We need to be rather careful about the term “opinion is divided”.
This is an excellent Paper on the Mathematics of Climate Change and Climate Change Alarmism, Climatology as opposed to Climate Politics,
French Mathematical Calculation Society: Global Warming Crusade is absurd and pointless « JoNova https://t.co/TEiN7g9n70 via @JoanneNova #Perspectiva #GrubStreetJournal#GrubStreetPolitics#GrubStreetGeoPolitics #GrubStreetScience#GrubStreetEnergy#GrubStreetGreenFascism
— GrubStreetJournal (@GrubStreetJorno) July 22, 2019
“The impact on the entire field of scientific research is particularly clear and especially
pernicious. No project can be launched, on any subject whatsoever, unless it makes direct
reference to global warming. You want to look at the geology of the Garonne Basin? It is,
after all, an entirely normal and socially useful subject in every respect. Well, your research
will be funded, approved and published only if it mentions the potential for geological
storage of CO2. It is appalling.”
1. This simple calculation clearly demonstrates that there are not enough stations to model
the surface temperature of the globe, and satellites cannot replace surface stations. The
reduction in the number of sensors being used is fundamentally unsound: temperature
varies from one place to another, from one hour to the next, and this natural variability can
be tracked only by a very dense network of sensors. p.16
2. Determining an average temperature for a system as complex as the Earth has no physical
meaning. Unfortunately, this question, fundamental though it is, has never been tackled by
organizations involved in meteorology. For them, the answer is simple: you take all the
sensors and calculate the average! p.23
3. According to the British Met Office, ‗The global average temperature is
the arithmetic mean of the northern hemisphere average and the southern hemisphere
This type of reasoning is being used by all the international bodies, and one might
legitimately question its validity. The thermodynamic mean, for its part, is too complicated
to apply and requires the use of models (with all their limitations and uncertainties).
We might, however, wonder why the arithmetic mean is also being used in areas that are
less well provided with sensors or have very high or very low temperatures. If we content
ourselves with an unweighted arithmetic mean, then areas with the highest density of
sensors are going to be over-represented!
Our conclusion here is very clear:
SCM SA White paper “Global Warming”, 2015/09
– to calculate the arithmetic mean for the entire planet makes no sense and can only
lead to errors;
– you can calculate the arithmetic mean for areas well provided with sensors (Europe
and the US), and compare the values from one year to another. This might provide
information on local climate variation. p.26/27
4. On CO2 Measurement and concentration,
Our conclusion is very clear: the entire methodology used to observe CO2 has to be
overhauled before we can even think about the results that have been obtained by these
observations. The first step is to correctly document the natural variability of CO2
concentrations (what affects them, and how do they manifest?). We must not forget that the
aim here is to make a global assessment of CO2 concentrations in the entire atmosphere.
Let us use a simple comparison to explain this. Let us imagine that we want to document
incidents of sins committed by human beings. Before concluding that ‗we can restrict our
investigations to the areas around cathedrals‘, which would at least have the merit of
simplicity, we would have to find out about the ‗natural‘ variability of sin. Perhaps, in fact,
more sins are committed far away from cathedrals? p.57
3. Critical analysis
In this case, we have been able to obtain raw data and conduct our own analysis, which
clearly demonstrates, contrary to what we are all reading all the time, that there has been
no increase in the number of cyclones over the past 40 years. We have found a slight
increase in the number of Category 4 and 5 cyclones (the strongest), but the numbers are
very small each year, and the increase might simply be due to changes in ‗accounting
A common deception is as follows: you begin by looking at cyclones that reach the US
mainland (the ones that affect people and insurance companies) and you count them. Then
you change the perimeter and include all cyclones in the North Atlantic, including ones that
disperse at sea. Of course, the second group is bigger!
As we said earlier, the statistics presented here cover all cyclones in the North Atlantic. p.67
6. Sea Level Rises.
a. Two kinds of instruments are used:
• Marigraphs, which have been around for 200 years;
• Altimetry satellites, which measure the height of the satellite above the ocean; they
have been around for 20 years, namely Topex/Poseidon (1992), Jason 1 (2001), Jason
The water level varies naturally:
• Due to the tides (lunar attraction)
• Due to wind and storms
• Due to sea currents
This being so, the estimates provided by marigraphs and satellites can be no more than
averages, if possible over one year or several years, as phenomena such as El Niño affect
the sea level for a year or more. p.68
b. E. Be careful! On Models. ( https://www.bitchute.com/video/dv8avoovsHqr/)
As this issue has taken on a major political dimension, all kinds of statements are made by
absolutely anyone at all. Great care is therefore called for when accepting information.
Conclusions based on any kind of model should be disregarded. As the SCM specializes in
building mathematical models, we should also be recognized as competent to criticize them.
Models are useful when attempting to review our knowledge, but they should not be used as
SCM SA White paper “Global Warming”, 2015/09
The rising sea level is a basic thesis for journalists, to support the doctrine of global
warming. They say, ―Look, the sea is rising, and so we are in danger‖.
It is perfectly true that the sea level is rising, but essentially this is due to the cooling down
of the core of the terrestrial globe which has been taking place gradually for five billion
years. As a result of this contraction, the lighter areas (the oceans) tend to rise up in
relation to the heavier areas (the mountains). This is simply a consequence of buoyancy,
and human beings have nothing to do with it. p.77
That’s Chapter 1 summarised and is sufficient for responding to the Pariah Status proffered upon me by Ron.
I would close only by Pointing interested and critical thinkers at the work of Clive Spash and his Paper The Brave New World of Carbon Trading.
“A FIRE, A FIRE IS BURNING! I HEAR THE BOOT OF LUCIFER, I SEE HIS FILTHY FACE! AND IT IS MY FACE, AND YOURS, DANFORTH! FOR THEM THAT QUAIL TO BRING MEN OUT OF IGNORANCE, AS I HAVE QUAILED, AND AS YOU QUAIL NOW WHEN YOU KNOW IN ALL YOUR BLACKHEARTS THAT THIS BE FRAUD – GOD DAMNS OUR KIND ESPECIALLY, AND WE WILL BURN, WE WILL BURN TOGETHER!”
― ARTHUR MILLER, THE CRUCIBLE
The States Guide to Trolling the Web. Forum Sliding (NB)