Print
Apr
18

Dr Vincent Gray's Letter to Sir Peter Gluckman

Author: Dr Vincent Gray on 18 Apr 2015

Respected climate analyst, Dr Vincent Gray, writes a probing letter to Sir Peter Gluckman, Chief Scientific Adviser to the  New Zealand Government. Gray's letter is published in full below. gluckman
 
Dear Sir Peter,
 
I would like to comment on the speech Trusting the Scientist  published athttp://www.pmcsa.org.nz/blog/trusting-the-scientist/ a summary of which you delivered to the recent seminar Scientists Speak Out organised by the New Zealand Association of Scientists.  
 
You begin with the following statement:
 
"It is instructive here to consider what the public role of science has been until now. For much of history beyond the classical period, the answer is a simple one: little or none.  Or so it was, at least up until the modern inter-war period, and even then it was rather limited until perhaps the late 1980s. Before then the scientist with a media profile was, too often, looked upon with suspicion by his or her colleagues."
 
Surely science has always had a vital public role if you interpret science to mean the discoveries which are the basis for the many technologies which have led to the progress of human race. You seem to accept the existence and importance of the early science which culminated in ancient Greece and was the main influence throughout the Middle Ages, Modern science is regarded as beginning well before the 1980's with Copernicus, Kepler Galileo and Newton.
 
Early astronomy had always been professional  In Britain King Charles the Second, who founded the Greenwich Observatory in 1675, appointed the first Astronomer Royal John Flamsteed.
 
The King had already founded the Royal Society of London in 1663. In 1714 the British Government offered a prize for a simple practical method for determining longitude. Isaac Newton was one of the administering Committee. The story has been told in the book by Dava Sobel. The winner, John Harrison, competed with the Astronomer Royal Nevil Maskelyne. One of Harrison's chronometers  was used by Captain Cook on his second voyage in 1772.
 
The French Revolution set up a committee which led to the metric system in 1799. A shame they did not do a better jpb on the calendar.
Print
Apr
16

Fred Singer about Nay-Sayers (Like Me)

Author: Professor Claes Johnson on 16 Apr 2015

Fred Singer claims in a recent post at WUWT that Climate Nay-Sayers are giving Climate Scientists a Bad Name.  singer and johnsonI think that Fred puts me into this detestful category of deniers and the issue is again that (in)famous "back radiation" or Downwelling Longwave Radiation DLR. Fred writes:

  • One of their favorite arguments is that the greenhouse effect does not exist at all — because it violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics; 
  • i.e., one cannot transfer energy from a cold atmosphere to a warmer surface. 
  • It is surprising that this simplistic argument is used by physicists, and even by professors who teach thermodynamics. 
  • One can show them data of downwelling infrared radiation from CO2, water vapor and clouds, which clearly impinge on the surface. 
  • But their minds are closed to any such evidence.
Fred is here deliberately misrepresenting me: I am not saying that there is no "greenhouse effect" from clouds and water vapor and a little from CO2. What I do say is that "back radiation" from the atmosphere to the Earth surface of magnitude 300 W/m2 is fake non-physics and I understand that a pyrgeometer reporting this quantity does that with a fake invented scale which could be anything.
 
To argue that a certain scientific statement gives climate scientists a "bad name" is a trick to shift the discussion from the scientific question of what a pyrgeometer in fact measures, to a question of value and "entartete kunst" or "bad science". This is neither clever nor very nice, or effective. Scientific arguments cannot be replaced by value arguments.  
Print
Apr
16

US Medical Scientists demo cancer-busting smartphone kit

Author: Richard Chirgwin, www.theregister.co.uk on 16 Apr 2015

America's FTC might be chasing after snake-oilers offering “detect cancer” smartphone apps, but that doesn't mean your mobe can't play a genuine diagnostic role. cancer app

Researchers from the Massachusetts General Hospital reckon with a bit of cloudy goodness, custom-made add-on optics and the right reagent kit, smartphones can gather data that helps with cancer diagnoses.

The hospital boffins probably have a better claim to respectability than Health Discovery, since the hospital isn't selling anything, but has merely published findings in PNAS.

The setup, here, doesn't do the analysis on the smartphone, nor does it solely rely on the smartphone as the diagnostic tool.

Rather, their “digital diffraction diagnosis” system uses a separate imaging module to capture a hologram of the sample, then sends the image upstream to a cloud computing environment to conduct the analysis.

