Day: December 31, 2013

Monckton Demonstrates

There are two speeches from the last ten years that stand out in my mind.
One was the speech Tony Blair gave to the Joint Session of Congress–why did I have to wait for a Brit to explain the greatness of America?
Then a few years ago Chris Monckton, Viscount of Brenchley, another Brit, gave a wonderful speech at one of the Heartland Climate Conferences and I got really misty and choked up to hear him talk with such affection about my homeland and its people.
Continue reading Monckton Demonstrates

WHO is Apolitical–Really?

Tibet is a 1984 non entity.
Hard to get attention or status when you are diminished as an entity and persecuted by a huge commie country that sits on the Security Council.
The Dalai Lama, remember him? Religious and political iconic figure, thought by Tibetans to be a deity. Not so the Chinese.
So here is an example of why I don’t trust the World Health Organization, or any UN entity involved in politically charged issues.
The UN is a debating society dominated by tyrannies. Ok? Got it??
Continue reading WHO is Apolitical–Really?

Let's Hear it for Osteopathy

I have been hard on Naturopathy and Chiropracty because they cross my science line. Not so with Osteopathy, which has become mainstream and committed to scientific medicine and medical care.
Osteopathy is evidence based medicine with some osteopathic therapies (mostly manipulation) included.
Anyone with sense can see the advantages of manipulative therapy properly applied. It’s like sophisticated massage/physical therapy.
Many months ago I developed some back problems from some work I had to do and benefited from some manipulative osteo therapies from a colleague.
I know, that’s an anecdote–so???? Osteopaths started in a place where they were sorta close to chiropracters, who have no scientific theories of any substance or repute.
Osteopathic medical schools are underfunded and on a shoestring, so also with their clinical and post graduate training programs, but I find that they work hard to close the gap on quality medicine and are serious contributors to good medical care. No substitute for hard work and virtue.
http://www.theunion.com/news/9548193-113/osteopathic-body-medicine-approach

Howard the Hero

Howard Hayden is my hero because he just plain damn loves physics and studying things.
When I grow up and get better at math, which is a strong point for Howard, like most physicists, then I will be a junior Howard Hayden and I will be happy being a scientist and studying the wonders of the world.
Oh,and he is also a hero because he is a man’s man, and thinks for himself and demands good evidence be put forward for anyone asserting a premise.
I have introduced Howard Hayden and watched him in person and he is one formidable man at the podium in a debate. He loves taking to a hot head from the audience, warrior scientist that he is.

Former Physics Prof. Howard C. Hayden of U. of Connecticut ridicules man-made climate fears and alleged ‘consensus’ as ‘groupthink’

Models Don't Model

We knew that. Below is linked a discussion by a respected climate scientist who says the models are bunkum.
There is a Prof at U Penn, Scott Armstrong, who asserts he can create reliable predictions. His protocol for good predictive model has more than 100 elements.
That makes sense as long as the elements have reliable information and are based on reliable observed and replicable experimental evidence.
The Forcing side of the climate models and their lack of mitigators creates this run away train modeling.
And that doesn’t even deal with the problems of the projected catastophic effects of warming, which are nothing more than speculations built on political agendas.
As an old man I disagree with the theory that 57 degrees F is good and warm is bad. The projected health and environmental problems from warming really are not part of the problems of the models, but they do demonstrate junk science in another context in the warming projections of the IPCC.
Am I breathless–no just respectful of the uncertainties. Physicists know stuff so well that sometimes they can predict very acurately what hasn’t been discovered or how things will work. They could predict the Higgs Boson and other elementary particles based on their calculations and experiments, but predicting in a complex uncertain environment like climate studies is not so easy.

Leading Expert Modeler Prof. Christopher Essex Tells Why Climate Models Hardly Better Than Hocus Pocus: ‘Welcome To Wonderland’! – Recalls perversion of science: ‘We want you to come up with the smoking gun that will prove global warming’

Complexity Uncertainty Egomania

Mona Charen is a smart lady commentator who is always on the money by my assessment.
Here she talks about the things that von Mises and Hayek tried to teach us about central planning, and she very insightfully takes down the idiocy of what has properly been called “Scientism” and its latest iteration–warmer CRU/IPCC cargo cult science.
Hayek named the problem the “fatal conceit” and the nomenklatura have it and live it.
Models–now there’s something to take to the bank that is a sign of a toxic level of fatal conceit.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/367248/things-we-know-just-aint-so-mona-charen

Thomas Sowell on Conflicts of Interest

Thomas Sowell lends a little sense to the question of experts and opinions.
Conflicts of interest are unavoidable in the real world, but that does not mean one can lie for justice–one of the bad habits of ideologues.
That is why JunkScience.com exists, to expose lying for justice, among other intellectual forms of dishonesty.
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/12/31/hit-piece-journalism-n1770006?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl