AccuTron

Thanks to all of you for your encouragement; it gets depressing at times. A couple more debunking moments: 1--Mann has a Facebook page showing an endless list of supporting universities and organizations. Many of those references are surely trivial attaboys from "climate non-scientists" who are completely clueless but they feel good wearing the hockeystick team jersey. The rest I suspect can be traced back to knowing fraud or incurious dupes. 2--Mann had a student named Briffa. Briffa did tree-ring analysis by >>>first eliminating any raw data that didn't agree with Mann's hockeystick<<<<. Which speaks bulls-eye to Lians' comment above. So be wary of claims involving "tree-ring analysis."

I used to fall for the CO2/human/hockeystick thing, actually believed it since it was everywhere. Bored one night I looked at "climate deniers" (I now realize that this is a smokescreen slander term) and was shocked at what I found just on the first search page. I have a BS Physics, cum laude, and immediately spent over sixty intense research hours on it. Hundreds of web pages, including all reader comments, a rich source. Two Congressional Reports, various original research papers, the entire Copenhagen Diagnosis, much more. I put up a google.doc link which will get you started. Some people can't open it, let me know, but here's the try: CRIMATE.pdf - Google Drive You can also get started with these nuggets, but PLEASE understand that the corruption on this is probably the biggest scam in all human history. It is a giant vote machine for Democrat/Green, etc. (Vote for those anti-science Republicans and you hate the planet.) Huge public money grab for climate action taxes or project construction. Many editors, for years now, are replaced if they do not succumb to publishing fraud articles, so you will see it everywhere. Science News just went down the tubes, having recently installed a young editor, not a research scientist herself, but a science display artist (Eva Emerson | Science News). She got to redo I think the entire website and magazine and "may" have had her head in the clouds a bit, pardon the pun, with an article claiming CO2 is beyond questioning. I scanned, and yup, Met was a source, see below for a list of fraud sources. Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth graph: Which leads, CO2 or temperature? I counted using a blank text file as a vertical straightedge, and the results: CO2=8 times, Temperature=5 times, tied=12. Thus CO2 does NOT lead ~60% of the time. There are also other gasses which track the same, and all interglacial periods show a CO2 rise, but Gore didn't mention that (pQ9kswB.jpg). Gore reportedly now works with Ken Lay (Gore “can’t remember” if he worked with Ken Lay on the Carbon Tax Credits Plan in 1997? | American Everyman) , world class scam artist of Enron fame, and they get broker fees for carbon trading. Question: How uncorrupted was the Nobel committee that gave him that award for nonsense? "CO2 And Climate Change, 1981 Hansen." Hansen is recently retired from NASA (James Hansen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Honestly, he looks like a nice guy. You can read right away that he's absolutely "a hockeysticker." Where I first learned of him was by looking honestly at an alarmist site and picking a name from the contributors, then searching for more about the person. At an alarmist site, I was suspicious yet value the honest look. I found this right off: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal.pdf which is a live link at the moment (the hockeystickers remove revealing materials and constantly improve the deception). You only need to look at page one and ignore the rest, which is just fluff. He mangles the mathematical necessity of "significant digits" (one term, A for albedo, has only one digit and even that's approximate, using "~", and the equation result, 255, has three digits, utterly illegal math) and mangles physics by referring to the Stefan-Boltzmann constant (look it up) which is ONLY for ideal black bodies (meaning gives off ZERO self-generated radiation), which the Earth, with it's nuclear-heated molten metal core, sure ain't. Yet with NASA credentials, he is the voice of authority to the populace. Look at the Copenhagen Diagnosis' graph of Solar activity: http://www.ccrc.unsw.edu.au/Copenhagen/Copenhagen_Diagnosis_HIGH.pdf page 14, showing only the 11-yr solar cycle and ignoring the existence of cycles lasting decades or centuries, which are shown properly in summation here: File:Carbon14 with activity labels.