« Is Israel defying Russia? - a rhetorical question | Main | The YPG/SDF crosses the Euphrates... again - TTG »

22 March 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



Here are the slides for his complete presentation, which this video is only a subset of:

i have difficulty with those who have their mind made up, one way or the other. You referring to me or Rutan? You don’t watch long videos?

Rutan makes the point that he had no idea what was correct until he studied the data (10 years) from an engineer’s POV, and, as he says, engineers have to get things right or people die. Eg: his planes. Scientists hypothesize then test, and there are no life and death consequences if they’re wrong. So, as Rutan says, he looks at data and the more data you have as an engineer, the better your decisions. And the science better work.

As for me, I started looking at the source documents eight years ago just before the Climategate scandal. I found so much of the reporting to be written by climate alarm advocates who didn’t have science degrees. The current New York Times climate reporter has a degree in political science.

The guy who came up with the '97% of all scientists agree' line that Obama touted as an eternal truth cast in concrete was an Australian (John Cook) who got his undergraduate degree in physics in 1989, then became a cartoonist, web page designer, and ran a cricket blog until 2010 whereupon he decided he was going to go back to school and get his Masters in Psychology, and dreamt up his three question survey later asked of scientists based on their Abstracts tallied by commenters on his new climate blog! He found 11 944 papers that mentioned “global warming” or “climate change” in the abstract but got rid of 66.4% of them because the abstract did not express an opinion on AGW. Didn’t bother reading the paper. Just the abstract.

So where did the 97% come from?

Of the remaining number of papers there were 32.6% pro ["endorsed AGW" in the abstract] + 0.7% against ["rejected AGW"] + 0.3% uncertain = 33.6%.

Ergo, of the remaining 33.6% of the papers he looked at, he divided the ‘pro' by the total and got this:

32.6/33.6 = 0.970238095

That is how John Cook got his 97% consensus figure. WTF?!?

John Cook, et al, just threw out the 66.4% of the 11,944 ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’ abstracts because they did not endorse human-caused global warming, or stated no position, not because they didn't address it in the body of the paper. But since his helpers were his crowd-sourced commenters charged with making these decisions, there were no scientific controls at all on the survey, which asked “Do you believe in Global Warming?” There isn’t a serious scientist alive who would deny that the globe warmed between 1980-2003.

The figures above are from John Cook's, et al, own abstract about how he got at the number. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=0A2D741387B2757EF045523848846DC7.c2.iopscience.cld.iop.org

Serious statisticians and hard scientists ragged all over (1) his method, and (2) his conclusions. But President O endorsed it in a tweet and made him and his 97% consensus claim famous.

[It’s actually worse than that when you read his paper and read the number of scientists he contacted to “self-rate” their own paper as 'endorsing the consensus'. But you can read it at the link if interested.]

When you get people like Bill Nye, The Science Guy--two years in mechanical engineering then a career as a television actor in science shows for kids--mock Dr. Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor in Atmospheric Physics at MIT for over 30 years, you know something is screwy. Or someone believes Al Gore (background journalism) over Dr. Willie Soon, physicist at the Solar, Stellar, and Planetary Sciences Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who the New York Times’ so-called “climate reporter’ trashed for doubting catastrophic global warming, then something is wrong.

Anyway, enough.


Thanks for those, Babak. I know Dr. Lindzen pointed out that the tilt of the earth accounted for the Ice Ages. I’m being very general. I think it’s 23.5 degrees right now (the Earth's axis is tilted 23.5 degrees from the plane of its orbit around the sun) but it was 19.5.

different clue

Norbert M Salamon,

A minor quibble . . . the bay is "Prudhoe" Bay. That's "Prudhoe".
"Purdue" is a university in Indiana.

Babak Makkinejad

Thank you for your comments.

I am only suggesting that with internal combustion engine, very many things are possible that are not with those rich-man toys. Especially carburetor-based engines can be maintained by Africans themselves in a manner that was the common practice in US until late 1970s and without expensive and expert input from Europe.

In Congo, transportation on land is sporadic and often unavailable on a regular basis. Medicines cannot be distributed nor a sick person quickly taken to the nearest physician. Cell phones are charged by old car batteries rather than by generators (common in Iraq and in Syria).

