The Attempt to Establish a Climate Ministry of Truth

The Ministry of Truth erases the past.

HadCRUT Has Now Fully Removed 0.15°C From The 1940s Warmth ‘Blip’ As Proposed In 2009 E-mails
By Kenneth Richard on 20. May 2024

The amplitude of the recorded warmth in the 1940s was always a problem for purveyors of the human-caused global warming narrative. So the 1940s temperatures have been artificially cooled to make this less of a problem.
In 2009, overseers of the HadCRUT global temperature data discussed “correcting” the “1940s warming blip” in e-mails that they later tried to hide from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) investigators.

“So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean — but we’d still have to explain the land blip.”

“I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately.”

“It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with ‘why the blip?’.”



Image Source: Climate Gate E-mails (FOIA)
And, just as they had said they would do, 0.15°C of warmth has gradually been removed from the 1940s HadCRUT global temperature data over the last 15 years. They have “corrected” the data to align with their narrative.



Image Source: climate4you.com
What’s also noticeable here in this HadCRUT-changes-temperature-data chart provided by climate4you is just how much warmth has been added to 21st century temperatures since 2008.

The HadCRUT3 global temperature trend was recorded as 0.03°C per decade during the global warming hiatus years of 2000-2014 (Scafetta, 2022).

This was increased to 0.08°C per decade by version 4, as the overseers of the HadCRUT data conveniently added 0.1°C to 0.2°C to the more recent anomalies.

Today, in HadCRUT5, the 2000-2014 temperature trend has been adjusted up to 0.14°C per decade when using the computer model-infilling method.

So, within the last decade, a 15-year temperature trend has been changed from a pause to a strong warming. After all, when the observations don’t fit the narrative, it is time to change the observations.



Image Source: Scafetta, 2022

 

Government in action as they continue their run for total control over the rest of us.

 

It makes sense. You can't controls folks without fear, at least in the progressive mind.

 

Sometimes there really is a conspiracy.
New Report Reveals Massive Scale of Green Billionaire Funding of ‘Climate Emergency’ Reporting in Mainstream Media
BY CHRIS MORRISON
…there might be some concern that another science-lite campaign could eventually lead to more grovelling public accountability, laughable scorn and diminished credibility. . . .

A massive global grooming programme aimed at mostly mainstream media involving climate catastrophism and Net Zero promotion is detailed in a recently published report from the green billionaire-funded Internews’s Earth Journalism Network (EJN). The work is a shocking insight into the corruption of independent, investigative journalism. At one point the report observes “a concerning trend among journalists in some countries still seeking to ‘balance’ their climate change reporting”. The report shows clearly that the green billionaires are calling most of the shots in promoting stories of Net Zero-inspired climate collapse. It is noted that they may fund journalists “to cover stories in a particular subject area, determined by funder interests and goals”. . . .

 

This has been glaringly obvious to me literally for decades. When practically every corporate-owned media outlet constantly pushes a relentlessly one-sided narrative for years, almost all of which, on close examination, turns out to be nothing burgers, it can only be because someone with a lot of money is spending that money to make sure it happens.

"Whenever I see something that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, I know there must be a damn good reason for it." -- Peter de Vries

And this clear and indisputable conspiracy smoking gun will be thoroughly whitewashed, just like the climategate emails were. Take it to the bank.

 

Like state govts want to keep women from traveling from one state to another for healthcare, a practice precipitated by the conservative SC. Republicans have started their move towards restricting rights.

 

So your claim is that every related corporation, every govt agency and every institute of higher learning is lying about the grassy knoll, contrails and AGW.

 

So we can no longer trust the research facilities to come up with cancer cures. They according to you pedal the big scam.

 

No, you simply made that up. Inevitably.

 

The genius of institutionalized evil is that first it forces its victims to participate in it in self-defense; then it makes them dependent on it; and finally, it recruits them as its loudest defenders.

