There are two sides to every story; the Chinese express it as Yin (black) and Yang (white). Many react with cultural bias by assuming white is good and black is bad. The idea of balance is possibly one of the greatest victims of political correctness. It has distorted climate science, because they only considered one side and refused to follow the scientific method.

Dr. Tim Ball recently appeared on It's Rainmaking Time!™ to clear up the misunderstandings about glaciers. Learn what's really happening in the Arctic here.

The climate alarmist perspective is often held not by extremists, but by people who clearly don’t understand science or the patterns of nature. Why are they and others making so much noise about “tipping points”?

How the World Was Bullied Into Silence

by Dr. Tim Ball on June 7, 2011

in Uncategorized

One of the most disturbing aspects of the global warming scam is the number of prominent people and entire segments of society bullied into silence. A comment from Dr. Joanne Simpson began, “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receive any funding, I can speak quite frankly.” This explains why the scam has progressed so far.

Bureaucracy: The Enemy Within

by Dr. Tim Ball on June 7, 2011

in Uncategorized

In the battle for proper climate science free from politics, there are two levels at which bureaucracy is a modern form of despotism. In most countries it is in departments of meteorology, weather, climate or environment. At the global level, it is in the United Nations. Regardless of location, it is essentially unaccountable and represents the enemy within.

Most people have no idea what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) actually studies. They believe their reports are complete reports of climate change. This misconception is mostly because the IPCC arranged it and does little to correct it. In fact, they only look at that portion of climate change caused by humans.

Ad Hominem

by Dr. Tim Ball on June 7, 2011

in Uncategorized

An acquaintance said I must feel vindicated now that the extent of the corruption in climate science is exposed. The answer is no, because I knew all along there would be no pleasure in “I told you so”. The damage done to climate science, science, and environmentalism is serious.

Traditionally, the older scientists held to the prevailing wisdom and were challenged by the new, skeptical graduates looking for wider answers. In climatology, the opposite has happened. The so-called skeptics challenging the prevailing wisdom are the professors who have researched and taught the subject for 30 years or longer. Their knowledge is much wider than that of the new young scientists because climate science has stagnated for thirty years.

In his book True Enough: Learning to live in a Post-Fact Society, Farhad Manjoo claims: “Facts no longer matter. We simply decide how we want to see the world and then go out and find experts and evidence to back our beliefs.” I am not sure this is a modern phenomenon.

No matter what political committees try to absolve corruption of climate science of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), they cannot hide the complete failure of the computer models to make a single accurate prediction. Leaked emails from the CRU received media attention, but the emphasis must shift to the computer models.