principiascientificinternational--2020-06-12--Official Tornado Data Exposes More Al Gore Lies

In two articles published this past week here at Climate Realism , we showed how Al Gore ’ s predictions about melting glaciers in Glacier National Park and disappearing snows at Mt .
Kilimanjaro have proven spectacularly wrong .
Those were the only two concrete predictions Gore made with a definitive timeline prior to today in his book , An Inconvenient Truth .
Gore failed on both accounts .
But those weren ’ t Gore ’ s only spectacular embarrassments .
Let ’ s take a look at what Gore claimed about tornadoes .
On page 86 in An Inconvenient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2004 , the all-time record for tornadoes in the United States was broken.
” Worse than his two failed predictions , this one is a flat-out lie .
And it was a flat-out lie when Gore asserted it .
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA ) has been meticulously keeping tornado records going back 65 years , to 1954 .
As shown in the NOAA graph reproduced below , there were 600 tornadoes in 2004 .
Prior to 2004 , however , there were six different years in which NOAA documented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s statement was a lie the second he made it .
Even more embarrassingly for Gore , the NOAA graph likely undercounted tornadoes during the mid-1950s through the late 20th century .
That is because advanced radar in recent years has enabled scientists to identify tornadoes in the middle of nowhere that previously would not have been counted .
As a result , it is likely that there were well more than six years between 1954 and 2004 with more tornadoes than Gore ’ s ‘ all-time-record year ’ of 2004 .
Occasionally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ OK , but what about strong tornadoes – the ones that really cause a lot of damage .
Those are the ones that really matter , and perhaps Gore was talking about those.
’ As you can see from this additional NOAA chart below , strong tornadoes ( F3 and above ) have been in long-term decline , with 2004 ( like most recent years ) experiencing a well-below-average number of tornadoes .
Any way you cut it , 2004 was not the all-time record year for tornadoes .
It wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been declining for decades .
Yet the establishment media fawns over Gore as a global warming prophet while attacking as “ deniers ” anybody who points out the facts above .
I place my money on the American people being smart enough to see through the media propaganda .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Official Tornado Data Exposes More Al Gore Lies
Written by James Taylor
In two articles published this past week here at Climate Realism, we showed how Al Gore’s predictions about melting glaciers in Glacier National Park and disappearing snows at Mt. Kilimanjaro have proven spectacularly wrong.
Those were the only two concrete predictions Gore made with a definitive timeline prior to today in his book, An Inconvenient Truth.
Gore failed on both accounts. But those weren’t Gore’s only spectacular embarrassments. Let’s take a look at what Gore claimed about tornadoes.
On page 86 in An Inconvenient Truth, Gore claimed, “in 2004, the all-time record for tornadoes in the United States was broken.”
Worse than his two failed predictions, this one is a flat-out lie. And it was a flat-out lie when Gore asserted it. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has been meticulously keeping tornado records going back 65 years, to 1954.
As shown in the NOAA graph reproduced below, there were 600 tornadoes in 2004. Prior to 2004, however, there were six different years in which NOAA documented more than 600 tornadoes.
Gore’s statement was a lie the second he made it.
Even more embarrassingly for Gore, the NOAA graph likely undercounted tornadoes during the mid-1950s through the late 20th century.
That is because advanced radar in recent years has enabled scientists to identify tornadoes in the middle of nowhere that previously would not have been counted.
As a result, it is likely that there were well more than six years between 1954 and 2004 with more tornadoes than Gore’s ‘all-time-record year’ of 2004.
Occasionally, somebody will assert to me, ‘OK, but what about strong tornadoes – the ones that really cause a lot of damage. Those are the ones that really matter, and perhaps Gore was talking about those.’
As you can see from this additional NOAA chart below, strong tornadoes (F3 and above) have been in long-term decline, with 2004 (like most recent years) experiencing a well-below-average number of tornadoes.
Any way you cut it, 2004 was not the all-time record year for tornadoes. It wasn’t even close. And tornado activity has been declining for decades.
Yet the establishment media fawns over Gore as a global warming prophet while attacking as “deniers” anybody who points out the facts above. I place my money on the American people being smart enough to see through the media propaganda.