 

Made what up…..everything I’ve said is true. Name one…just one anywhere in the world….The bullshit position held by the right, absolutely no other political party, major religion, related corporation, govt, or any educational facility Anywhere agrees with. It’s all made up ****.

 

What you falsely claimed I said -- which is why you didn't quote me saying it.

That's also false.

?? One what?

No idea what you incorrectly imagine you think you might be talking about.

 

You just said what ? They are institutionally evil ? Is that the reason you claim you’re smarter than MIT about AGW.

 

So all these climate science related institutes are evil ? NASA is evil, Cal Tech is evil….Geesus. Name one that isn’t in your mind….oh, they all are.

 

Google blocks climate information.
Google Censors True Stories on Heat Waves, 'Climate Change'

Issues & Insights

 

Google's motto started out as, "Don't be evil." It was quietly dropped several years ago.

I used to be able to find anything I wanted with Google quickly and easily. Now I can't find the exact same material I was able to find easily before. Google now only shows me what it wants me to see.

 

I use my own forum to store important articles I refer regularly for this very reason.

 

That's one reason I start threads.

 

The context was cancer cures. The institutionalized evil is drug patents. Try to keep your eye on the ball.

 

If you want to respond sensibly to what I said, try quoting it. No guarantee that your response will be sensible, but your chances would be better.

I have made no such claim. More honest, yes. Smarter, no.

 

The EPA lied to Congress.
EPA Chief Insists His Agency Has Not Sent ‘One Dime’ To Hardline Left-Wing Org — But There’s A $50 Million Problem
Nick Pope
Despite Regan’s statements, CJA is still listed on the agency’s website as a recipient of $50 million in taxpayer cash via the EPA’s “Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Grantmaking Program,” which is designed…

 

The Ministry of Truth works hard to strangle "inconvenient" research.
As Retirement Approaches…
October 26th, 2024

Since I’ve been getting questions about my retirement plans, I decided it’s time to address what I know so far.

John Christy will be retiring from UAH July 2026. Because my funding has been tied to his projects (including the Alabama Office of the State Climatologist, which he heads), there is a good chance I will also be retiring on or before that date.

The main issue with me continuing employment past his retirement date is the lack of funding from the federal government. We had a Department of Energy contract, but it is ending and we have very few friends in Washington since we remain on the “wrong side” of the science. The peer review process (which determines what proposals the government will fund) has been stacked against us for many years making it almost impossible to get funded to investigate the issues we believe are important to the climate debate.

It’s a little ironic that even though both John and I are “lukewarmers” that’s just not alarmist enough for us to be allowed to play in the climate sandbox with the big dogs (sorry for the mixed metaphor).

John and I still need to discuss how to keep the monthly satellite temperature updates going (if possible). There are three of us contributing to this effort. Danny Braswell (retired from UAH, but working part time) has been trying to get the newer ATMS instruments folded into our processing, but downloading the historical data is taking forever due to NOAA limitations on the number of files that can be requested on a daily basis. Also, much of the software had to be re-written to handle the differences between the AMSU and ATMS instruments scan geometries. John Christy is a good planner, and I’m hopeful we can work out something to keep the global temperature updates going, keeping in mind none of us is getting any younger.

On that subject, I am often asked if there are new, young researchers who can take our place. The problem is that their careers depend upon getting those same federal contracts we depended upon. Unfortunately, any projects that smell like climate skepticism are generally not funded, and young researchers will likely hurt their careers if they are considered to be replacements for John or me.

It has been many years since we received funding specifically to support the global temperature monitoring effort. The Remote Sensing Systems satellite temperature monitoring effort has much more funding success due to (in my opinion) Frank Wentz’s long-term, close friendship with one of NASA’s top managers. It helps to have friends in high places.

I will keep everyone updated as I learn more. Personally, I would like to continue the work I have started (especially the urban heat island work) if possible. Staying working, even part-time, helps keep me sane… I need to keep my mind active.

