Friday, January 17, 2014 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

AGW inquisition burns a journal, Pattern Recognition in Physics

One sentence in Scafetta's paper on solar/climate patterns was too much for the AGW loons and their cowardly slaves and collaborationists

The only justifiable concern connected with the climate are the climate alarmists' efforts to suppress the freedoms – the economic freedoms, the academic freedoms, and sometimes basic human rights including the free speech. Three days ago, I discussed the climate alarmist UNFCCC boss' praise for Chinese communism and criticism of the U.S. democracy and Willie Soon just informed me about a new story of a similar kind.

Burning of Mister John Huss for heresy, July 6th, 1415.

Climate extremists such as Phil Plait sometimes bitingly quip when they ask why climate skeptics don't publish in the established scientific journals. The answer has been well-known to pretty much everyone at least since the ClimateGate in 2009: when they do, either their papers are eliminated or destroyed by the alarmist mafia, or the authors are destroyed by the climate mafia, or the journals are destroyed by the climate mafia.

The new story is another example of the latter category.

The liquidated open access journal was called

Pattern Recognition in Physics (journal website, two volumes).
If you open the link above, you will see the official explanation why the journal – one launched by Copernicus Publications in March 2013 – was terminated a few days ago.

Because this wasn't even a journal focusing on the climate, you inevitably ask: What was the reason? The reason was that a
PRP, special issue: Pattern in solar variability, their planetary origin and terrestrial impacts (editors N.-A. Mörner, R. Tattersall, and J.-E. Solheim)
contained an article that could potentially impact the climate debate in the "wrong way" that the bosses of Copernicus Publications would never dare to team up with. Of course, the sea-level expert Nils-Axel Mörner is an outspoken climate skeptic (I know him from a Dec 2009 meeting in Berlin) which means that "heretical" papers were not automatically banned in this special issue. My understanding is that he wasn't an editor of PRP itself, just the special issue. The same is true for Roger Tattersall who also authors a skeptical Tallbloke blog which also carries a new story about the death of this journal.

The "offending" paper was
The complex planetary synchronization structure of the solar system (abstract, full PDF)
by Nicola Scaffeta who is well-known to readers of Steve McIntyre's blog (and many others).

It's a paper with a cute yet outdated historical introduction (Pythagoras' music of the spheres) whose serious part focuses on the Fourier analysis of the solar activity and patterns in it, kind of. Of course that the terrestrial climate plays a role, too – it's arguably a major "proxy" to the solar activity.

At any rate, someone in Copernicus Publications decided that he or she or they didn't want to "risk" that his or her or their company would be connected with a heresy in any way, so he or she or they terminated the whole journal because of hypothetical implications of one paper. Well, Tallbloke publishes a letter that seems to imply that the whole journal was really killed because of one sentence in that paper (!):
This sheds serious doubts on the issue of a continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC project.
The irony of the termination due to "heresy" is enhanced by the word "Copernicus" in the name of the company – many "heretics" were treated in very similar ways because they were teaching Copernicus' insights.

Giordano Bruno was burned by the geo(climate)centrists in 1600 AD.

What I find amazing is the openness of the reasons behind the executions. The climate alarmist jerks have harmed hundreds of good people by unfair decisions behind the scenes. But this isn't one of them. We are explicitly told that the journal was killed because of the climate heresy. I think that they want to make everyone afraid. Needless to say, the extra accusations, e.g. "nepotism", are nonsensical. Nepotism is a bias favoring family members. None of the people in the journal or the special issue is a relative of anyone else.

Who's next? Will the climate Nazis destroy because it hosts a paper by Richard Lindzen analyzing the detailed reasons why climate alarmism is a pile of cr*p? Or will they detonate a few bombs in The Telegraph or Fox News?

As a major force suppressing the academic freedom in the early 21st century, the climate alarmists may perhaps look less organized or more diluted than the Nazis or Stalinists – the absence of a clear, single Führer or Daddy helps this impression – but what they're doing is the same thing and they're doing it pretty much to the same extent. That's the reason why most papers in related subjects don't explicitly disprove or denounce the climate alarm – even though, one must keep in mind e.g. these 1,100 peer-reviewed journal articles contradicting the "consensus", a thousand of papers that hardcore ostriches such as Phil Plait chose not to see.