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Notice how Copenhagen's "human" well matches the actual Solar. If you know the story going in, it's clear that the entire C.D. is lies. They reference research papers in supposed support, thinking no one will check. I checked. They are two types: one, known frauds; two, genuine scientists which UNDERCUT the C.D. One good example is here: Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years by the National Research Councils. 160 pages and I read them all. If you know the story going in, you can see that it's soft pedaled but agrees completely with the so-called "deniers." The link should be to page 4, where you can get a good idea of how they feel by reading the first paragraph on the page (assuming it opens properly to that page on your browser). It doesn't deny the general warming of the twentieth century, which other studies show to be natural, but questions the other claims -- "substantial uncertainties...prior to about A.D.1600; "Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that “the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium”" That's the Copenhagen Diagnosis definition of support! Knowing what you know about Mann (see below), you may read between the lines on their recommendation "Improving access to data used in publications would also increase confidence in the results of large-scale surface temperature reconstructions both inside and outside the scientific community." (It has been reported elsewhere by a government scientist whistle blower that the 1998 claim used data where higher latitude and higher altitude thermometers...thus the cooler readings...were simply eliminated. I'm searching for that link; it was on Fox news if anyone feels like helping. Found something similar here: Whistleblower Outs NASA for Hiding Data of Global Cooling - Climate Change Dispatch I found it tricky to follow, but interesting points are made and also in the reader comments.) The Wegman Report 2006 US Congress: The actual originating smoking gun is that Dr. Mann of CRU made a bogus algorithm for temperature analysis, came up with an "alarming" rise of 0.5C. (Funny how he was the "discoverer" yet thermometers are everywhere; including ones which were installed in open fields in the fifties, yet are now surrounded by hot shopping mall parking lots.) Which brought about the IPCC, and it's panicking pronouncements. One heroic Canadian, McIntyre, back about 2003 believed it, and simply asked Mann to see the data. Mann stonewalled to tremendous proportions, all viewable in a McIntyre mega-blog, and four years and two FOIA requests revealed that he altered original data by 0.6C, discarded the original data, because he wrote a bogus algorithm now shown clearly to make hockey stick shapes out of pure noise test signals, and which implied a 0.5C rise. Couldn't admit his mistake. Just scanning the graphs in the report will do. (M is for bad guy Mann and M is for good guy McIntyre, making notes a bit confusing to the uninitiated.) Yet Mann still has a devoted following as the alarmist top spokesman. The hockey stickers obviously cannot deny the evidence, so they attack Wegman because he did some minor plagiarism on a website he was doing about color perception. No connection to Mann's algorithm at all, pure mudslinging. This is endless and growing. A partial list of sources to NEVER believe: Trenberth, Mann at Climatic Research Unit (where the fraud originated!!!), Al Gore, upper levels of the IPCC (if you see my link, IPCC headman Pielke lies to Congress about man causing climate disasters, while the IPCC's OWN MATERIAL from lower employee levels says no link can be found), Met, Hadley, Meehl, on and on and on. Check those names against the links starting this thread. This is just a bare bones outline, so don't be easily swayed by alarmist claims. On an entertaining note, view this: Lieutenant Kizhe - YouTube. Two reasons. One, it's a really charming and very well done 1934 Russian comedy, easy subtitles, and a real cinema gem. Based upon a Russian folk tale, the year is 1800 at the crazy Tsar's palace. (Music by Prokofiev ▶ Prokofiev: Suite from Lieutenant Kijé) Two, a non-spoiler since it occurs early on -- the plot. A clerk makes a typo, is about to correct it, but the document is grabbed from him and taken to the Tsar. The typo implies the existence of a Lt. Kije, the Tsar wants to meet him, but there never was such a person. So Russian officers keep making up stories about where Lt. Kije is. ("His" Russian Orthodox wedding scene is a delight with the bride looking at the empty space she is marrying.) Mann's hockey stick is a Lt. Kije. See all reports in this light. Where is the missing heat? Made up stories abound, one of them