Button up your overcoat, baby it's cold outside

[dogtowner]

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/01/global-temperature-continues-to-cool/

We're back to 2014 levels per the UK Met office. This air report follows on the heels of last week's cooling seas report.

And all like normal cycles behaved forever.

 

[PLC1]

NASA is wrong again. No wonder the moon landing had to be faked.

 

[palerider]

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/01/global-temperature-continues-to-cool/

We're back to 2014 levels per the UK Met office. This air report follows on the heels of last week's cooling seas report.

And all like normal cycles behaved forever.

Interesting that the temperature in the troposphere is claimed to be the highest in october since record keeping began while at the same time, the oceans are hemorrhaging heat. You would think that climate science would connect the two things and perhaps wonder where it is leading...wonder what happens to the climate when that excess heat has finally bled off.

When things like this happen it only demonstrates conclusively that climate science isn't science at all..it is a pseudoscience intent only with maintaining a steady income stream and increasing its influence in the political arena.

 

[The Scotsman]

it is a pseudoscience intent only with maintaining a steady income stream and increasing its influence in the political arena.

Its going a bit further than that now. It seems that if you question those on the "correct" side of the "science" then instead of defending and debating your research and findings you reach for the lawyers. Have you read about the Stanford Professor Mark Z. Jacobson, he is seeking damages against the National Academy of Sciences resulting from a peer reviewed study of renewables that was questioned by the review panel. He has filed a $10M lawsuit. From the abstract of the NAS report...

In contrast, Jacobson et al. [Jacobson MZ, Delucchi MA, Cameron MA, Frew BA (2015) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112(49):15060–15065] argue that it is feasible to provide “low-cost solutions to the grid reliability problem with 100% penetration of WWS [wind, water and solar power] across all energy sectors in the continental United States between 2050 and 2055”, with only electricity and hydrogen as energy carriers. In this paper, we evaluate that study and find significant shortcomings in the analysis. In particular, we point out that this work used invalid modeling tools, contained modeling errors, and made implausible and inadequately supported assumptions. Policy makers should treat with caution any visions of a rapid, reliable, and low-cost transition to entire energy systems that relies almost exclusively on wind, solar, and hydroelectric power.

http://www.pnas.org/content/114/26/6722.full

His response...

Climate science and the renewables debate has now come to this.

 

[dogtowner]

Geez, that's weird

 

[The Scotsman]

Geez, that's weird

Its hard to go from hero to zero in such a short time... Jacobson was the posterboy of the renewable brigade and now he's trashed is reputation. Guess he has to fund his lifestyle somehow... I hope for his sake the lawsuit is on a contingency basis!!

 

[palerider]

Its hard to go from hero to zero in such a short time... Jacobson was the posterboy of the renewable brigade and now he's trashed is reputation. Guess he has to fund his lifestyle somehow... I hope for his sake the lawsuit is on a contingency basis!!

If he loses, I believe he will get hit for the expense incurred by the person or persons he sued..and court costs... The case is a sure loser and he is going to lose a great deal of money when it ends as it only can end.