The samples are marked with “microbeads” before image capture (see image above). These “bind to known cancer-related molecules”, the hospital's release states. The group also developed image processing software it claims can process 10 Mbytes of data in “less than nine hundredths of a second”.

Working with PAP smear data, the researchers say their system matched conventional pathology in identifying samples as high risk, low risk, or benign.

Similar results were observed for lymph node biopsies and in human papilloma virus detection, the hospital reckons.

Among other things, the hospital hopes to improve the system by integrating bigger databases into its back-end in the future.

At a current $1.80 per assay, the hospital says the technology would be particularly useful in regions with poor access to he kind of pathology infrastructure typically associated with cancer diagnostics. 

Print
Apr
15

The Myth of Scientific Neutrality

Author: www.thedailybell.com on 15 Apr 2015

A major publisher of scholarly medical and science articles has retracted 43 papers because of "fabricated" peer reviews amid signs of a broader fake peer review racket affecting many more publications ... scientist 1

[T]he Committee on Publication Ethics, a multidisciplinary group that includes more than 9,000 journal editors, issued a statement  suggesting a much broader potential problem. The committee, it said, "has become aware of systematic, inappropriate attempts to manipulate the peer review processes of several journals across different publishers." Those journals are now reviewing manuscripts to determine how many may need to be retracted, it said. – Washington Post, March 27, 2015 

The Daily Bell published a reaction to the WaPo article on March 28 (see Real Tragedy of 'Science': Faith Declines as Fakery Grows). As that analysis explained, the scandal's breadth is extraordinary. Dishonest scientists give us multiple reasons to distrust them. We have some additional thoughts.

Science, according to scientists, is about facts and evidence. These brave truth seekers prove their hypotheses with rigorous experimentation, and then share the newfound knowledge to make the world better.

That's the theory. Reality is different.

Scientists are no more neutral than journalists are. Some try to expand human knowledge without regard for their own self-interest. Most are like everyone else; they just want to pay the bills and find meaning in their work.

The core problem is the idea that acting in one's own self-interest is somehow wrong or shameful. This causes scientists to hide their true motivations and possibly mislead the public. The fabricated peer reviews reported in the Washington Post are a good example. The only surprise is that publishers are finally resisting.

Print
Apr
14

Evidence of liquid water found on Mars

Author: Paul Rincon Science editor, BBC News website on 14 Apr 2015

Nasa's Curiosity rover has found that water can exist as a liquid near the Martian surface. Mars should be too cold to support liquid water at the surface, but salts in the soil lower its freezing point - allowing briny films to form. curiosity

The results lend credence to a theory that dark streaks seen on features such as crater walls could be formed by flowing water.

The results are published in the journal Nature.

Scientists think thin films of water form when salts in the soil, called perchlorates, absorb water vapour from the atmosphere.

The temperature of these liquid films is about -70C - too cold to support any of the microbial life forms that we know about.

Forming in the top 15cm of the Martian soil, the brines would also be exposed to high levels of cosmic radiation - another challenge to life.

But it's still possible that organisms could exist somewhere beneath the surface on Mars, where conditions are more favourable.

Print
Apr
11

Monsanto Employee Admits an Entire Department Exists to “Discredit” Scientists

Author: Christina Sarich, naturalsociety.com on 11 Apr 2015

Dare to publish a scientific study against Big Biotech, and Monsanto will defame and discredit you. For the first time, a Monsanto employee admits that there is an entire department within the corporation with the simple task of ‘discrediting’ and ‘debunking’ scientists who speak out against GMOs. monsanto

The WHO recently classified glyphosate, a chemical in Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup, as carcinogenic – news that is really heating things up with biotech. So Monsanto has been demanding that the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) retract their statements about the poisons’s toxicity to human health.

The company demands this even though a peer-reviewed study published in March of 2015 in the respected journal, The Lancet Oncology, conducted a analysis proving that glyphosate was indeed ‘probably carcinogenic.’

Monsanto’s vice president of global regulatory affairs Philip Miller told Reuters the following in interview:

“We question the quality of the assessment. The WHO has something to explain.”

It has already been explained, Mr. Miller. The study states:

“Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum herbicide, currently with the highest production volumes of all herbicides. It is used in more than 750 different products for agriculture, forestry, urban, and home applications. Its use has increased sharply with the development of genetically modified glyphosate-resistant crop varieties. Glyphosate has been detected in air during spraying, in water, and in food. There WAS limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of glyphosate.