Read more at Climate Realism
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-12--‘Cell’ Mag: ‘Science Has Racism Problem’

The woke editors of the prominent science journal Cell have published a mea culpa , accusing their entire discipline of racism .
“ We are the editors of a science journal , committed to publishing and disseminating exciting work across the biological sciences , ” the editors write .
“ We are 13 scientists .
Not one of us is Black .
Underrepresentation of Black scientists goes beyond our team — to our authors , reviewers , and advisory board .
And we are not alone.
” “ It is easy to divert blame , to point out that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ establishment , to quote statistics , ” they declare .
“ But it is this epidemic of denial of the integral role that each and every member of our society plays in supporting the status quo by failing to actively fight it that has allowed overt and systemic racism to flourish , crippling the lives and livelihoods of Black Americans , including Black scientists.
” “ Science has a racism problem , ” they assert , apparently concluding that underrepresentation of a given ethnic group must necessarily equate to an unrecognized bias against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would mean that , in the editors ’ minds , any field with an ethnic representation that does not perfectly mirror the overall population must be unconsciously racist .
Rap music , for instance , which is dominated by people of color , would , therefore , be racist and anti-white .
Many professional sports , where blacks are proportionally overrepresented , would also be racist .
In their self-condemning screed , the Cell editors point to the history of human genetics , “ a field that has been used repeatedly as scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ races ’ and to support inherent inequalities.
” “ Proponents of eugenics use the alleles we carry as reason to declare racial superiority , as if expression of a lactase gene has bearing on one ’ s humanity .
Race is not genetic , ” they state .
This last statement is patently false since all physical traits — such as skin color — are genetically determined .
Whether one wishes to call such differences “ racial ” is merely a question of semantics , not of fact .
Much of the 1,000-word @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abuse of blacks at the hands of white scientists .
One would think that their examination of conscience would focus more on current practice—to see whether such abuse continues today — rather than seeking to awaken feelings of guilt for other people ’ s actions .
The editors also encourage their readers to “ ask why Black women are five times more likely than white women to die during pregnancy , or why Black infants are twice as likely to die as white babies born in the US.
” If they were truly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the editors might ask why black babies are three times more likely than white babies to be intentionally killed in the womb through abortion .
Over and over , the editors repeat their mantra that “ science has a racism problem.
” One wonders how science as such can be racist .
One would think that professional thinkers might realize that while scientists may be racists , science itself can not .
Racism is based on beliefs and prejudices , which are the proper domain of human individuals .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

‘Cell’ Mag: ‘Science Has Racism Problem’
Written by Thomas D Willams PhD
The woke editors of the prominent science journal Cell have published a mea culpa, accusing their entire discipline of racism.
“We are the editors of a science journal, committed to publishing and disseminating exciting work across the biological sciences,” the editors write. “We are 13 scientists. Not one of us is Black. Underrepresentation of Black scientists goes beyond our team — to our authors, reviewers, and advisory board. And we are not alone.”
“It is easy to divert blame, to point out that the journal is a reflection of the scientific establishment, to quote statistics,” they declare.
“But it is this epidemic of denial of the integral role that each and every member of our society plays in supporting the status quo by failing to actively fight it that has allowed overt and systemic racism to flourish, crippling the lives and livelihoods of Black Americans, including Black scientists.”
“Science has a racism problem,” they assert, apparently concluding that underrepresentation of a given ethnic group must necessarily equate to an unrecognized bias against that group.
This glaringly unscientific conclusion would mean that, in the editors’ minds, any field with an ethnic representation that does not perfectly mirror the overall population must be unconsciously racist.
Rap music, for instance, which is dominated by people of color, would, therefore, be racist and anti-white. Many professional sports, where blacks are proportionally overrepresented, would also be racist.
In their self-condemning screed, the Cell editors point to the history of human genetics, “a field that has been used repeatedly as scientific rationale for the definition of human ‘races’ and to support inherent inequalities.”
“Proponents of eugenics use the alleles we carry as reason to declare racial superiority, as if expression of a lactase gene has bearing on one’s humanity. Race is not genetic,” they state.
