Richard T. Fowler

Offering Christian and Christ-centered commentary about climate- and energy-related issues.

Has The Coup Already Happened?

Originally posted on Real Science:

President Obama has demonstrated that he can do anything he wants, violate the US Constitution at will, and the Republican Congress will not stop him. He has the full support of the press for any and all illegal actions. Hillary was taken out last week. No other Democrats seem to be viable candidates.

Through his climate change scam, he is creating an army of brown shirts who are 100% convinced that Republicans will destroy the planet.

Suppose Obama simply remained in the White House in January, 2017? He makes a speech that the world depends on his remaining there. McConnell and Boehner are much too weak to do anything about it. The New York Times would write an editorial, saying that this is awful – but we have no choice.

Who would stop him? Hillary was the only person standing in his way, and the Republican leadership is too weak to stop anything Obama does…

View original 34 more words

Biggest Conservative Victory Since Before the Great Depression — How Long Before AGW Policies Based on Hoax Science Are Repudiated by Congress?

NBC news is reporting this morning that Republicans have won at least 250 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. They further report that this represents the largest margin for that party since the presidency of Herbert Hoover.

While many voters probably expect that this will lead to a dramatic change in the nation’s climate and energy policies, I predict they will be sorely disappointed. There is a large contingent of Leninists among Republican members of Congress, and they have no shortage of tricks at their disposal to put a stop to our efforts to exact meaningful change to policies that are based on the CO2 hoax.

Our greatest problem as of this morning is convincing those who voted Republican yesterday that they are not going to get the climate and energy policies they want from this electoral victory … that what they will get instead is two more years of prevarication and nonsense, followed by yet another Communist surge in the run-up to the 2016 election.

The sooner these voters understand this, the sooner they begin to take action to remove hard Leninists and fellow travelers in the Republican leadership, both within and without the Congress.

What is your prediction for how long it will take for a new pro-science and anti-fraud CO2 policy to be passed by the new Congress? I predict it will not happen with this Congress without a massive paper petition drive and a series of rallies or pickets for legitimate science.


Great Moments In Climate Science

Originally posted on Real Science:

ScreenHunter_4036 Oct. 25 16.51ScreenHunter_4035 Oct. 25 16.28

View original

Spectacular Growth Of Arctic Sea Ice During NASA/NOAA ‘s Hottest Year Ever

Richard T. Fowler:

Wow! That’s got to be at least 10% growth in seven days.

Originally posted on Real Science:

Green shows growth in the last seven days

ScreenHunter_3896 Oct. 20 22.39

View original

Bill Gray Editorial In The Coloradoan

Richard T. Fowler:

HUGE … Popcorn fans, make sure you are well-stocked. Because now it’s on. Bill Gray has just accused the temperature gatekeepers of “tampering” with the data to produce a signal. It seems they will have to respond to this!

Originally posted on Real Science:

Another awesome piece from my hero, Bill Gray, whose funding was cut off in 1993 by Al Gore – over Bill’s refusal to participate is a Gore fear mongering activity.

Despite increasing amounts of CO2 gas in the atmosphere, mean global surface temperatures have not shown any increase over the past 18 years.

In addition:

• • Raw U.S. mean surface temperatures and daily high surface temperature records (without any tampering) have shown a weak decline since the warm 1930s period.

• Winter snow cover has been gradually increasing across the northern hemisphere in recent years.

Read the rest here :   Soapbox: CO2 increase is not nemesis as it’s portrayed

View original

“GHE” vs. “Tyndall effect”

Our friend Tony Heller puts himself in a tight spot. It ends up being him, Morgan Wright, and someone named dp versus 15 others:

Anything Is Possible
Richard T. Fowler (myself)
Higley 7
M. Kelly
Kevin K.
Neils Zoo
Northern Ont.
Password Protected
Squid 2112
Mark Stoval
Tom O. Mason

Then, Tony posts a follow-up post in which he seems to reverse himself:

(Read the post, the title is not very representative.)

The Definitive Data On The Global Warming/Climate Change Scam

Richard T. Fowler:

Steven, thanks in no small part to your tireless efforts, I think we are finally starting to detect an ever-so-slight change in the direction of the Titanic.

Is it enough, and is it soon enough?? We’ll stay tuned.

Originally posted on Real Science:

Bookmark this.

There is only one piece of US climate data which correlates with CO2 –  the amount of data tampering NCDC is applying to US temperature.

ScreenHunter_3233 Oct. 01 22.59

All of the other relevant metrics show either no correlation, or negative correlation vs. CO2.  The whole thing is a 100% scam – from top to bottom.

Hot days show no correlation vs. CO2

ScreenHunter_3341 Oct. 05 06.14

Severe tornadoes have declined as CO2 has increased

ScreenHunter_3337 Oct. 05 05.58

US temperatures show no correlation with CO2

ScreenHunter_3332 Oct. 05 05.19

US hurricane strikes have declined as CO2 has increased

ScreenHunter_3328 Oct. 05 04.41

US heavy rainfall events show no correlation with CO2

ScreenHunter_3315 Oct. 04 14.20

East Coast sea level rise shows no correlation with CO2

ScreenHunter_3311 Oct. 04 11.20

View original

NCDC Corrects For UHI – By Massively Cooling The Past

Originally posted on Real Science:

Another smoking gun that USHCN adjustments are garbage, and inverted from reality.