(Yes, I modestly do think that the celebration of the list of the 1,100 articles as "Oreskes done right" is the best one LOL.)

What can you do in such cases? You can't do much so far. If a company decides to destroy your journal because its cowardly bosses are deeply raped by alarmist faggots and you can't prove that some law was explicitly violated and some particular crime was committed, you can't do anything.

However, there are cases in which you can do something. Yesterday, an article in the Guardian demanded that climate alarmists turn off the air-conditioning of the climate skeptics around them. I don't own any air-conditioning and I don't need any – I am really convinced that a Czechia heated up by 13 °C would be a better place to live – but if there are any TRF readers who are climate skeptics and who do possess some air-conditioning, I think that the right reaction is a matter of common sense. This is exactly the situation for which the second commandment was written down!

So shoot, baby, shoot. Defend your poor innocent device that can't defend itself. It may be enough to defend 10,000 air-conditioning devices in the world and the problem of climate alarmism may be permanently solved. They have poisoned the Academia way too much; they have depleted their right to live.

And that's the memo.

See also Jo Nova, Tall Bloke, Retraction Watch, Big City Lib

P.S.: Another blow to freedom occurred in the EU – in Greece, via Georgios Korpas. A Greek blogger was arrested for blasphemy for 10 months, just because his FB page made fun of a weird Greek orthodox "prophet" whose name was mixed with the name of a popular Greek pasta-based food. The Nazi Golden Dawn party is probably a driver behind the blasphemy laws and arrests. Greece of the present seems like an intolerable mixture of the left-wing irresponsibility and culture of entitlement on one side, the economic one; and "right-wing" medieval bigotry on the other, social side.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (15) :

reader Werdna said...

In the state of Florida we are still, for now, legally allowed to shoot anyone intruding on our private property, to defend against home invasion. If anyone breaks into my house, or otherwise comes onto my property with the intention to damage my property, which includes my air condition system, I can and will shoot them.

Of course, some obnoxious and dangerous Communists are trying to change Florida's self defense laws, which are some of the best in the nation, to be weaker, so I can't say I will be allowed to do so forever.

reader Curious George said...

Prof. Matt Strassler thought on January 16: "Anyone who thinks Climate Change is a scam has no grasp on reality, and should be ignored. Maybe an individual scientist can run a scam, but a scientific community cannot; it’s made of thousands of people, and there’s no “secret meeting” at which all these people get together and try to figure out how to get rich." This may influence his opinions.

reader Luboš Motl said...

LOL, one obviously doesn't need "common meetings of everyone" for a pathological structure penetrating the society to operate.

reader lucretius said...

Actually it is Matt Strassler who has no grasp of any reality outside his own field of physics, and whose opinions on everything other than quantum field theory should be ignored. He sounds like he has never heard of trade unions, or other groups of people who do not need to set up a conspiracy (with secrets meetings, coded messages and other such stuff) to act together in support of their common interest and to try to suppress anyone who threatens it. Usually, they also develop an ideology that serves this interest while making it possible for them to feel altruistic and virtuous. Coalminers unions are always convinced that the world needs more coal, for teachers unions teachers are always underpaid and for climatologists, global warming is the biggest problem the world faces.

The problem with Matt is he himself acts as if scientists (very broadly understood, which includes also political scientists, in support of whom he has written at least one post, and maybe all these “studies” people, although he has not yet made his view clear on them) belonged to one trade union and should act jointly to persuade the “ignorant public” that what it needs is exactly what is the in the interest of Matt and his fellow trade union members. In fact, his all too obvious attempts to manipulate his readers for this very purpose persuaded me some time ago to do what he suggests for others, that is, to ignore him. (That as well as the fact that I have found him self-important and boring).

reader Smoking Frog said...

I am really convinced that a Czechia heated up by 13 °C would be a better place to live

In the summer, that would make it warmer than San Bernardino, California, and a lot warmer at night. Have you ever been there in the summer!?


San Bernardino

reader Werdna said...

The notion that one is suggesting a conspiracy theory, to suggest that all parties involved are simply following their individual interests, is self evidently absurd.

reader Werdna said...

You are assuming that the warming would be uniform throughout the year. This is generally not the case, and specifically the warmer days tend to show smaller trends than the coldest ones.

reader Tom Trevor said...

