Comments for Carlin Economics and Science

Comment on Why a Copernican Revolution Is Needed in Climate Change Research by Joachim Seifert

Joachim Seifert — Sat, 14 Jan 2012 19:37:14 +0000

This comment hits the spot……the astronomical side was “neglected” by the IPCC…..
Neglected? No, but on purpose kept under the table, in order that any resulting RF, which
occurs due to astronomical (orbital and 3-body-planetary) movements is given
to atmospheric physics, CO2 and AGW….. The LA-meeting of AR4-wg1 in 2006 agreed to “assume the orbital forcing to be ‘invariant’ ” and great HAPPINESS broke out…. (Email of one participant)….. Invariant = neglectible on less than millenium scale… (AR4-wg1-chapt 2).
They all knew there is substantial astronomical RF and agreed to collude…..to hide it….
The evidence/proof of this: See AR4-wg1-chapter 9 of Mrs.Hegerl: The astronomical side
is referred to with “Goosse et al, 2005″ in which the Earth’s orbit is modelled by simplistic
Keplerian parameters of Berger, A. 1978 !! , which, according to the NASA JPL is only
good enough for high school standards but “not for professional use” (JPL Horizons)
Goosse et al knew they hide orbital forcing…..

Scafetta is on the right trail and others (including me) will lift the cover …

Comment on Why a Copernican Revolution Is Needed in Climate Change Research by Scaffeta on his latest paper: Harmonic climate model versus the IPCC general circulation climate models | TaJnB | TheAverageJoeNewsBlogg

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:01:43 +0000

[...] So, is a kind of Copernican Revolution needed in climate change research, as Alan Carlin has also suggested? http://www.carlineconomics.com/archives/1456 [...]

Comment on Why a Copernican Revolution Is Needed in Climate Change Research by Scaffeta on his latest paper: Harmonic climate model versus the IPCC general circulation climate models | Watts Up With That?

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:01:57 +0000

[...] So, is a kind of Copernican Revolution needed in climate change research, as Alan Carlin has also suggested? http://www.carlineconomics.com/archives/1456 [...]

Comment on Comments on Proposed EPA Endangerment Technical Support Document by iit jee question papers free download

iit jee question papers free download — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:21:32 +0000

Its like you read my mind! You appear to know a lot about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you could do with some pics to drive the message home a little bit, but other than that, this is great blog. A fantastic read. I’ll certainly be back.

Comment on EPA Inspector General Finds Procedures Used in Preparing GHG Endangerment Finding Did Not Follow OMB Requirements by Terry Oldberg

Terry Oldberg — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:18:39 +0000

During the period for public comment on the EPA’s proposed Endangerment finding, I submitted a comment by following the EPA’s own procedure. In this comment, I pointed out that the IPCC’s conjecture of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) lacked refutability by reference to instrument readings, thus lying outside science. Subsequently, the EPA published a response which (allegedly) addressed each one of the public comments it had received. In this response, the EPA failed to acknowledge receipt of or refute my contention that the AGW conjecture lacked refutability thus lying outside science. I responded to this inaccuracy with a letter to the EPA’s administrator, Lisa Jackson. In my letter to Jackson, I pointed out that the EPA’s response to public comments was materially inaccurate. Year later, I’ve not heard from Jackson.

Comment on EPA Inspector General Finds Procedures Used in Preparing GHG Endangerment Finding Did Not Follow OMB Requirements by Disregulated. « Greenhouse Bullcrap

Disregulated. « Greenhouse Bullcrap — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 21:34:39 +0000

[...] CARLIN ECONOMICS & SCIENCE EPA Inspector General Finds Procedures Used in Preparing GHG Endangerment Finding Did Not Follow OMB Requirements Alan Carlin| September 28, 2011 http://www.carlineconomics.com/archives/1363 [...]

Comment on EPA Inspector General Finds Procedures Used in Preparing GHG Endangerment Finding Did Not Follow OMB Requirements by hro001

hro001 — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 05:03:52 +0000

Congratulations, Dr. Carlin!

Based on past performance, response from the IPCC movers and shakers (e.g. Trenberth) was entirely predictable.

It would have been nice if the OIG had pointed out that – notwithstanding the inclusion of a lengthy recitation of IPCC’s “policies and procedures” – the 2010 IAC review of these policies and procedures (which did not include any examination of “the science”) concluded that the IPCC wasn’t following its own rules.

So in effect, the EPA – which didn’t follow its own rules -relied on the increasingly disputed “findings” of yet another group which didn’t follow its own rules!

And they expect the general public to “trust” them?!

Amazing.

Comment on EPA Inspector General Finds Procedures Used in Preparing GHG Endangerment Finding Did Not Follow OMB Requirements by csanborn

csanborn — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 13:46:15 +0000

It is heartening to see sanity coming back. Your efforts helped big time. Thank you.

Comment on Why the UN GHG Hypothesis Should Be Rejected on Scientific Grounds by National Parks Find New Use For Tax Dollars | The Northwest Speaks

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 23:28:55 +0000

[...] has made many efforts to support its climate religion (climatism). Since this viewpoint has no basis in the scientific method, it is not science and would seem best characterized as religion. For a list of what the [...]

Comment on How Big Brother Is Using the National Parks and Other Agencies to Promote His Climate Religion Using Your Tax Dollars by National Parks Find New Use For Tax Dollars | The Northwest Speaks

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 23:26:18 +0000

[...] How Big Brother Is Using the National Parks and Other Agencies to Promote His Climate Religion Using… [...]