The weather station at Fort Collins, CO is a classic study in UHI, yet NCDC adjusts Fort Collins temperatures by massively cooling the past – the exact opposite of what they should be doing.

ScreenHunter_3296 Oct. 04 04.14

In 1937, the station was located in the middle of a farm,

By 1950, the area was starting to get built up.

By 1969, the city had surrounded the weather station.

Now it is in the middle of a parking lot.

ScreenHunter_619 Sep. 16 08.24

The Fort Collins trend massively diverges from nearby Boulder, CO. Fort Collins is warming rapidly, while Boulder is cooling. Homogenization should warm the past, not cool it.

ScreenHunter_1501 Jan. 11 06.26

What about TOBS? The Fort Collins temperature has always been read near sunrise, which adds an additional cold bias to the data. Every factor in the equation should cause the NCDC adjustments to warm the past, rather…

View original 45 more words

Comment for Harry Dale Huffman and Steven Goddard Regarding the Biblical Account of Creation And Its Comparability to Fraudulent Climate “Science” — A.D. 2013/07/31 01

A commenter named Anto commented today at Steven Goddard’s Real Science:

When it’s a matter of faith, there’s always some way to excuse the pachyderm in the greenhouse.

Case in point: creationists – close relatives to today’s climate catastrophists.

Harry Dale Huffman replied with the following:

There is a real, physical truth behind the creationist claims, despite their religious motivation and habitual stampede towards a “First Cause” (or “God”) explanation for things. None of the earth and life sciences–not just the incompetent “climate science”–are “settled science”, despite 150 years of Darwinian dogma (the “undirected evolution” paradigm guiding all those sciences IS dogma, and fundamentally false).

There was, in fact, a deliberate “creation” event–actually, a re-formation of the existing surface of the Earth, AND a re-formation and re-orientation of the entire solar system (these links give only the simplest, definitive objective evidence of the event), which imposed a readable design enclosing a real message for man on Earth–within the last 20,000 years, as my unprecedented research has brought to light (I am a physicist, dealing only with objective evidence). We are literally in the time of Galileo again, when the “authorities” and the consensus-minded populace cannot focus upon the greater truth, and are violently opposed to recognizing it.

I offer the following in response to Harry, and I also address it to Steven.

I say that the “time of Galileo” never went away, just shifted its focus every so often. Your own arguments are packed to the brim with subjective observations, which you can’t or won’t admit are subjective. Physics itself must deal with subjective evidence, or else it is not scientific. For this reason I have yet to meet a “physicist” who is not anti-science, for they are ever denying the obvious subjectivity present in their reasoning. Granted that many if not most Creationists I’ve encountered are anti-science as well, but that in and of itself doesn’t falsify their theories, as is also the case with the physicists. Proof or disproof is not dependent on the use of a perfect method for finding the truth. If that there the case there would be no valid proofs or disproofs, because there is no perfect human being walking the Earth today.

Really the bottom line is whether one believes in the supernatural, which objectively does exist. If one denies that which is blatantly true and in one’s face, simply because one is afraid of the wider implications, then of course one’s conclusions about pretty much everything natural are going to be wide of the mark … sometimes phenomenally so. Most of us, myself included, have been guilty of this kind of denial.

But if one admits the existence of supernatural effects operating together with nature, then at once one has lost the ability to be certain that the biblical history of Creation is false. It is very, very important for people to understand this. Denial of this fact is really at the core of the modern Inquisition. And make no mistake, the Inquisition does want Creationists dead if they will not repent. Ultimately that’s where this is headed, and already some of their more strident denunciations are barely distinguishable from threats.

I think the really important thing here is to LEARN AND RECOGNIZE that the Inquisition has never been either scientific or Christian (or even Jewish), or inherently Creationist. It has been a wolf in sheep’s clothing ever since its inception. And it has now taken over the mantle of science, exactly as prophecied. Folks like you, Harry, and you as well, Steven, are unwitting accomplices, unaware of what you’re really doing. I have great respect for both of you, because I see the degree of honesty that shows through in your words. Ultimately you will probably see the full reality, and you will be targets as well, because you have such integrity that you’d rather be targets than publicly deny what has been proven to you. Please always remember that the truth about Creation is never just revealed to everyone who seeks it. Only to those who are willing to believe that it’s possible are shown the proof. And that’s totally out of the hands of us who already know. We can pray, but ultimately if it’s not God’s plan for you to know, you will not be shown! I was in Harry’s place for many years, and Steven’s for years before that. If anyone here is the very antithesis of habitual stampeding or mindless consensus-following, it is myself. I didn’t embrace my present beliefs, I fought tooth-and-nail to deny them! But because it was God’s plan for me to know, I was forced to know, against all my natural instincts! The consequence: I spent >85% of my life up until now denying that which I now know to be true. And again I can’t prove it to you because it’s subjective, and subjective things are something you have to experience yourself.

I’m sorry, but the doctrines of pure naturalism, and of uniformitarianism, are frauds. They are the true closest relatives of liberal climate catastrophism. Of course, the liberals are borrowing “liberally” from the Bible, because ultimately the intent is to impersonate Christians while fundamentally inverting the Word. I beg you not to fall for such a cheap trick. You are way, way better than that.


Sociopolitical Meaning of Star Trek, and Associated Discussion about the American Experiment — A.D. 2012/02/27 01

Additional comment is invited emerging from the conversation involving myself and Mr Lynn at this location:

The issue of globalism is also discussed at length on that thread, and ties into the two matters cited in the title.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: