findings were published in the prestigious journal Science, say they've determined that the idea that the only source of nitrogen for plant life came from the air is wrong. There are vast storehouses in the planet's bedrock that plants also feed on.

This is potentially huge news, since what it means is that there is a vastly larger supply of nitrogen than previously believed.

University of California at Davis environmental scientist and co-author of the study, Ben Houlton, says that "This runs counter the centuries-long paradigm that has laid the foundation for the environmental sciences."

Pay close attention to the word "paradigm."

If Houlton's finding about these vast, previously unknown nitrogen stores holds true, then it would have an enormous impact on global warming predictions.

IBD Newsletters Get exclusive IBD analysis and action news daily.

 

 

Climate scientists have long known that plants offset some of the effects of climate change by absorbing and storing CO2. But climate scientists assumed that the ability to plants to perform this function was limited because the availability of nitrogen in the atmosphere was limited.

As a 2003 study published in the same Science journal put it, "there will not be enough nitrogen available to sustain the high carbon uptake scenarios."

In the wake of the latest findings, Ronald Amundson, a soil biogeochemist at the University of California at Berkeley, told Chemical and Engineering News that "If there is more nitrogen there than expected, then the constraints on plant growth in a high-CO2 world may not be as great as we think."

In other words, with more nitrogen available, plant life might be able to absorb more CO2 than climate scientists have been estimating, which means the planet won't warm as much, despite mankind's pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

A Stunning Finding

Houlton has been exploring this possibility for years. Back in 2011, he reported that forest trees can tap into nitrogen found in rock.

At the time, he said "the stunning finding that forests can also feed on nitrogen in rocks has the potential to change all projections related to climate change," because it meant there could be more carbon storage on land and less in the atmosphere than climate models say.

The question is whether any climate scientists or environmentalists — who are entirely wedded to the idea that industrialization is destroying the planet — would ever admit this.

That's why that word "paradigm" is important.

As we've noted in this space, the idea of "settled science" peddled by environmentalists and politicians defies the history of science, which has seen repeated upheavals of previous forms of "settled science."

Thomas Kuhn studied this phenomenon in his 1962 book "The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions." He explained how scientists develop a theory — or paradigm — based on available evidence — to explain what they're seeing.

Once that paradigm takes hold, scientists are often loath to give up on it even if evidence piles up that it might be wrong. Eventually, however, faulty paradigms do give way, ushering in a new scientific paradigm. Examples of such paradigm shifts in the past: heliocentric solar system, continental drift, Einstein's theories.

A Coming Paradigm Shift?

That same thing might be happening right now with climate science.

As we've said many times, evidence continues to show weaknesses in climate models used to predict future warming. They failed to predict a decadelong pause in global temperatures. Nor have various calamities that were supposed to have occurred by now materialized. And a recent paper published in Nature concluded that the planet is less sensitive to increases in CO2 than the computer models say.

Meanwhile, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been conducting highly suspicious temperature data manipulation. The changes in the temperature data consistently make the past seem cooler, which in turn makes the present seem warmer.

This creates a data illusion of ever-rising temperatures to match the increase in CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere.

Marc Morano, editor of the popular ClimateDepot blog and author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change," notes that "science is not supposed to have a politically predetermined outcome pushed by ideology and politics. This new nitrogen study is but one example of consensus science being overturned.  The global warming science establishment should now be open to similar studies and dissenting voices on CO2 to overturn the alleged climate change consensus."

But will they?

With their reputations and huge amounts government grant money at stake, it's unlikely that many climate scientists would ever admit to being wrong. No matter how obvious it became that they were.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE:

The Climate-Change Doomsday Just Got Canceled

The Stunning Statistical Fraud Behind The Global Warming Scare

Despite What You've Heard, Global Warming Isn't Making Weather More Extreme

 

[Machiavelli]

I had a Trump Oil guy give me all sorts of Climate Data on Twitter once. 

 

Basically, it came down to him saying that we would need to be at like 10x the pace we are now for it to really do anything catastrophic, but that it gets overhyped. Yet he seemed to acknowledge it being something to be concerned about. 

 

I have read and seen stuff where folks claim the orig science behind it has been manipulated and such---and we have also seen so much gloom n doom predicted since the 50s/60s--but it still is not a bad idea to try cleaning up our process and all that as well. 

 

Perhaps we're 'safe' for the next 100, 200 or even 1000 years, but...........what will our grandchildren and their families have to endure? 

 

We can still use oil, conduct business and such while also trying to be a bit smarter. Shouldn't have to be a one side or the other approach.

[mikeman]

I had a Trump Oil guy give me all sorts of Climate Data on Twitter once. 

 

Basically, it came down to him saying that we would need to be at like 10x the pace we are now for it to really do anything catastrophic, but that it gets overhyped. Yet he seemed to acknowledge it being something to be concerned about. 

 

I have read and seen stuff where folks claim the orig science behind it has been manipulated and such---and we have also seen so much gloom n doom predicted since the 50s/60s--but it still is not a bad idea to try cleaning up our process and all that as well. 

 

Perhaps we're 'safe' for the next 100, 200 or even 1000 years, but...........what will our grandchildren and their families have to endure? 

 

We can still use oil, conduct business and such while also trying to be a bit smarter. Shouldn't have to be a one side or the other approach.

CO-2 levels are rising unabated, all these crazy "save the planet activities" are accomplishing nothing. It's a money grab, nothing more.

[Balco]

Anybody with a brain knows it's a sham. These liberals are so gullible.

Truth

[Machiavelli]

CO-2 levels are rising unabated, all these crazy "save the planet activities" are accomplishing nothing. It's a money grab, nothing more.

 

 

I wouldn't even say it's so much of a Money Grab as it is a Control Grab, if it's really being manipulated like crazy. 

 

Would seem to me that it would steer towards more of One World Govt stuff and more UN control--as look at all the nations who signed Paris.

[mikeman]

I wouldn't even say it's so much of a Money Grab as it is a Control Grab, if it's really being manipulated like crazy. 

 

Would seem to me that it would steer towards more of One World Govt stuff and more UN control--as look at all the nations who signed Paris.

You got that right about control, while they fly around the world on private jets, they'll be monitoring our movements, the day will come when they'll say "you drive way too much, your carbon footprint is way too high", then they'll tax you to death to compel compliance.

[Machiavelli]

You got that right about control, while they fly around the world on private jets, they'll be monitoring our movements, the day will come when they'll say "you drive way too much, your carbon footprint is way too high", then they'll tax you to death to compel compliance.

 

 

Yeah. The hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

 

Then they claim that all their traveling is to "Spread Awareness." 

 

I'll say this for the Libs, though: They're getting pretty f'n good at politicizing everything and capitalizing what they want pushed.