being that it's in the ocean but hasn't made it out yet. (You may have also seen an IPCC claim a few years back that ~10,000 sq miles of Himalayan glaciers are missing. You probably didn't see the retraction two weeks later, that it had been an "error." Nope, pure fraud and someone caught them. But the lie is still around that the glaciers are all going. Insofar as it's generally accepted that Earth, at least in the northern half, has been warming on it's own for about 160 years, one would expect SOME melting. According to clam shell analysis, Greenland has been SEVERAL DEGREES warmer SEVERAL times in the last 100,000 years. (Can't find original link but here's a good one: Greenland's shrunken ice sheet: We've been here before) Yet the IPCC has us all freaking because of a supposed SEVERAL DEGREES that we are supposedly causing sometime in the future.) Again, these are but a handful of nuggets compared to the vast expanse of the crime. (Stefan fans will appreciate this: The Philippines are suing the US because they had a typhoon! Blamed on CO2. How will the US defend itself? By admitting the administration won votes and power by fraud? UN Climate Summit Rejects Its Own Science – Links Typhoon Haiyan to Global Warming – UN Summit Degenerates Into Unscientific Claims to Advance Political Agenda – Climate Depot Special Report | Climate Depot ) As to that supposedly unanimous army of "climate scientists" -- many are simply not real scientists, easy to dupe, ignorant of real criteria, etc. I know one, and he hadn't even heard of the Wegman Report, which is like a doctor of internal medicine who never heard of a liver. Unwittingly but irresponsibly, they teach this fraud to each other then say "Look at how many of us there are!" The mainstream press, surprise surprise, doesn't really check and is owned by vested interests anyway. Can't say it enough: this is a mere sliver of the truth. EVERY EVERY EVERY time you see human-CO2 alarmism, liar or dupe, it's merely another tendril of the same originating power monger beast.

I found very good results with a therapist. First there was a long sequence of weekly sessions, which provided the major discovery/education, then some tuneups along the way, spanning several years. During our last visit, then a rare thing, due to an outside crisis, he said "We're done." And he was correct. His approach was to let me speak, suggest very little, but would steer me now and then, like an experienced hand occasionally moving a boat tiller just a bit, or an experienced guide at a fork in the road suggesting which direction. With any decent personal awareness applied to your revelations along the way -- notice that I say awareness, and not actions, which might be a mistake -- it then becomes a matter of time. Not unlike an injury to a ligament, it takes a long time to rearrange a jillion brain connections. I've also become aware, after the fact, that our brains actually know more than they tell us, which sounds weird but is true. There's an unconscious master element, like a building project manager, that says "Yup, gonna' take six months on that one, and about two years on that phase." Which turns out to be true. So what you need more than anything is faith. In a religious context that is powerful, but in a secular one, it also works. Again after the fact, I now see this so clearly. When I had ignorance and pain, when I could see no hope, I took it on faith that something good might happen that I could not then understand. I kept proper toothbrushing and flossing, which sounds odd, but those acts are saying "I need to keep my teeth healthy for the future." That statement is an act of faith, a small but effective way to practice. Along with other known healthy habits. Then be patient. It's a slow-growing result, but it does grow. You might have really good revelations along the way, and I caution you to not get so over-excited that you loose perspective. When we are MOST excited is when we should do nothing. And never ever think you've got it all figured out. There are always other larger views ahead. My therapist said it was "like a spiral" meaning an upward spiral, like a bird gets a good view, but spirals up again and gets a bigger view. You'll know when you're mostly done. If you're not sure, then you have a gift, to think that yet more goodness, yet unseen, lies ahead. (A powerful PS: someone told me that the Devil works through temptation and doubt. Doubt is the opposite of faith. When you feel doubt, know that it's a temporary fever and calmly and willfully try to diminish it's power over you. Like any practice, you will discover over time that you get better at it.)