Glyphosate has been detected in the blood and urine of agricultural workers, indicating absorption. Soil microbes degrade glyphosate to aminomethylphosphoric acid (AMPA). Blood AMPA detection after poisonings suggests intestinal microbial metabolism in humans. Glyphosate and glyphosate formulations induced DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals, and in human and animal cells in vitro. One study reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) in residents of several communities after spraying of glyphosate formulations.”

Print
Apr
10

THE TRUE ORIGIN OF HYDROCARBONS

Author: Suresh Bansal on 10 Apr 2015

Is the oil we rely on for energy really derived from organic sources (as per fossil fuel theory), or is it constantly being regenerated within earth’s mantle from rocks (as per abiogenic oil theory)? oil drilling

Scientists have sufficient evidence showing that commercially interesting hydrocarbons have been expelled from organic rich source rock and are trapped in the reservoir rocks. We also have compelling evidence demonstrating the presence of biological molecules in commercial oils.

But in addition to the evidence of an organic origin to oil and natural gas, we have observed the abundance of similar hydrocarbons on many other planetary bodies viz. comets and moons (eg. Titan) etc. For example, Uranus' atmosphere is about 83% hydrogen, 15% helium and 2% methane; Saturn is composed of mostly helium and hydrogen with traces of methane; Neptune's atmosphere is made up predominately of hydrogen and helium, with some methane.

These extra-terrestrial sources are therefore determined to have been formed without any involvement of any biological material.

The common association of hydrocarbons with the inert gas helium is also not explainable in current theory of biotic origin of petroleum. We have observed presence of some traces element like V, Ni, Cu, Co, Zn.. etc in hydrocarbons which also do not clearly explain the biotic origin of petroleum (Szatmari et al,2005). According to the author of the paper they have analyzed 68 Brazilian oil and nine foreign oils and determined 24 metal traces in the oils showing fine correlation of the oils with CI chondrite and mantle peridotites, and less correlation with oceanic and continental crust, with none with seawater.

Print
Apr
10

'Suicide' of French Senator Jean Germain, friend of windfarm victims

Author: Mark Duchamp, World Council for Nature on 10 Apr 2015

French Senator Jean Germain, a friend of windfarm victims, has been found dead in what appears to be a suicide. He had made increasingly effective political opposition against ‘Big Green’ interests in recent times. His death may be considered suspicious. Jean Germain As UK national newspaper, The Guardian noted:

“He is a martyr of the republic. He has been thrown to the dogs” said his lawyer (1).
 
Recently, Jean Germain had convinced his fellow Senators to propose an amendment doubling the setback between wind turbines and habitations to 1,000 meters. The French government, house of representatives and  wind industry are opposed to it.
 
In a country like France, a 1,000-meter buffer zone would make relatively few wind projects possible. But the majority of Senators thought the health of their constituents was more important.

Other French politicians who, according to the authorities, committed suicide:
 
- Pierre Bérégovoy in 1993, who “shot himself” - yet it turned out later that he had two bullets in his head (sic)  (2)
- Robert Boulin, who was found in a pond in 1979, with clear evidence of blows to the face - in other words, this Minister would have commited suicide by beating himself up (3).
Print
Apr
07

Nothing Unusual About Current Climate say Scientists

Author: www.co2science.org on 07 Apr 2015

Very briefly, Liew et al. (2014) begin their recent report on the climatic history of Taiwan by describing how high-resolution pollen records from four lakes and a bog - which they recovered from both high and low altitudes in northern and southern Taiwan - were used together with radiocarbon dating to develop a 4000-year temperature history of the subtropical mountain island. mwp ipcc 1991

The result of this effort was a temperature history that compares well with trends that previously had been developed for China and Europe. And again, very briefly, it revealed the occurrence of a relatively long cold period from approximately 1920 BC to 30 AD, which was followed by the Roman Warm Period (about 30-360 AD), which was followed by the Dark Ages Cold Period (about 360-760 AD), which was followed by the Medieval Warm Period (about 760-1300 AD), which was followed by the Little Ice Age (about 1300-1850 AD). Then, last of all, the record depicts the gradual development of the Current Warm Period, which at this point in time appears to be at its peak, having not risen further than where it is now over the past couple of decades.

Therefore, in light of these and other well-documented findings that are reported and analyzed in the Medieval Warm Period Project portion of the Data section of our website (co2science.org) - which can readily be accessed here - it can clearly be seen that there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about the current state of earth's warmth, which was clearly eclipsed by the Medieval Warm Period at various locations around the globe.

Print
Apr
06

Hidden Opportunities: Exposing false claims by Australian Govt's Bureau of Meteorology

Author: Malcolm Roberts, Galileo Movement on 06 Apr 2015

New report responds to Senator Birmingham’s apparent reliance on false claims by the Australian Government’s Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). The Senator's letter dated December 18th, 2014 to Malcolm Roberts is refuted by overwhelming empirical scientific evidence, as outlined in excerpts from the report, below. false claimsMoreover, key players in the climate alarm narrative are exposed as beneficiaries of related financial scams.

Data shows that the much publicised “97% consensus of climate scientists” claiming human carbon dioxide (CO2 ) causes catastrophic warming is really “0.3%” with none having empirical scientific evidence for their claim. 
 
Concerns expressed in the body of the August 2010 report on UN IPCC processes by the world’s peak scientific academic body, the Inter Academy Council undermine all 800 UN IPCC confidence and likelihood statements. 
 
UN IPCC science reports contain no empirical scientific evidence of human causation. Atmospheric temperature measurements show no warming for almost 20 years and ground-based measurements prove no significant warming in natural warming-cooling cycles since the start of measurements in 1660. 
 
Empirical data prove human CO2 cannot effect global temperature or climate variability and show temperature changes cause changes in CO2 levels, the opposite of the UN IPCC’s core claim. 
 
Responses from CSIRO, BOM and academics funded by ALP-Greens commissions contain no empirical scientific evidence of humans causing climate variability yet official reports and statements by a small closely connected group imply such evidence. 
 
BOM fabricated warming by ‘adjusting’ past and recent temperature data. Former CSIRO Chief Executive Megan Clark was on major international bank boards while advocating a CO2 ‘trading’ scheme aiming to create trillions of dollars in profits for those banks. CSIRO ‘scientists’ funded by taxpayers and speaking at international conferences advocated unelected global governance.
 
Unfounded climate claims and advocacy for CO2 ‘trading’ schemes are traced to Maurice Strong, founding Secretary-General in 1972 of the UN Environmental Program that sponsored the UN IPCC and director of the Chicago Climate Exchange trading CO2 credits. He initiated and drove the UN’s Rio Declaration Agenda 212 for twenty first century unelected global governance signed in 1992 by Paul Keating’s Labor government. 
Print
Apr
06

Candlelit Dinner Anyone? (The Great Oxygenation Event)

Author: Dr Klaus L.E. Kaiser on 06 Apr 2015

In my related article I explained there is an epoch in the Earth’s history termed the “Great Oxygenation Event.” It happened a long time ago, roughly 350 million years ago, when much of today’s coal beds in the earth’s rocks began forming. candlelit dinner

It all began with one simple and then-new invention by Mother Nature. That invention has been truly great and everlasting; it’s widely known under the term PHOTOSYNTHESIS.

Photosynthesis

Photosynthesis (PS) is the process by which algae and plants convert carbon dioxide (CO2) to organic matter, like the wood of trees. Any other organism on this planet that is not an alga or plant itself feeds on the former. Therefore, CO2 is the source of all life on earth. There is not a single organism that does not require the carbon atom as a basic building block.

Photosynthesis brings about another product, rarely mentioned but vital to all higher organisms on the planet, and that is molecular oxygen (O2). There is no other source of O2 on earth but photosynthesis. Therefore, without carbon dioxide there also would be no free oxygen in our atmosphere.

Print
Apr
06

CSIROh! Climate of Deception?

Author: Malcolm Roberts, Galileo Movement on 06 Apr 2015

In a report prepared at the invitation of Steve Austin, host on ABC-Radio 612 Brisbane, Australian government climate scientists are exposed as conspiring to create an alarmist and false picture of global warming. malcolm roberts

Independent analyst, Malcolm Roberts, of the Galileo Movement reports:

 “I've written to many of the people whose behaviours, opinions and/or claims are discussed in this report and whose core claim is that human CO2 caused Earth's latest modest cyclic global atmospheric warming that ended in 1998. Most have responded. All have failed to provide empirical scientific evidence and logical scientific reasoning for the basis of their core claim. All seemed reluctant to address my questions adequately. They failed to meet my reasonable need for integrity, reassurance and understanding.”

Below Principia Scientific International has pleasure in providing readers with full links to all sections of Roberts’ findings: