Coping: The Myopic Idiocy of Climate Change Hype

imageI believe “Science” has gotten climate change stupendously wrong.  And I’d like to thank a Washington Post story for making it so easy to dispute climate change claims.

I wasn’t planning to present a major discussion of the silly climate change meetings getting underway today, but time has come to lay out a much more precise (and scientific) point of view.

The guts of this were laid out in Peoplenomics in “The Scariest Holiday – Ever” a month ago.

The WaPo Ocean Boulders Story:  Academic Absurdity

The Washington Post story “That’s heavy: climate-change warnings include rising seas and wild weather shifts. But giant flying boulders?” details some massive rocks on the otherwise mostly flat southern Bahamas Island of Eleuthera.

Among the alarmist claims is that 1,000 ton boulders like those in the Bahamas could come from climate change.  Whips up the ocean and mega-storms and all that.

Well, it’s a clever half-truth.

Yes the boulders are there, but probably not from Climate Change as hyped.

The first problem is that the assertion is that 2-million pound rocks could be washed up on the Bahamas by “mega-storms” resulting from climate change.  Kids like me from a fire department upbringing know a thing, or three, about water’s coefficient of friction.

While I don’t fault the scientists involved for taking their research in a direction of loose budgets to scare the daylights out of people (and stampede the whole world into global government complete with global climate taxes) the facts of the matter are considerably different than climate fear-mongers would care to let on.

Want to go to school for a few minutes?

S.V. Clube, William Napier, and

Unfortunately for climate adherents, we have very good evidence as to what causes global warming and periodic catastrophic cooling.  However, to arrive at the source, we need to adopt an interdisciplinary approach which (no surprise here) is lacking in climate research.

A short comment on the evolution of science is important:  When initial discoveries are made, they are equivalent (as in geometry) to individual points.  Not that these aren’t useful when science is young, but the more points, the better.

Recall that (again referring to geometry) two points make a line which allows us to project things.  Extensibility is a fine thing.  but lines are limiting.

Three points define a plane and four points define an object.

Science has not moved beyond points and lines in many areas, and you’ll see this in a few moments when I introduce you to object-oriented thinking.

Dot, line, and planar thinking characterizes where most science lives in today’s world.

Now to DTIC:  This is the Defense Technical Information Center.

One reason the U.S. still (despite administrative efforts otherwise) still has a commanding position as the preeminent military on the planet is that schools like Annapolis, West Point, and Colorado Springs place an incredibly high value on thinking.  Zoom out, then zoom-in.  Repeat.

And if you spend a fair amount of time researching any topic, as I have on climate change, you can use the Point, Line, Planar, Object (PLPO) approach to analysis to really get a leg up and be well ahead of the pack when comes to analysis of complex issues.

When you have a point, it’s a simple assertion.  When you have a line, you have a correlation, sometimes called a “line of inquiry.”  When you have a plane, you have a working theory, but when you get an object when four related points are discovered.

That’s when you have to deal with something which has a wholeness to it…which becomes pretty damn hard to deny.

Climate change is in the point and line stage – and check me if I’m wrong, but shouldn’t NYC be underwater?

The climate cheerleaders were no doubt disappointed when the story arrived “MIT Scientists: Global Warming pure Nonsense by Government Inc.”

The evidence of another mechanism for climate change  (other than man-caused warming) is found in a somewhat rare book that I have in my collection:  A copy S.V. (Viktor) Clube’s classic book The Cosmic Winter.  This came out in 1990.

And this has what to do with the library?

Well, Clube (and coauthor William Napier) continued to develop their theories writing for the U.S. military, among others.

Recommended (dot mil) Reading

You REALLY, REALLY, REALLY need to read “Giant Comets, Evolution, and Civilization” which is the real-deal and can be found here:


Global Warming and Cooling (Ice Ages) are likely Comet-Driven

I will run you through this with a few selected quotes from Clube’s work with Napier because it will give lie to absurdities like ocean climate-driven ocean waves washing up rocks that weigh 2-million pounds.

The Concept Summary

Climatic cycles, ice epochs, mass extinctions and other global disturbances may be attributed to episodes of bombardment by giant comets. Such bodies now in chaotic orbits beyond Jupiter present the most serious current celestial hazard.

