“So, the long and short of it is that the prediction that the bear numbers would decline by two thirds failed. Not only did the bears not decline, but the global population number rose by at least 16 percent, perhaps more.”
[This interview was originally published by Friends of Science on December 15, 2019. It is presented here with the permission of the interviewer, Mr. Grègoire Canlorbe]
Susan J. Crockford: I live in Victoria, British Columbia, and I specialize in animals from the late Pleistocene, so probably the last fifteen to twenty thousand years. I have a contract company called Pacific Identifications Inc. We identify animal bones from archaeological projects and also from biological research: stomach contents, fecal samples, that kind of thing. That’s primarily how I get my income. And then, I am also a former adjunct professor at the University of Victoria—I had held that position since 2004 but in 2019, it was not renewed.
My primary interest—my overall interest—is evolution. That, for me, really informs everything. It’s the big picture. Evolution is the big idea that drives all my interest. For example, the interesting thing is that a deer bone from 8000 years ago looks like one living today, and so, there is continuity.
But there are also distinctions—when you get species differences, those are apparent. I became interested in polar bears when I was working on the topic leading up to my PhD dissertation. I was looking at the speciation process that turns a wolf into a dog (what we also call domestication). While trying to unravel what biological process drives that transformation, the wild species that I looked at to compare it to was the brown bear to polar bear transformation. So, I’ve been looking at the Continue reading “A conversation with Susan J. Crockford—for Association des climato-réalistes”
___________ “Global warming is not a purely scientific issue any more,” he said. “It has repercussions for society. It has also taken on a moralistic, almost religious quality. If you believe what everyone believes, you are a good person. If you don’t, you are a bad person. Who wants to be a sinner?” ___________
[This interview article about ‘skeptic’ climate scientist Nir Shaviv was published and then quickly pulled from Forbes.com. We discovered the article after it was reprinted by Jim Lakely, Communications Director of the Heartland Institute. We are reprinting it here under the fair use doctrine. Ed.]
The U.S. auto industry and regulators in California and Washington appear
deadlocked over stiff Obama-era fuel-efficiency standards that automakers oppose and the Trump administration have vowed to roll back – an initiative that has environmental activists up in arms.
John Raymond Christy is a climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) whose chief interests are satellite remote sensing of global climate and global climate change. In February 2019 he was named as a member of the EPA Science Advisory Board.
[This interview is being reprinted with the permission of the author. It was originally published on 28 June 2019 by Friends of Science, Calgary and can be found in the link provided in the paragraph that follows. Ed.]
In May 2019 he was interviewed by Grégoire Canlorbe for Association des climato-réalistes, the only climate-realist association in France. The conversation was first published in the French journal Valeurs Actuelles (in a French edited version), and on Friends of Science (in the original English version).
Grégoire Canlorbe: You have been at pains to show that climate models are over-predicting warming by roughly a factor of two. Could you come back to this alleged falsification?
John Christy: We should be applying the scientific method to claims scientists (and others) are making about the climate. In this case I downloaded the output from 102 climate model simulations used by the IPCC and compared the tropospheric temperature since 1979 between the models and several observational datasets, including the satellite dataset we generate. The models on average were warming the atmosphere at a rate Continue reading “A conversation with John Christy, for Association des climato-réalistes”
It’s been long known that NASA1 GISS2 has been going through its historical temperature data archives and erasing old temperature measurements and replacing them with new, made up figures without any real legitimate reason.
This practice has led to the formation of new datasets called “adjusted” data, with the old datasets being called “V3 unadjusted”. The problem for global warming activists, however, was that when anyone looks at the old “V3 unadjusted” – i.e. untampered data – they often found a downward linear temperature trend. Such negative trends of course are an embarrassment for global warming alarmists, who have been claiming the planet is warming up rapidly.
[This article is a reprint from the Climate Change Weekly, #322, with the permission of the author/editor of that periodical. The Climate Change Weekly is published by the Heartland Institute. The original article is available here. This article should be of particular interest to our forum in light of the recent discussions regarding progress, or lack thereof, in getting the skeptical point of view out to the general populace. One might conclude from this article that the skeptical community with help from climate economics may be seeing more success in changing minds than we might have thought. Ed.]
From Alberta to Australia, from Finland to France and beyond, voters are increasingly showing their displeasure with expensive energy policies imposed by politicians in an inane effort to fight purported human-caused climate change.
Skepticism about whether humans are causing dangerous climate change has always been higher in the United States than in most industrialized countries. As a result, governments in Europe, Canada, and in other developed countries are much farther along the energy-rationing path that cutting carbon dioxide emissions requires than the United States is. Residents in these countries have begun to revolt against the higher energy costs they suffer under as a result of ever-increasing taxes on fossil fuels Continue reading “Climate Politics Abroad Are Turning Decidedly Skeptical”