This last statement is patently false since all physical traits — such as skin color — are genetically determined. Whether one wishes to call such differences “racial” is merely a question of semantics, not of fact.
Much of the 1,000-word essay is a look back at historical abuse of blacks at the hands of white scientists.
One would think that their examination of conscience would focus more on current practice—to see whether such abuse continues today — rather than seeking to awaken feelings of guilt for other people’s actions.
The editors also encourage their readers to “ask why Black women are five times more likely than white women to die during pregnancy, or why Black infants are twice as likely to die as white babies born in the US.”
If they were truly curious and truly interested in black lives, the editors might ask why black babies are three times more likely than white babies to be intentionally killed in the womb through abortion.
Over and over, the editors repeat their mantra that “science has a racism problem.” One wonders how science as such can be racist. One would think that professional thinkers might realize that while scientists may be racists, science itself cannot.
Racism is based on beliefs and prejudices, which are the proper domain of human individuals.
Read rest at Breitbart
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-14--Fake News MSM Still Pushing a CV-19 APOCALYPSE

The mainstream media is still trying to drum up fear and hysteria on the basis of cherry-picked statistics .
A glance at the figures is enough to prove them liars .
Someone should let them know : no one is listening anymore .
The US has recently surpassed 2 million cases , according to official figures , representing almost one-third of the world ’ s coronavirus infections .
Much of the reporting on recent statistics features words like ‘ spikes ’ , ‘ surges ’ , and ‘ hot spots ’ , but patterns in the statistics suggest that some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while it is only now beginning to spread in others .
What can I say ?
They ’ re lying .
There has been a clear and persistent drop in cases ever since the peak towards the end of April , about six weeks ago .
This is just another example of MSM outlets publishing half-truths , cherry-picked statistics , and agenda-driven stories in order to push their narrative .
Your best bet for getting good information is alternative outlets like this one and various lone voices on Twitter .
One such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times reporter turned novelist and pundit Alex Berenson , who tweeted on Friday to dispel this tired MSM narrative .
In an apparent reference to his former ‘ legacy media ’ employer , Berenson ’ s Twitter bio reads “ In the wrong lane , trying to turn against the flow.
” That is a noble cause .
He has been an outspoken critic of the US government ’ s response to the coronavirus outbreak and to lockdowns in general , and recently published an eBook entitled : ‘ Unreported Truths about COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Death Counts and Estimates ’ .
By definition , this puts him totally and irrevocably at odds with pretty much every mainstream news outlet , and CNN in particular .
My own view is that I could not be less interested in so-called ‘ case numbers ’ , and haven ’ t been from the beginning .
I take my cue from Professor Sunetra Gupta , professor of theoretical epidemiology at the University of Oxford , and one of the authors of the ‘ Oxford model ’ , an alternative to Neil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said in her landmark interview with UnHerd , This makes perfect sense : a government that does no testing will find zero new cases , but that does not mean that the virus has not spread to new individuals .
Likewise , if testing begins in a state which has previously had very little , then lo and behold , they will find a ‘ spike ’ in new cases .
In general , Professor Gupta ’ s reasoned , rational , and professional analysis of the coronavirus has been a testament to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Neil Ferguson and the government toadies who take his ravings as Gospel would do well to study .
A far better description of the outbreak can be gathered from Covid-19 deaths , “ the only reliable measure , ” according to Professor Gupta .
There are , of course , problems with the data on Covid-19 deaths , too ; Dr. John Lee argues that the way they are being counted is ‘ a national scandal ’ , as positive tests are not required for deaths to be registered as the result of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been issued to reduce the number of autopsies , when autopsies are more important then ever .
It is difficult to care about coronavirus now that Western liberal democracy seems to be entering the throes of death .
Certainly protesters , rioters , and looters of all stripes do not seem to be worried about a ‘ spike ’ in cases—and why would they be ?
Most of them are young , and as such have only an astronomically small chance of dying from Covid-19 – they are about as likely to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media is doing their best to remind us that we are all going to die , in between the rest of their putrid jet stream of incitement to race war .
The details may change , but essentially the story is always the same , whether they are hyping civil unrest , coronavirus , or climate change .