Thus, whereas until the mid-1970’s, the Oort cloud was generally thought of as a stable, primordial system essentially not influenced by its Galactic environment, it now appears that sequences of giant comets perturbed into Earth-crossing orbits by periodically varying tidal forces of Galactic origin are the probable key to terrestrial evolutionary processes [4]. It turns out, for example, that the ,-26 Myr period of the late Phanerozoic pulsation (i.e. since about 260 million years BP) is indicative of the Galaxy’s longer term influence on the Oort cloud while the current (Pleistocene/Holocene) ice epoch and its ,-,0.1 Myr alternation between glaciation and greenhouse are broadly indicative of a current more localized Galactic influence close to the plane [5, 13]. The current arrival rate of giant comets implies that they are a prime celestial hazard to civilization; thus it appears that the last (i.e. latest Pleistocene) glacial and its aftermath, the current (Holocene) interglacial, may be associated with the disintegration and decline of the single, most recent, giant comet in near-Earth space [6]. This has led to a very natural focus now on the lesser but still significant hazards due to the still disintegrating debris of this giant comet, producing dark- and mini-ice ages on millennial and centennial timescales respectively [3]. The near-Earth arrival frequency of giant comets, – 10′ per annum, is much the same as that of -1-kilometer asteroid impacts, but the adverse environmental effects of giant comets, although comparable in severity, are much more prolonged. In the present study we consider the giant comet issue from both astrophysical and climatic perspectives. A point at issue is the greater complexity of the cometary as opposed to the asteroidal hazard, as well as its more pervasive effects.”

Now to the Washington Post story about this “giant waves” thing.

It doesn’t hold up to critical thinking, at least as inferred by climate alarmists.

It wasn’t climate it was COMET

True, enough, we do get periodic Ice Ages, and periods of extreme warming, but these are distinctly different events than, say, burning coal in China.

Note’s Clube’s work, while there may be atmospheric warming, there has also be a corresponding oceanic cooling process underway.  A pertinent couple of extracts:

During the ice ages the whole Earth was cooled, including the tropics. This is proved by glaciers extending down to about 10,000 feet on tropical mountains which do not at present hold glaciers, such as those on Hawaii. The need for the whole Earth to be appreciably cooled is difficult to reconcile with ice-age theories depending solely on small oscillations of the Earth’s rotation axis relative to the ecliptic plane, and small oscillations in the Earth’s orbital eccentricity. Neither of these effects produces any change in the amount of solar energy incident on the Earth and so could not lead to widespread cooling. Oscillations of tilt merely produce slight latitudinal variations in the incidence of solar energy, which are in any case much smaller than the transport in latitude of heat by atmospheric storms and ocean currents. The transport of oceanic heat towards the poles gives a far larger effect and would easily buffer slight latitude variations of insolation. Oscillations in eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit produce small shifts of solar energy between one geographical hemisphere and the other, and so should tend to cool one hemisphere and warm the other. But ice-ages occur contemporaneously in both hemispheres, not alternately, a disproof that was already understood more than half a century ago. The presence of the Milankovitch cycles is currently controversial: the most accurate climatic chronology covering the last 500,000 yr, obtained from calcite deposits in the Devil’s Hole fissure in Nevada, appears to indicate a chaotic behaviour for the climate over this period [29]. However the marine pelagic record appears to support the 100,000-year cycle [15]; this may be due to a combination of planetary resonances resulting in periodic giant comet dusting.

Clube and Napier’s work, in case you’re not following (it’s early, I get that) is that the Earth periodically gets a gigantic gob-smack with a comet.  When they get close to earth, they generally break into multiple pieces which them impact the earth and they throw up trillions of tons of eject (per impact) and now I bet you’re beginning to figure out where the rocks in the Bahamas most likely came from…

But let’s look at the heating and cooling dynamics because comet impacts are damn near the clone of Nuclear Winter in how they operate:

“In distant geological periods the heat storage in the ocean was considerably greater than it is at present. Today the ocean waters are close to freezing, whereas only 50 million years ago the bottom temperature was – 15’C and the available oceanic heat was then equivalent to a 50 year supply of sunlight. The difference has been attributed to drifting continents, especially by the positioning of Antarctica and Greenland at or close to the poles. Melt water from Arctic glaciers has gradually filled the lower ocean with water close to freezing, greatly reducing the margin of safety against ice-age conditions developing. The past two million years have essentially been a continuing ice-age therefore, broken occasionally by short-lived interglacials. But clearly, from this perspective, the prospect of a drift away from an ice age, through an enhanced greenhouse effect, may be of less concern than that of a drift back into an ice age. Thus we need sustain the insolation at a significantly lower value than at present for only several years to lock enough water vapour into ice to create the permanently cold, dry atmospheric conditions of an ice age.”

The dynamic goes something like this:

  1. Comet strikes
  2. Nuclear winter type climate strikes
  3. Oceans are still warm, marine life less impacts
  4. A few hardy land critters survive and recolonize during end of Ice Age
  5. Land warms up, but dumps in cold water into oceans
  6. Then Oceans warm and air temps rise ass oceans rewarm after their cooling
  7. Then comes politics and unclear thinking

We have a very, very good idea where the world’s past comet and asteroid impacts have been located.  One lays in the Gulf of Mexico, northwest of Cancun.