I think this whole Electric Vehicles and Anti-Fossil Fuel mindset among certain people in Europe and North America is a rich-man's indulgence; with precious little concern for the common man in the middle of that vast continent called Africa.

Look up please Lister Engine and imagine what it could do for the Quality of Life of Africans (or Indians, or South Americans) in their forlorn villages.

different clue

Babak Makkinejad,

How so? It is not as if we or anyone reaches out and bans the presence of internal combustion engines in Congo.

Can you produce the smoking "rich-man's toy"? Can you produce the "smoking nail" in the coffin? Can you show how the pre-adolescent kind-in-a-coffin count was increased by one by the smoking "rich-man's toy" . . . if you can produce that? And tie it to the smoking "another nail in the coffin"?

Babak Makkinejad

You do not understand, cheap gasoline makes the internal combustion engine available to a wider world that could otherwise not afford the cost of operations.

The smoking-rich-man is setting the global agenda, the smoking-rich-man goes spends $6000 on his kids to go to Guatemala to spend two weeks helping build a $500 shack.

Really, all these electric vehicles and green energy - just like the drugs or the Left/Right games of politics - are toys and indulgences of the rich people on this planet.

"Damn the Co_2, full throttle ahead!"

Babak Makkinejad


The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels:





OT....just came out this AM.

The Associated Press‏@AP 2h
Israeli police arrest a 19-year-old Israeli Jewish man as the primary suspect in a string of bomb threats in U.S. And Canada.

And more



It’s a good book.


Fracked oil comprises nearly the entirety of increased US oil production and it's in free fall as fast as it rose.
Depletion never sleeps. Comparing expensive fracked oil production to much cheaper OPEC oil is a fundamental error.



Compounded by so-called loans to Africans secured with their natural resources as collateral. Can’t pay? Take their stuff. Impoverish them some more. The Chinese are giving various African countries infrastructure loans at 2-3% without the onerous theft of their natural resources, and working alongside them producing roads and factories. Grant you, the Chinese are there for the natural resources as well, but they’re paying them for them.

I remember hearing a guy on PBS from Nigeria about 8-10 years ago saying that the availability of electricity at night in the villages so that kids could study would create light years of progress. Instead, he said, one person or business has the one TV set with access to electricity and all they can do is gather round and watch soccer. Lives wasted. They sell their oil but they don’t have refineries. Again, its transnationals that own those oil companies, and they’re just pumping the resources out of their lands.

And you’re right, Babak, the bullshit of saddling them with green gadgets that siphon clean water out of polluted streams--gives a new meaning to suck it up--instead of building water treatment plants, or solar energy doodads so they can have four hours with a 100-watt bulb at night is barbaric. Constant and reliable energy is the power and engine of modern civilization. The average American housewife wastes more water cleaning out a pot than some of the African women carry back to their villages on their heads everyday. And it still has to be boiled with precious propane.

Instead of doing something fruitful we give the IMF billions for development loans and the IMF waltzes in with the bond vigilantes (Goldman Sachs, etc) who get protected loans on the federal government dole. Just like the Greek crisis. When the IMF loaned them money, the dough didn’t go the Greeks. The IMF paid it to French and German banks, and Greece got bupkis but still have to pay it back.


Energy independence is a myth just as we'd be independent of low cost clothes made in China. US has been importing oil since the 40's and will continue to do so. Imported oil from Canada or Mexico doesn't make us "independent".


"Damn the Co_2, full throttle ahead!"

NASA put up a CO2 satellite about two or three years ago. Surprise, surprise. The Sahara Desert is starting to green again as seen from space.


Babak, you might enjoy this British news article. It captures exactly what you’re saying.