No matter the issue , these media have disgraced themselves time and time again by shirking their journalistic responsibilities and scorning rational analysis in favour of maximally emotive click bait .
By this point , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a scrap of credibility left .
It ’ s time to change the record .

Written by Peter Andrews
The mainstream media is still trying to drum up fear and hysteria on the basis of cherry-picked statistics. A glance at the figures is enough to prove them liars. Someone should let them know: no one is listening anymore.
The US has recently surpassed 2 million cases, according to official figures, representing almost one-third of the world’s coronavirus infections. Much of the reporting on recent statistics features words like ‘spikes’, ‘surges’, and ‘hot spots’, but patterns in the statistics suggest that some areas have dwindling levels of the virus, while it is only now beginning to spread in others.
What can I say? They’re lying. There has been a clear and persistent drop in cases ever since the peak towards the end of April, about six weeks ago. This is just another example of MSM outlets publishing half-truths, cherry-picked statistics, and agenda-driven stories in order to push their narrative. Your best bet for getting good information is alternative outlets like this one and various lone voices on Twitter.
One such voice is that of former New York Times reporter turned novelist and pundit Alex Berenson, who tweeted on Friday to dispel this tired MSM narrative.
Alex Berenson ✔@AlexBerenson 1/ Hey, wonder why @cnn and the rest of Team Apocalypse are screaming so hard about new “cases” (aka positive tests, which are actually falling nationally, btw)? It might because daily US Covid deaths have fallen two-thirds in six weeks. True story, not that you’ve heard it… 2,341 Twitter Ads info and privacy 1,269 people are talking about this
In an apparent reference to his former ‘legacy media’ employer, Berenson’s Twitter bio reads “In the wrong lane, trying to turn against the flow.” That is a noble cause. He has been an outspoken critic of the US government’s response to the coronavirus outbreak and to lockdowns in general, and recently published an eBook entitled: ‘Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates’. By definition, this puts him totally and irrevocably at odds with pretty much every mainstream news outlet, and CNN in particular.
Cases, schmases!
My own view is that I could not be less interested in so-called ‘case numbers’, and haven’t been from the beginning. I take my cue from Professor Sunetra Gupta, professor of theoretical epidemiology at the University of Oxford, and one of the authors of the ‘Oxford model’, an alternative to Neil Ferguson’s apocalypse model.
Gupta said in her landmark interview with UnHerd,
“the number of cases should not even be presented as it is so reliant on the amount of testing being done.”
This makes perfect sense: a government that does no testing will find zero new cases, but that does not mean that the virus has not spread to new individuals. Likewise, if testing begins in a state which has previously had very little, then lo and behold, they will find a ‘spike’ in new cases.
In general, Professor Gupta’s reasoned, rational, and professional analysis of the coronavirus has been a testament to some lingering British academic excellency, which Neil Ferguson and the government toadies who take his ravings as Gospel would do well to study.
A far better description of the outbreak can be gathered from Covid-19 deaths, “the only reliable measure,” according to Professor Gupta. There are, of course, problems with the data on Covid-19 deaths, too; Dr. John Lee argues that the way they are being counted is ‘a national scandal’, as positive tests are not required for deaths to be registered as the result of Covid-19. Furthermore, the guidance has been issued to reduce the number of autopsies, when autopsies are more important then ever.
Change the record
It is difficult to care about coronavirus now that Western liberal democracy seems to be entering the throes of death. Certainly protesters, rioters, and looters of all stripes do not seem to be worried about a ‘spike’ in cases—and why would they be?
Most of them are young, and as such have only an astronomically small chance of dying from Covid-19 – they are about as likely to be hit by lightning.
But the mainstream media is doing their best to remind us that we are all going to die, in between the rest of their putrid jet stream of incitement to race war. The details may change, but essentially the story is always the same, whether they are hyping civil unrest, coronavirus, or climate change.
No matter the issue, these media have disgraced themselves time and time again by shirking their journalistic responsibilities and scorning rational analysis in favour of maximally emotive click bait. By this point, surely not a single one of them has a scrap of credibility left. It’s time to change the record.