Another lies off to the northeast of the Bahamas.  In fact, a person who is interested can take some simple mapping software (I use Microsoft Streets and Trips) you can toss things into PowerPoint and come up with some very interesting speculation about where at least one ancient comet impact probably was.

One of the joys of the Second Amendment is that lots of Americans have a pretty good understanding of ballistics.  This is important, because the impact of a comet fragment, or moderately-sized asteroid would leave (*depending on angle of incidence) both side-scatter as well as main ejecta piles.

Extending the lengths of some of the Bay Lakes of North Carolina’s southeast region,we can cobble up an idea of “side-scatter” and when we look at the geology of Florida and the Bahamas, we can hypothecate a big “eject field” in these places.


Since the northern Bahamas appear to be closest to the imagined impact area, we would expect the northern/central islands there to be of a somewhat higher elevation than lower-lying islands down toward North Caicos, Providenciales, and  Grand Turk.

This squares with my personal research in the area.  These are old stomping grounds of mine from my airline days (My airline brought 727 charter jets to Provo) and the rocky upthrust of Grand Turk, adjacent to the Turk Trench”  also fits the model of a crustal fracture up north as the comet augured-in.

Eleuthera is flat, mostly sandy, but would fit the ejecta model well. Ejecta will be ocean bottom upthrust and oh, gee,. that DOES explains moving 2-million pound rocks around.

Not Climate Change as you’ve been sold it.

OBJECTive Thinking

When I see a story trotted out (coincidentally just before a “global warming emergency conference”) like this 2-million pound rock stuff,  I have to sit back and look at what we know – and that instead of listening to only one  “point” of science, I would argue that we should look at a second point (bathymetric thermography) and do some serious work on how those data sets interact. Look at it from Clube’s perspective – very, very long term as computational thermographics interaction.

From a starting state of hot earth, hot ocean, you get whacked.  Then a surface ice age with a warm-water life preserver – quite literally.  Then  we warm.  That cools the water which moderates the Ice Age recovery.

From there, the ice fraction of surface declines.  Water temp declines halt then reverse.  The heating them accelerates until the next cometary impact.

That is the objective macro view.  Yet climate models do no begin with understanding this long-term, wide-spread, demonstrable sequence which lays before our own lying eyes.

The we melt the ice off – which flows downhill and cools the ocean.  I assume you remember water holds more heat than sand, right?

That is the objective macro view.  Yet climate models do no begin with understanding this long-term, wide-spread, demonstrable sequence which lays before our own lying eyes.


Then, in case you missed how Shumaker-Levy 9 broke up upon approach to Jupiter, and how that triggered global superstorms on a planet many times larger than Earth, we should pay very close attention.  Jupiter’s diameter is 11.2 times that of Earth and correspondingly larger in volume.

Because the ramification of pressure-wave predictions provide a far more believable explanation for the sudden death of dinosaurs (*including the mammoths with food still in their mounts) than any competing theory out there.

If you are well studied in the creation of havoc when wronged, you would know that a 5-pound over-pressure blast is about the threshold needed to kill humans in situ.  Basic to all “thinking-the-unthinkable” our country does (and does extremely well).

Tell me what you think a multi-piece fragmenting comet would have done?  Way over 5 PSI…you can bet your ass.

I don’t mind the discussion of global warming today, but the facts argue that climate change is a cyclical event and that a modest rework of lifestyle will result in little – if any – improvement.

We don’t need a global tax to fix it, either:  Simply a ban on additional children at 1?20th of replacement rates would do it.

That’s the whole point of rediscovering monosexual relations…to reduce repopulation rates.  Reduce the birth rate far enough below replacement and the stress of global warming goes away.

Major religions won’t buy it – neither will the poor.  So the best move seems to be marketing of monosexualism and fear-mongering on swamping New York.

The Truth – which is something we don’t handle well (nor see much of) is something far more terrible.  What’s the old saw?  “Never let a good crisis go unexploited.”

The Problem with THAT, of course, is that the global corporatist financial model will immediately implode because while Capitalism works great for Expanding populations, its antithesis, Socialism, may work better for Imploding populations.  Except even that collapses so we get a depression and die-off, but with plausible deniability.

That boys and girls is what you are NOT being told about climate and it’s what world governments are so desperate to shove climate change down our throats.

Until the root cause of man –caused climate change (too many men, simply) is addressed, the whole thing is a freaking sham  and a global socialist power-grab to subjugate the world’s population so as small cadre of elites can talk great fear on climate and then get in their personal jets and go home and count their untold billions.

If it were sincere, they would walk.

But they don’t (and won’t).  What’s more, you’re an idiot for not seeing it.

