Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. blog comments powered by Disqus

De Bello contra Scientiam - About the War on Science

By Baronet Pissequaffer Apeton, VP War on Science

Are we engaged in a war on science? You bet we are! On the ‘science’ that’s controlled by a small politico-scientific elite who have engineered a
conspiracy of consensus about ‘global warming’ in order to support their clandestine push for a single world government. Readers might not realize just how pervasive this conspiracy has become. Each month, hundreds – thousands, by some counts – of articles consistent with the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are published in the corrupt, stinking morass of the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Furthermore, the national science academies of over 30 countries have issued statements of affirmation, as has every major scientific society that has published a position (see here). Against this mammoth level of collusion and what its subscribers call the ‘evidence’ behind it, you’d think that we deniers have an almost impossible task. How is it, then, that we’re managing to hold our own quite as well as we are? Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis! Following is an outline of the main points of our strategy. Read More...

Australian Research Agencies hide Evidence for young Earth

Just in the last few days, a contribution to Geophysical Research Letters shows the latest effort to cover up the greenhouse deniers' innovative research that is finally being published by AGU [FoGT discussed others recently]. The original paper by Lockart, Kavetski and Franks at the University of Newcastle  [GRL 36, L24405] showed that the alleged global warming over Australia's Murray-Darling basin was correlated with reduced cloudiness. Professor Franks' key position in Australian science includes his role as a scientific advisor to Senator Steve Fielding whose key senate vote was pivotal in the defeat of Australia's emissions trading legislation.  Read More...

Alberta’s $2B CCS plan: Cash Confiscation & Sequestration

Some of you dear followers of this blog who haven’t had the benefit of a classical education--unlike his learned eminence Viscount Lord Monckton of Brenchley--may have some difficulty with the term “sequestration”. Basically it’s a word of Latin origin that, translated into Albertan, means sticking something where the sun don’t shine. The Government of Alberta has a plan to take hard-earned dollars of ordinary Albertans and give them to large corporations so that the companies can take plant food (carbon dioxide) and “sequester” it deep in the bowels of the earth, where the sun most definitely does not shine. Read More...

Open Letter to AGU: FoGT offers Support in Climate Denial

Deniers who keep up with the corrupt, stinking morass of the peer-reviewed ‘scientific’ literature – and many who don’t but who want to impress their Friends – will be intimately familiar with what our hero Lord Monckton called “perhaps the most important paper ever to have been published on the question of anthropogenic ‘global warming’”: the paper that appeared last August in Geophysical Research Letters by Lindzen & Choi. Lindzen & Choi analyzed the relationship between sea-surface temperature and satellite-observed outgoing radiation in and over the tropics from 1985 to 1999 and concluded that climate sensitivity, the global average temperature rise expected under a doubling of atmospheric CO2, is only about 0.5oC rather than the ~3oC of the consensus-conspiracy. The paper instantly became a denialist smash-hit, and all our Friends trumpeted it at every chance they could as the final proof that CO2 was nothing more than harmless plant food. Read More...

Knowledge vs Belief: Are AGW Proponents gullible?

A Rant by Gunkl, modified by Dr. Schweinsgruber

Some skeptics consider proponents of what the broad body of science and the IPPC say, that global warming is manmade and real, as true believers: knowledge vs. belief. This is principally true, albeit it is the other way round.

MP3: Friends of Science sunk by an Iceberg

“The very curious thing about this is, if it is the atmosphere that is melting the ice; 9/10 of the ice is below the water; so how exactly is the atmosphere gonna be melting the ice?”
Norm Kalmanovitch, FoS, 11 May 2010.