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-14--Fresh Proof Nature, Not Humans, Drives CO2 Levels

Statistical analysis of official data from the Mauna Loa Observatory of atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) reveals Nature , not humans determines the concentration of this trace gas .
Variances in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide are shown to be well correlated with changes in the seasons , phases of the moon and El Niño events rather than human industrial activity .
No studies by climatologists endorsed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) address these factors .
Figure 1 shows the atmospheric CO concentration measured weekly at the Mauna Loa Observatory ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March 1958 to 30 May 2020 .
The Observatory is at Latitude 19.54° North , Longitude 155.57° West , Elevation 3397 metres .
It is on the northern slope of Mauna Loa , an active volcano on the island of Hawaii in the mid-North Pacific Ocean .
The series shows a regular seasonal variation superimposed on an upward trend .
The linear trend for the whole period of 62 years was 1.58 ppm per annum .
For the 3-year period March 29 , 1958 to 1961 , the rate was 0.55 ppm pa. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 , the rate had steadily increased to 2.91 ppm pa , more than five times greater than 60 years earlier .
The acceleration in the rate of generation of CO over the time of the measurements is attributed to an increase in biogenic CO in response to the gradual increase in temperature since the end of the Little Ice Age .
Justification for this claim can be seen in a comparison between the dearth of life at the cold Poles and the profusion of life , in a myriad of forms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forms flourish with greater temperature .
As there were missing values in the time sequence , interpolation was applied using a third order polynomial fit to adjoining data strings and a ‘ weekly ’ time interval of 7.02416 days , that is , one fifty second part of a year , for the following analysis of the CO concentration time series .
The original time series consisted of 3173 values while the interpolated time series consisted of 3233 values at a uniform ‘ weekly ’ interval .
The amplitude of the seasonal variation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series to 9.3 ppm in the later part of the series , changing from year to year in an irregular fashion but clearly increasing in amplitude over time .
The maximum in the seasonal variation occurred on average in mid-May at the start of Summer while the minimum occurred at the end of September , just prior to Winter .
It is attributed to the Summer sunshine causing an increase in photosynthesis which absorbs CO resulting in the fall in CO concentration .
The decay of vegetation in the cold of Winter releases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CO concentration .
That is , the concentration is decreasing during the heat of Summer and increasing during the cool of Winter putting it at odds with the UN IPCC claim that an increase in CO concentration causes a temperature increase .
The annual rate of change of the CO concentration was determined from the interpolated ‘ weekly ’ time series by taking the difference between values 52 weeks apart and is shown in Figure 2 .
It displays the estimated annual rate of change of the CO concentration with high frequency noise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ linear trend of 0.0286 ppm pa per annum .
The sequence of maxima and minima match that for the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index ( Ref.2 ) shown in Figure 3 .
In order to illustrate the correlation between the two series , Figure 4 shows the detrended Mauna Loa annual rate of change of CO concentration , after smoothing with a low pass filter , overlain on the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index , both covering the same 61 year period .
In considering the relationship between the two series it is necessary to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of change was derived from a weekly series of measurements taken at a single point on the globe .
The Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index is the anomaly in the sea surface temperature relative to a 30 year average over the Equatorial zone between latitudes 5° South to 5° North and longitudes 120° West to 170° West , an area of the central Pacific Ocean of 6,568,670 square kilometres .
The Mauna Loa Observatory is 2,450 km from the centre of the Ninõ 3.4 area , on a bearing of 27.5° East of North @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies of CO data on www.climateauditor.com , their seasonal variation arose from biological sources in response to the associated temperature change .
Likewise the close correlation between the Mauna Loa CO rate of change and the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index , as shown by the coincidence of the major maxima in Figure 4 , is attributed to a biological response to the major , world-wide climate event depicted by the Niño 3.4 Index .
There is a marked negative correlation in the centre of the graph annotated by ‘ ↑ ’ corresponding to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Philippines on 12 June 1991 which significantly altered the relationship between the rate of change of CO and the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index .
The eruption caused an unexplained phenomenon whereby the rate of change of CO dropped to a minimum as the sea surface temperatures reached a local maximum .
The Mauna Loa Observatory is 8859 km on a bearing of 72.4°East of North from Mount Pinatubo .