You go first, Citizen…” and  just keep bending over.

Skeptics are not alone: “Skeptical Climate Documentary Set to Rock UN Climate Summit – ‘Climate Hustle’ To Have Red Carpet Premiere in Paris…”

Write when you break-even (or your ankles give out…)


8 thoughts on “Coping: The Myopic Idiocy of Climate Change Hype”

  1. “Until the root cause of man–caused climate change (too many men, simply) is addressed, the whole thing is a freaking sham, and a global socialist power-grab to subjugate the world’s population so as small cadre of elites can talk great fear on climate and then get into their personal jets and go home and count their untold billions.”
    (Should have been placed first!!!) ;-)

  2. There’s another explanation that’s also plausible. If it isn’t right it’s fascinating as a concept. Magnetic reversals AND large excursions that return to their previous state cause widespread volcanism. This is the theory of Robert W. Felix. He’s got two books that are both very interesting reading. “Not by Fire But by Ice” and “Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps”. It seems that volcanic eruptions correspond with Magnetic reversals and magnetic excursions. It also explains the black matte over North America and the extinction of a lot of the larger mega-fauna there.

    It could also explain the woolly mammoths with food in their stomachs flash frozen and the masses of jumbled fish bones and other debris in Alaska. The mass volcanic eruptions would plunge the Earth atmosphere into deep cold quickly. He doesn’t give a mechanism for why the magnetic pole shifts like it does. Of course I’ve seen no one else do so coherently either.

    I’ve got a strange idea on how ice ages happen. Why does the Sun slow down? There was a guy who was looking at the satellite photos monitoring the Sun. He noticed that there were large mountain looking structures that were in more than one orbit. He speculated that it was slag like flows floating just like slag on top of a weld and the solar flares were just electric arcs breaking through the slag to equalize charges. That may be quite different from the normal Sun operation story but it sounds good to me. I got to thinking that if the slag built up enough it would cover the Sun vastly reducing the solar flares for long periods of time. We know that Ice Ages tend to end abruptly. Maybe the charges built up and up and up and then in a large burst break through. Once the slag is broken it would break up the rest and the cycle would start over. Sometimes the burst would hit the Earth and sometimes the majority of the blast would be out into space.

    Now why would that influence the magnetic field of the Earth. Hmm…warning very sketchy thoughts. We know that there are magnetic tunnels that go all the way from the Sun to the Earth. Could this be because they are resonant? The resonance would link the Sun with the Earth. When the slag builds up it changes the resonance and the Earth field wanders until stresses are equalized. The bug a boo is the Sun’s field flips fairly often so…maybe the Earth is like a magnetic diode or rectifier and it’s the magnitude that matters. Yes I know I’m blathering but it’s a big mystery and interesting. If you buy the books I listed I think you would find them thought provoking. “Magnetic Reversals” is the second book but maybe a bit more complete. (Yes I know you can probably can’t read all these books in your copious free time but I thought I’d let you know about them anyways.)

  3. Hi George. After teaching geology at a local community college for 10 years and hearing all the crap on human induced climate change and natural climate change, ( two different things) I have yet to find any clear fact-based peer reviewed paper that explains climate change.
    Your paper is one point with many wild ideas and some basic facts wrong like most papers put out by professors who much publish.
    Thank you, Jim

  4. Climate change is not of significance. It is the pollution of the oceans and the fresh water supplies that will have the earliest effect on humanity. At one time, every drop of fresh water in the USA was drinkable. I dare you to drink any fresh water more than 100 miles from its source in the USA. And the aquafir’s have a century of pollution heading for them as well. Aquifer is a porous clay matrix that holds water. When the aquifir is pumped dry, that matrix collapses, and the aquifir then can hold only about 25% of its original volume, and water can no longer flow from one part of the aquifir to another.

    Potable water is the number one health problem world wide. And the oceans, the major source of oxygen, are dying fast.

    As usual, humanity looks in the wrong place not only for solutions, but also for problems. Most of the debate I see out there is like debating what color to paint the kitchen in a house that will be torn down next year for a new freeway.

    That’s how it looks from Ecuador, where my drinking water comes out of a thousand square miles of cloud forest.

  5. If people would like to disprove the hoax , one needs to look no further than NASA/JPL.

    The same warming has been recorded on various other bodies in our system. See Odyssey for one. The information is all there.

    No SUV’s or coal fired power plants on Mars , or Titan , or , or…

    Lets not let facts get in the way of a good business opportunity !

  6. I’m not convinced that there IS any global warming.

    Too many “adjustments” in the data in order to “normalize” the differences between reading times of day, etc. And mysteriously, all the “adjustments” seem to be in the warm direction.

Comments are closed.