Werdna, even here in Florida we don't really have that right, We have the right to defend ourselves if our person is threatened on our property, and "Stand your ground" allows us to defend ourselves off our property, but if the only threat is to your property you really don't have the right to shoot an intruder. Now as a realistic matter if someone comes on my property with harmful intent I am going to say I had to assume that my life was in danger.

reader Werdna said...

You are technically correct, yes, the reason is for threats of personal harm. But if someone is breaking into my property, that's a home invasion, and I have the right to defend against home invasion, under the presumption the home invader intends harm to my person, yes? Or is my reading of Florida law incorrect?

reader Smoking Frog said...

It turns out my calculation was wrong, but I was not assuming what you say. I was assuming that "heated up by 13 °C" means that the trend line of annual anomalies over whatever number of years rises by 13 °C. As far as I know, an annual anomaly is calculated as an average of monthly anomalies without weighting of months. I think summer trends are roughly 1/2 of winter trends. Assuming (simplistically) that the annual anomaly is the average of summer and winter anomalies (as if summer and winter were the only seasons), it would be 3/2 of the summer trend, so the summer trend would rise by 8.7°C, and the summer would be 3-4 degrees cooler in Prague than in San Bernardino.

reader Luboš Motl said...

I've been to Santa Barbara both in early and late summer. It's luxurious, the kind of weather that Czechs pay $3,000 to experience once. ;-)

Some extra comments on the 13 deg C change:

reader John Archer said...


Consider yourself lucky you live in the Land of the Free, for the time being* anyway.

If you lived in Big-Brother England today, you could end up like Tony Martin. []

Don't ever let the bastards rescind your 2nd Amendment. We had the 1926 Fire Arms Act and it has been downhill ever since. No hand guns now anywhere (except for criminals**), courtesy that limp-wristed, girly-boy, lithpy Tony fucking trembling-lip Bliar — to be shot on sight. Oh please, somebody....

Changing tack slightly: the inestimable Mark Steyn says New Hampshire is a nice place place to live vis-à-vis guns— just shoot the cunts, and drag 'em inside if necessary. No questions. Nice.

*You elected that thoroughly alien blackoid moosslime in Chief. Jesus H Christ! Your body politic is on a par with ours! Who did y'all think he was - Virgil fucking Tibbs?

** I understand they're a fashion accessory in the 'black community***', and probably with asians too who are nothing if not sly++: they have a superb reputation for example for fleecing Sambo in black Africa - so it's hardly surprising Sambo kicked them out. Of course our lot let them in - why didn't they tell them to fuck off back to India? [That's south asians in our case, not the orientals, by the way.] They'll cheat you if they can. Oleaginous too, extremely. Christ, we're 'blessed' with our forced diversity! That place stinks of grease.

*** Originally encouraged to come by our 'leaders' (after they were mesmerised by the rhythms emanating out of the 1948 Windrush when it docked), who estimated Britain couldn't survive a national bus-conductor shortage on top of coming out of WWII skint. Yeah! Huh! It's a wonder how we fucking managed to night-bomb Hamburg and Dresden with all our bus conductors on passionate leave. By the way, these were the same fucking leaders who reckoned the hoi-polloi could survive air raids in Anderson shelters and barred access to underground tube stations in London until the FUCKING PEOPLE TOLD THEM TO GO FUCK THEMSELVES.

Yeah, we, the 'mob', won that one. I want to see us mob-handed again, with spades this time. I want to bury the cunts — a final solution. Hey, that's kinda 'collective' I suppose. I wonder if Ayn Rand would approve?

Who cares? As far as I'm concerned, fuck anyone who stands in our way.

The same goes for all Western nations: stand up for yourselves.

reader John Archer said...

P.S. You can't even buy a cavalry sword coz it's got a curved blade. You're not even allowed to make one.

This is our fucking England, today.

reader Smoking Frog said...

San Bernardino is about 12 degrees C warmer than Santa Barbara in the summer. Would the Czechs pay maybe $1000 to walk around in San Bernardino for a few days? There are people there who desperately need to make some money. :-)

reader Smoking Frog said...

Come to think of it, science-minded Czechs might like it. There's a rat species that only lives in vacant lots in San Bernardino, and I understand the environmentalists have successfully gotten legal protection for it.