Climate sense
Dr David Evans, formerly of the Australian Greenhouse Office, distils the science and politics of climate change into two documents highly approachable for the layman. If you read nothing else, read these:
Climate Coup – The Science [PDF download link]
Our emissions of carbon dioxide cause some global warming, and it has indeed warmed over the last century. But this doesn’t prove that our emissions are the main cause of that warming—there might be other, larger, natural forces on the temperature. The key question is: how much warming do our emissions cause?
Climate scientists use their climate models to estimate how much. In this article we check their main predictions against our best and latest data, and find they got them all wrong: they exaggerated the warming of the air and oceans, they predicted a very different pattern of atmospheric warming, and they got the short-term relationship between outgoing radiation and surface warming backwards. The latter two items are especially pertinent, because they show that the crucial amplification due to the water feedbacks (mainly humidity and clouds), that is assumed by the models, does not exist in reality. This amplification causes two-thirds of the temperature rises predicted by the models, while carbon dioxide only directly causes one third. This explains why the models overestimate temperature rises.
We check the performance of the climate models against impeccably sourced, publicly-available data from our best and latest instruments. See the endnotes for how to download the data yourself.
Climate Coup – The Politics [PDF download link]
The climate models are incompatible with the data. You cannot believe both the theory of dangerous manmade global warming and the data, because they cannot both be right.
In science, data trumps theory. If data and theory disagree, as they do here, people of a more scientific bent go with the data and scrap the theory.
But in politics we usually go with authority figures, who in this case are the government climate scientists and the western governments—and they strongly support the theory. Many people simply cannot get past the fact that nearly all the authority figures believe the theory. To these people the data is simply irrelevant. Society needs most people to follow authority most of the time, just like an army needs soldiers who do not question orders.
The world’s climate scientists are almost all employed by western governments. They usually don’t pay you to do climate research unless you say you believe manmade global warming is dangerous, and it has been that way for more than 20 years. The result is a near-unanimity that is unusual for a theory in such an immature science.
Australian Climate Madness 
Simon this tells the whole story:
The world’s climate scientists are almost all employed by western governments. They usually don’t pay you to do climate research unless you say you believe manmade global warming is dangerous, and it has been that way for more than 20 years. The result is a near-unanimity that is unusual for a theory in such an immature science.
We pay you to prove a preconceived proposition that AGW is real and man made, – Case closed!
I second that.
They are, quite simply, excellent pieces of work. Robust research, insightful and logical, and beautifully written. I sound like a book reviewer – but i’m not. I’m a scientist, a quantitative scientist (though not a climate scientist) and while I consider myself to be fairly well-read in this area Dr Evan’s work and insights on the science and the political drivers for adopting the “consensus science” (group-think) are second to none. The link to Martin durkin’s essays in The Politics – also very well worth following-up.
Other contributors that cover these areas in a responsible and interesting way include: GWPF, Jo Nova, WUWT, Bishop’s Hill and, of course, ACM (this site).
So many thanks David for your contributions to this important debate.
Following the orders of political authorities it about the fastest path to failure for both the individual or the military. The authorities pretend they are in control of reality when they are not even in control of themselves. Reality ignores what the authorities say it is supposed to be and remains exactly and only what it is. As a result, the so called authorities are totally unnecessary. They do far more harm than good even on their best days. They have done nothing that justifies even a minimal degree of respect. The world would be far better off without them.
The future has been always created by the few individuals who ignored the so called authorities and simply proceeded to do what the authorities wanted to be impossible. I know because I have done it countless times.
Excellent articles … I was going to suggest to add them to your database of essential reading but I see you’ve already done that Simon. 😉
In my comment above – I suggested other readers may also find the essays of David Durkin (he of ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’) well worthwhile following-up – and that a link to these was provided in Dr David Evans’ The Politics (above). But I have just re-read Climate Coup -The Politics and can’t find it. Whilst fairly sure David did link to it – it may have been elsewhere eg. on Jo Nova’s site… I can’t recall.
Anyways… here’s the link. His essays on: GREENS – Lesson from History (2 volumes) were excellent. Really.
http://www.martindurkin.com/blogs/greens-warning-history-volume-one
This paper makes the assumption that atmospheric CO2 is a significant driver for global average temperature (whatever that is). There is no evidence to support this. All the evidence shows that CO2 changes are a result of temperature changes.
What follows Dr Evans’ excellent articles will be interesting indeed. Will his character and credentials be besmirched as has happened to many other fine scientists who have dared cast doubt on this absurd multi-billion dollar fraud? It seems to take enormous courage for anyone to speak out against this ‘crime-of-the-century’, and I wish Dr David Evans every best wish and proffer my full support.
That the case is lost for Australia with its draconian carbon dioxide tax is clear. Let us hope it will not be too long before we can go the polls and vindicate the majority of Australians’ view.
To quote a scene from Life of Brian…( which makes more sense than loony climate change “science” – and its much funnier ) :
“Splitter ……”