But advancing any science that doesn’t support global warming being a “crisis” remains an uphill battle. Several months before his death, Rush Limbaugh told me he thought we were losing that battle. But I’m willing to continue to fight it, anyway. I’m old enough to remember when the Soviet Union was believed to be an ever-present danger to the world that would never end, and yet it imploded. Maybe one day climate alarmism will suffer the same fate.

 

DoE has suppressed inconvenient research results.
EXCLUSIVE: GOP Lawmakers Press Biden-Harris Admin Over Alleged Cover-Up Behind Major Fossil Fuel Crackdown
Nick Pope
Forty-five GOP lawmakers are demanding answers from the Department of Energy (DOE) after a government watchdog group accused the agency of covering up a key study that would have interfered…

 

The Ministry of Truth in action.
German Researcher: Doubling Of Atmospheric CO2 Causes Only 0.24°C Of Warming …Practically Insignificant
By P Gosselin on 19. November 2024

The CO2 scam and “climate denial”

German researcher concludes CO2 warming immensely exaggerated…. IR radiation of clouds considerably reduces the greenhouse effect of CO2.”

The prosperity and political stability of our countries are in grave danger. The reason for this is an ideology that claims catastrophic climate change caused by the alleged “greenhouse gas” CO2 and is intent to destroy our civilization and prosperity. Its supporters are spreading a witch-hunt atmosphere against anyone who questions their ideology. So-called “climate deniers” are also denied any scientific expertise.

Every Swiss person can already see the first financial consequences on their electricity bill: In this country, the price of a kilowatt hour has shot up by up to 300% for some households in just four years. And this is just the beginning, as the Swiss government is pursuing the goal of switching to solar and wind power and thus to sources that cost 20 instead of 6 rp/kWh.



Figure 1: A cumulonimbus cloud with the typical “anvil” in the upper area. The white upper surface reflects a large part of the sunlight back into space so that this energy cannot penetrate into the lower parts of the earth-atmosphere system. The nearly black underbelly demonstrates the effectiveness of this reflection (Photo: Fred Mueller)

“Climate deniers”: the everyday witch-hunt against science and freedom of opinion

“Natural science does not provide absolute truths or laws chiseled in stone, but only assumptions and hypotheses. Even if a thesis has proven itself in practice and has found general acceptance, critical scrutiny is not sacrilege but an indispensable duty of every scientist. Bans on thought and muzzles are methods and typical characteristics of a dictatorship that degrades science to an unworthy servant of the powerful. How credible is an ideology that wants to be colourful but suppresses diversity of opinion?” asked chemist Dr Michael Schnell1) in his lecture “Experimental verification of the CO2 greenhouse effect – the false climate prophets” at the EIKE Climate Conference in Munich in 2020. The downright canceling campaign of the previous year’s EIKE Climate Conference2) showed just how justified his warning of dictatorial tendencies is.

“Ministry of Truth” at work

With the participation of journalists, environmental organisations, politicians and “Antifa” (a rogue self-declared antifascist organisation in Germany), attempts were made to prevent the conference through “actions” and political and media pressure on the landlord of the conference hotel. The fact that the corresponding video on the EIKE website can no longer be accessed shows just how sophisticated, intricate and far-reaching this suppression has become. Only an internet search shows that it can still be found on YouTube. However, it is labelled with a warning euphemistically referred to as an “info section” referring to reviews and “fact checks”. There are now networks of such “fact-checkers” operating worldwide4) and throughout Europe5) , which attack alleged misinformation under the guise of “correction” and present “official” opinions as the truth. They use tricks to try to discredit the statements made or people involved. If you follow the link given on the “Info section” on the subject of climate change6), the reader is showered with the full plethora of climate hysteria and money-begging messages brought forward by the United Nations (UN). And of course, this presentation of “infallible truths” is not tagged with any reference to critical scientific voices on the subject.