In China, the true cost of Britain's clean, green wind power experiment: Pollution on a disastrous scale
This toxic lake poisons Chinese farmers, their children and their land. It is what's left behind after making the magnets for Britain's latest wind turbines... and, as a special Live investigation reveals, is merely one of a multitude of environmental sins committed in the name of our new green Jerusalem


Oil deposits are what they are, finite and produced over 60million years. The "more" we discover after depleting existing field is in smaller and smaller amounts. Imagine being able to fill your gas tank at every station, then one day you are limited in your purchases to 15 gal/wk. No problem. Then a year later you can only get 12gal a week so you buy a more efficient car. No problem. A few years later you can buy "more" but it's 10gal/week. That's what's happened since the '60's. "More" was discovered but each new field was smaller. Whether you interpret this trend in apocalyptic or gradual terms is irrelevant, what is factual is that it's happening. 2017 is not 1967.


But the Saudis still charge what the frackers charge per barrel, so they make out like hay. Alberta Syncrude is actually three times as concentrated as sweet Texas or Arab crude so the US refineries make out like hay as well. The majority of oil big companies in Alberta are American-owned (China has a slice of one). Canada supplies the US with 22% of its oil.


Even worse than that on the mortgage part, eakens. Listen to this. Highly informative AND entertaining. Throw it on your device and listen, or just crank up your computer while you pour yourself a drink. Clear-headed and fun to listen to because Bill Black is so damn expressive and logical.

different clue


That would be interesting if true, and should lead to a real rethink. Do you have any links to sets of before-and-after images showing the greening Sahara Desert as photographed from space?

Babak Makkinejad

I remember this young villager from around Birjand - loved to drink ice-cold water from the frig, every day; "I had never had this at home."

His other aspirational goal was to have a radio-cassette player (not a boom box, mind you) to break the deadly dullness of the village night.

When a rich White woman says:

"It takes a village to raise a child.",

she makes it crystal clear that she has never lived in a real village anywhere in the world )had she experienced a single hour without electricity in her life?) and has been living in a mixture of myth and fantasy.


Babak, as if on cue I happened upon this a few hours ago:

Greece to Surrender Gold, Utilities and Real Estate in Exchange For Pieces of Paper Printed in Brussels
Germany announces the final pillage of Greece


different clue, another one:

The Sahel is Greening


The answer to both your questions is both. Physicist Enrico Fermi is generally handed the chapeau for being the father of nuclear fission (or is it fusion?) in 1934--even though the Roentgen guy and Marie Curie, etc, came before him--but the PRACTICAL application of it, the real-world use of it was highly dependent on the brilliant US government engineers at the Oak Ridge Laboratory.

it’s like space travel. Scientists can theorize about the atmosphere and what it takes to travel within the different altitudes out to deep space, but designing a machine that can actually do it, can actually manage the dramatic and extreme changes of temperature and radiation through the mesosphere and thermosphere and the Van Allen Belts is another thing entirely. Remember the Challenger launch when the “O” rings failed because they launched at or below 32 F, and the entire rocket blew up and we lost all those astronauts? That’s an engineering issue. Engineering is applied science, and their meticulousness with the science must be exact, oftentimes, to within nanometer tolerances.

I’m kinda’ on the pragmatic side of things, james. I don’t presume to bluesky stuff even though I was accepted for Theoretical Physics at MIT out of high school because I was a kid genius in math and physics, or so they said. NOT NOW. I like the ‘this works, this doesn’t’ school of thought and have become more so as I’ve aged to the point of probably appearing stupid now to those around me. That’s why I l.o.v.e.d. Richard Sale’s reporting when he worked for UPI (mofo’ brilliant shit). I like to know how things work, or the simplicity of a genuine strategy with an insightful tactical plan (and Sale had an insight into the intel world he reported on that was truly remarkable and unique, with a writer’s poetic expression to polish it off, imo). So I veer towards the hard-nosed. “Show me the evidence.” Get me from A to B. Know what I mean? I have no interest in being the room smarty. I was accepted into MIT in my penultimate year of high school; I know what I can do if I want to, but the older I get I find the dumber I become. And I find fewer and fewer people who want to talk about the things that interest me.

Sleep tight, buddy. I’m going to bed.


"Really, all these electric vehicles and green energy are toys and indulgences of the rich people on this planet"

I beg your pardon, but that is the myopic point of view we heard before back in the days of the beginning of the combustible engine car.

Babak Makkinejad

Yup, the Greek people evidently have lost their mojo, where is the cry of Ελευθερία ή θάνατος?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad