Climate alarmism - Historical overview, inconsitencies and evidence of fraud

Climate skeptic Tony Heller (aka Steven Goddard) at the 34th Annual Meeting of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, on July 9, 2016 presents an overview  of the history of climate alarmism and its media coverage, inconsistencies between alarmist claims and the climate data record and evidence for fraudulent manipulation and altering of the record by NASA, NOAA and others. It's a rambling presentation covering, back and forth, the past century+ but leaves the definite impression that something is seriously amiss about the current climate alarmist narrative.



More:

Heller gave a similar presentation at a Washington State Senate hearing February 2017.  Some senators (Dems) are skeptical of Heller's conclusions but it is interesting that Washington State is at least willing to hear from skeptics like Heller and Don Easterbrook (previous post).

Data manipulation and false data,  Data Integrity

Malfeasance in the "climate change" industry

Dr. Tim Ball makes the case for malfeasance (vs. error/incompetence) in climate science:

How many scientific mistakes separate incompetence from malfeasance? After watching the corruption of climate science for over 30 years, I believe we crossed the line with creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Its procedures were established to prove the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis.

... The misuse of specialized methods and procedures is a fundamental problem caused by climatology being a generalist discipline. Most are specialists in a single component, who then, inappropriately, call themselves climate scientists. ... The IPCC brought together such specialists and charged them with proving, rather than disproving, the hypothesis that humans were causing global warming (AGW). It was an unholy alliance that provided an environment for misuse and abuse.

Fudged data - Is global warming the fraud of the century?

Bill Whittle with PJTV's Trifecta:

Recent evidence calls into question the accuracy of climate data, and every day, natural gas looks like a cleaner domestic alternative to Middle East oil. So why is the left promoting global warming and resisting the use of natural gas?

Inside "the sham Robocall scandal"

Greg Renouf, on his blog GenuiNEWitty, provided a very detailed account of who was behind the fraudulent promotion of the Robocall "scandal".

Here's Greg with Ezra Levant:

A phony poll to boost a fraud's image

Ezra Levant shows how a poll manipulated by a PR flack at Angus Reid got David Suzuki to the top of a "most admired" list:



Update: Ezra's column.

Climate science fraudsters confess (sort of)

After Steve McIntyre pointed out the serious 'flaws' in their paper (which had received world-wide media coverage screaming certain doom) the authors, Marcott et al, give a half-assed confession:

"Without providing any links to or citation of Climate Audit, they now concede: 

20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions."

Ross McKitrick:

"... the authors made very strong claims about the implications of their findings regarding 20th-century warming. Yet at no point did they mention the fact that the 20th century portion of their proxy reconstruction is garbage..."

Crony environmentalism by fraudulent collusion

EPA, Greens play a hazy “sue and settle” game

“Sue and Settle “ practices, sometimes referred to as “friendly lawsuits”, are cozy deals through which far-left radical environmental groups file lawsuits against federal agencies wherein court-ordered “consent decrees” are issued based upon a prearranged settlement agreement they collaboratively craft together in advance behind closed doors. Then, rather than allowing the entire process to play out, the agency being sued settles the lawsuit by agreeing to move forward with the requested action they and the litigants both want….

... taxpayers, including those impacted regulatory victims, are put on the hook for legal fees of both colluding parties. According to a 2011 GAO report, this amounted to millions of dollars awarded to environmental organizations for EPA litigations between 1995 and 2010. Three “Big Green” groups received 41% of this payback: Earthjustice, $4,655,425 (30%); the Sierra Club, $966,687; and the Natural Resources Defense Council, $252,004. Most of this was paid to environmental attorneys in connection to lawsuits filed under the Clean Air Act, followed next by the Clean Water Act.

In addition, the Department of Justice forked over at least $43 million of our money defending EPA in court between 1998 and 2010. This didn’t include money spent by EPA for their legal costs in connection with those rip-offs, since EPA doesn’t keep track of their attorney’s time on a case-by-case basis. ...

This is crony environmentalism involving fraudulent collusion.  Perps on both sides of these transactions should be prosecuted and jailed.

[Via]

John Robson on equalization fraud

Make It Go Away:

Equalization makes us poorer, encourages bad policy and fosters bitterness. Unfortunately we can’t just take it out behind the barn and kill it with an axe. ...

Not to mention that it's fraudulent:

Satirist P.J. O’Rourke says, “Beyond a certain point complexity is fraud … when someone creates a system in which you can’t tell whether or not you’re being fooled, you’re being fooled.” So take Canada’s multi-billion-dollar equalization program … please. It’s so complicated even experts have trouble with it, and regular citizens are excluded completely.

... equalization is arbitrary. Devised with theologian Soren Kierkegaard's "covetous eye on the outcome," it provides dense technical cover for political shenanigans involving billions of dollars.

This much complexity is fraud, plain and simple.