Even the University of Rostock felt compelled to issue a press release on Dr. Schnell’s lecture7). In it, it “emphatically distances itself from the statements made by Dr. Michael Schnell in relation to climate change. These statements are not based on research results from the University of Rostock”.

These are still the currently milder working methods of the complexly structured “Ministry of Truth”, with which our woke climate overlords want to nudge us towards the “right way of thinking” on climate issues.



Figure 2: The course of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere (black line) and the temperature on the Earth’s surface (blue line) over the last 600 million years or so. It is difficult to understand why CO2 can be described as the “Earth’s thermostat” in view of these curves (graphic from: centil-europe.ch

What was Dr. Schnell’s offence?

What was the actual offence that brought Dr. Schnell this form of reputational damage? He had conducted experiments on the question of how the CO2 greenhouse effect could be proven or falsified. His conclusion:

“Both research methods proved that at least the near-Earth CO2 greenhouse effect is physically possible. But it was also shown that the IR radiation of clouds considerably reduces the greenhouse effect of CO2. The experiments confirm the position of the ‘sceptics’ who see a reduction in CO2 climate sensitivity in water vapour and clouds and accuse the ‘alarmists’ of grossly exaggerating the alleged CO2 danger.”

A thorough analysis

Prof Franz-Karl Reinhart from the EPF Lausanne is one of the well-known critics of the IPCC in Switzerland. In a publication dated 12 September 20179) , he presented a comprehensive analysis of radiative transfer through CO2 . This involved scrutinising Svante Arrhenius’ theory that the strong IR interaction of CO2 molecules leads to the absorption of IR photons emitted from the ground and then to the re-emission of this radiation. The resulting counter-radiation towards the earth’s surface would counteract its cooling and thus cause a greenhouse effect. In his introduction, F. K. Reinhart points out that “water in its aggregate forms [clouds of water vapour, water droplets and snow and/or ice] has an enormous impact on the climate and it therefore makes little sense to assume [solely] radiation or energy balances”. By analysing the pure CO2 radiation mechanism, he wanted to check mathematically what climate impact a doubling of the concentration of CO2 would actually have with respect to the increase in temperature if the interfering influences of water were not present. The IPCC gives values of 3-5°C here.

This is not just about the main absorption bands of CO2 in the IR range in question, which lie at wavelengths of 4.25 and 15 µm. The calculation is way more complicated because these bands have a considerable width. If their structure is broken down more precisely, numerous secondary absorption frequencies can be seen on both sides of the main peaks.

Figure 3: Distribution of secondary absorption lines of the 4.25 µm band of the CO2 molecule (graphic: Anton Paar 10)

In addition, there are various other, less pronounced absorption frequencies spread across the entire IR spectrum. Even if the energy contribution of each of these “smaller” peaks is comparatively small, they should not be neglected as a whole. In total, around 200,000 frequency lines had to be taken into account in the relevant spectral range of 2.9 to 29 µm. Dr. Reinhart relied on the HITRAN program11) for this analysis. This scientific software package offers the researcher comprehensive calculation tools, including the necessary databases. It calculates radiation reactions and radiation transport processes in all possible gases and gas mixtures according to the latest scientific and technical standards. Changes in atmospheric composition and density as well as their evolution with increasing altitude can be taken into account. HITRAN is used by scientists as well as satellite operators, meteorologists and the military due to the quality of its results.



Table 1: The calculation of the forcing Fc based on the current CO2 concentration and climate situation (TEarth = 288 K), the increase in forcing ΔFmax and the resulting temperature increase ΔTmax compared to today for CO2 concentrations of 800, 2,000 and even 4,000 ppm (Table: F. K. Reinhart)

The calculation results shown in Table 1 prove that carbon dioxide is only a very weak greenhouse gas. The temperature increase that has occurred since the beginning of the industrial age as a result of increasing the CO2 content of the atmosphere to 400 ppm is therefore only 0.12 K (or 0.12 °C). It would only rise by 0.24 K even if it were doubled to 800 ppm. Even a tenfold increase to 4,000 ppm (which would be utopian anyway due to the far too small reserves of raw materials) would only result in a temperature increase of < 0.8 K.

Conclusions
In his summary, Prof. Reinhart comes to the following conclusions:

“- The heat retention (“forcing”) by atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2 ) causes a maximum temperature increase of 0.24 K (0.24°C) when the concentration doubles from 400 ppm to 800 ppm, based on a simplified absorption model that is independent of climate.

– This value depends only on the accepted mean earth temperature, T = 288 K, and is relatively insensitive to its uncertainty of 2 K.

– The temperature increase since the industrial revolution amounts to a maximum of 0.12 K, which is within the range of measurement accuracy. The anthropogenic contribution is therefore practically insignificant.

– The behavior of glacial and current temperature trends is not causally linked to carbon dioxide concentrations.

– The causes of global warming have not been clarified. However, they are most likely linked to the solar system and the water cycle.

– Measures to control CO2 emissions and the earth’s temperature are unsuitable, even dangerous means”.



Figure 4: The last cold period in the Alps was characterized by extreme swings in both directions. The upper part of the picture shows the considerably reduced ice cover around 25,000 years after the beginning of the cold period. Only 17,000 years later, the Alpine region was covered by a gigantic ice sheet and the temperature (black curve) was 13 °C below today’s level. The blue curve indicates the volume of ice bound in the glaciers in cm sea level equivalent (screenshots from 12)

Figure 5: The joint representation of the trends in atmospheric CO2 content and temperature over the course of the last ice age shows that the correlation between the two variables appears to be rather weak. In particular, the explosive rise in the red curve at the very end raises doubts. The course of the CO2 concentration with temperature can easily be attributed to outgassing or absorption due to higher or lower solubility in the sea as a result of Henry’s law. An industrial influence can be ruled out (except for the last 150 years or so). (Graphic: author + screenshot from )

No mincing of words: Nobel Prize winner Prof John Clauser 13)

It may well be argued that the two authors mentioned above are possibly mistaken and not leading specialists. However, this attempt to disqualify them definitely does not apply to John Clauser. The experimental physicist, who specialzes in the fundamentals of quantum mechanics, was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2022. He is a vehement critic of the current CO2 climate hysteria, as evidenced by his statements at an EIKE conference in 2024. In it, he states that “the IPCC and its collaborators misjudge the prevailing climate process on Earth”. Here is a small selection of statements:



Figure 6: Some key statements from Prof Clauser’s presentation at EIKE 13)

With these theses, Prof Clauser has naturally become a hate figure for climate catastrophe prophets. Significantly, however, the well-known climate activist platform Wikipedia14) merely accuses him of not having published a single peer-reviewed study on climate change in his career. The ridiculousness of this argument can hardly be surpassed. The “climate impact” of CO2 is based on quantum physical interactions between CO2 molecules and IR photons, and this falls entirely within his area of expertise. Of course, no factual refutations of his theses are to be found on Wikipedia. Prof Clauser’s role as ambassador of the “World Climate Declaration” of the Clintel Foundation15) (Climate Intelligence) proves that he is by no means alone in his theories. In addition to Prof Clauser, its more than 1,900 supporters include the Nobel Prize winner for physics Prof Ivar Giaever16) from Norway as well as prominent climate researchers such as the atmospheric physicist Prof Richard Lindzen17) and the experimental physicist Prof Herrmann Harde1 . Prof Clauser is also a member of the board of the CO2 Coalition Foundation19) .

Fred F. Mueller

 

And that is at the high end of what would be expected, based on the modest effect on infrared absorption of adding CO2 to ordinary sea-level atmospheric air -- as Angstrom established more than 100 years ago, and which can be confirmed by any competent physics undergrad with access to a university optics lab.