Source; Wishes to remain anonymous
The crazies are still at it...... will they never quit?
A study in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons argues the trillions of dollars spent to fight climate change are being wasted in a vain and unnecessary effort driven in large part by the focus on an essentially meaningless and made-up metric: global mean surface temperature (GMST). GMST does not have a precise regulatory definition, and is in fact physically meaningless based on fundamental principles of thermodynamics. An AI analysis of the claims of warming based on purported changes in temperatures confirmed the methodologies and assumptions used by the un's ipcc to designate and forecast temperatures are “fundamentally fraudulent” because the project of averaging temperatures is meaningless outside of an equilibrium system, which the Earth and its various climates are not. Also, to measure average temperature change, one must work within a common designated system of measurement, yet the ipcc contributors don’t do this.
Temperature is an intensive property [a characteristic of a substance that does not change with the amount of matter present (such as density, temperature, color, or boiling point, etc.) that is defined only in equilibrium systems and cannot be meaningfully averaged across non-equilibrium systems. The Earth’s surface air and ocean water is a large non-equilibrium system with enormous spatial and temporal variations in temperature, pressure, humidity, and heat capacity, in addition to the more than 800-fold mass density difference between seawater and air. It is well understood that as an intensive thermodynamic property, temperature is neither additive nor meaningfully averageable across such a system, in contrast to extensive properties such as energy, mass, and volume, which scale directly with the amount of matter and can be summed over subsystems. As Essex et al. demonstrate, there is no physical principle that dictates how surface temperatures should be averaged globally to produce a meaningful statistic, making any such human-chosen averaging methodology arbitrary, resulting in a statistical artifact with no physical meaning. This arbitrariness is not a minor technical detail. There are infinite ways to average temperatures—arithmetic mean, geometric mean, harmonic mean, root mean square, and the entire family of Hölder means, among infinitely many others. Each method produces different numerical results and different trends over time. Without a physical principle to select one averaging method over another, the choice becomes purely arbitrary. As the Essex study conclusively demonstrates: “if the physics does not prescribe one averaging rule to be used over another, as it does not for temperature, we may use any rule. If one interpreter of the data chooses one rule while another chooses a different rule, there is no way to settle a disagreement whether the system is getting warmer or cooler with time.” The implications extend far beyond academic thermodynamics. Every climate model used by the ipcc (CMIP models) is tuned to reproduce historical GMST trends. When models are calibrated to match a physically meaningless quantity, their outputs become equally meaningless—not just for temperature projections, but for all variables, since these are coupled global circulation models where all components interact. The fundamental principle of scientific modeling requires that models be validated against physically meaningful observables.
Nevertheless, all ipcc climate models, which are the basic support for the eco's claim of a climate crisis, are tuned to reproduce historical GMST trends. This represents what Orwell presciently described: "the systematic replacement of objective truth with politically convenient fiction."
Meanwhile, 2025 could come to be characterized as the year the lights began to flicker across Europe as threats to energy security begin to manifest. Britian almost ran out of electricity in January. They did have a blackout at Heathrow Airport in March and Iberia suffered a full peninsular blackout in April. They also had warnings that accelerated decline of North Sea gas production might threaten the viability of key pipelines leading to winter gas shortages that would threaten the power sector. Europe, due to its headlong, ill-considered embrace of the eco-extremists "net-zero" future powered by wind and solar power.
Temperature is an intensive property [a characteristic of a substance that does not change with the amount of matter present (such as density, temperature, color, or boiling point, etc.) that is defined only in equilibrium systems and cannot be meaningfully averaged across non-equilibrium systems. The Earth’s surface air and ocean water is a large non-equilibrium system with enormous spatial and temporal variations in temperature, pressure, humidity, and heat capacity, in addition to the more than 800-fold mass density difference between seawater and air. It is well understood that as an intensive thermodynamic property, temperature is neither additive nor meaningfully averageable across such a system, in contrast to extensive properties such as energy, mass, and volume, which scale directly with the amount of matter and can be summed over subsystems. As Essex et al. demonstrate, there is no physical principle that dictates how surface temperatures should be averaged globally to produce a meaningful statistic, making any such human-chosen averaging methodology arbitrary, resulting in a statistical artifact with no physical meaning. This arbitrariness is not a minor technical detail. There are infinite ways to average temperatures—arithmetic mean, geometric mean, harmonic mean, root mean square, and the entire family of Hölder means, among infinitely many others. Each method produces different numerical results and different trends over time. Without a physical principle to select one averaging method over another, the choice becomes purely arbitrary. As the Essex study conclusively demonstrates: “if the physics does not prescribe one averaging rule to be used over another, as it does not for temperature, we may use any rule. If one interpreter of the data chooses one rule while another chooses a different rule, there is no way to settle a disagreement whether the system is getting warmer or cooler with time.” The implications extend far beyond academic thermodynamics. Every climate model used by the ipcc (CMIP models) is tuned to reproduce historical GMST trends. When models are calibrated to match a physically meaningless quantity, their outputs become equally meaningless—not just for temperature projections, but for all variables, since these are coupled global circulation models where all components interact. The fundamental principle of scientific modeling requires that models be validated against physically meaningful observables.
Nevertheless, all ipcc climate models, which are the basic support for the eco's claim of a climate crisis, are tuned to reproduce historical GMST trends. This represents what Orwell presciently described: "the systematic replacement of objective truth with politically convenient fiction."
Meanwhile, 2025 could come to be characterized as the year the lights began to flicker across Europe as threats to energy security begin to manifest. Britian almost ran out of electricity in January. They did have a blackout at Heathrow Airport in March and Iberia suffered a full peninsular blackout in April. They also had warnings that accelerated decline of North Sea gas production might threaten the viability of key pipelines leading to winter gas shortages that would threaten the power sector. Europe, due to its headlong, ill-considered embrace of the eco-extremists "net-zero" future powered by wind and solar power.
Replies
I refuse to waste much time on nonsense. If I'm seeing it right they are saying the temperature we measure on the surface of the earth isn't an accurate measurement. So what are they measuring and basing all this on? If the "danger" is coming from inside the earth.......then what we are doing on the surface is not the cause, so stop the BS, move on, we have much bigger problems that to worry about something we have no control over!