More detail of the source of variation in the CO annual rate of change is shown by its autocorrelation function illustrated in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cyclic pattern based on the El Niño event as shown in the accompanying table listing the correlation maxima , Table 1 .
The average from Table 1 , column 4 , adjusted for the multiple expressions of the El Niño event was 1313 days .
The event clearly dominates the CO annual rate of change indicating that this major climate event together with the seasonal weather pattern determines the rate of generation of CO in the Equatorial region .
This confirms the earlier proposition that the temperature level determines the rate of change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data for Cape Grim and Macquarie Island stations and Mt Waliguan Observatory described in the analysis of data from each site as reported in the pages of : .
Figure 6 shows the amplitude spectrum from the Discrete Fourier Transform of the interpolated time series for the annual rate of change of the CO2 concentration padded with zeros at each end to give of length of 4096 values .
The amplitude scale was clipped to better display the higher frequency , shorter wavelength events so it excludes the maximum of 9.4 at x-coordinate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1308 days , which dominated the autocorrelation function .
That is the maximum predicted to represent the response to the El Niño event already seen in the autocorrelation function .
Figure 6 .
DFT Amplitude spectrum of the annual rate of change of CO concentration .
There is a multitude of local maxima in the Amplitude spectrum some of which have been assigned possible sources from the known synodic periods of the Moon and planets within the Solar System , being the time interval between instances of the Sun , Earth and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for these periods have been taken from the publicly available literature but may change with time .
The periods drift due to the ever-changing configuration of the Solar System and this may contribute to a broadening of the spectral responses .
There are other periodic events , such as changes in the ellipticity of the orbits which have not been taken into account in this study .
A list of possible sources is shown in Table 2 for a selection of the peaks in the DFT amplitude spectrum .
They are listed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cycles per 4096 weeks , and the amplitude of response with period in years and days for ease of reference to orbital periods of the Moon and planets , e.g .
x-coord 2 is 2 cycles in 4096 weeks which is one cycle in 2048 weeks which is a period of 39.38 years or 14,385 days .
Some of these may also relate to the periodicities resulting from the Short-term orbital forcing described in Cionco , R. G. , and Soon , W .
W.-H. [ Ref .
3 ] .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of atmospheric CO in the Equatorial zone has been the El Niño event , that is , climate change causing a change in the rate of generation of CO , the complete opposite to the UN IPCC claim that CO causes climate change .
As far as is known , no physical process has been proposed whereby the CO change could cause an El Niño event .
Furthermore , it is notable that both the synodic and draconic periods of the Moon are apparent throughout the 62-year weekly series .
An explanation for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moon reduces the incoming Sun ’ s radiation to the Earth and its atmosphere as it passes between the Sun and the Earth .
Similar temperature minima must occur when Mercury and/or Venus pass between the Sun and the Earth .
The draconic period is due to the Moon ’ s elliptical plane being at an angle of 5.14° to the Earth ’ s elliptic relative to the Sun .
As a result , when the Moon passes through one of the two nodal points , where the Moon ’ s ellipse intersects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has the greatest influence in diminishing the irradiation of the Earth which , in turn , reduces the Earth ’ s surface temperature thereby causing a response in the rate of generation of CO .
Except during a Solar eclipse when the drop in temperature is marked , the passing of the Moon through its nodal points may only causes a minor drop in temperature .
Despite this , there is a measurable effect on the rate of change of CO concentration apparent in the amplitude spectrum implying a significant sensitivity between temperature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action appears to have been completely overlooked by the UN IPCC in their assessment of the forces generating the Earth ’ s climate .
As a number of the spectral maxima approximately correspond with the synodic periods of the Moon and the planets , the results are interpreted as showing that the Sun ’ s irradiance of the Earth is modulated by the movement of the Moon and planets .
This must cause corresponding changes in the Earth ’ s atmospheric temperature which , in turn , has caused changes in the CO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never-proven claim by the UN IPCC that increased CO concentration causes an increase in the Earth ’ s atmospheric temperature .
• Cionco and Soon , Short-term orbital forcing : A quasi-review and a reappraisal of realistic boundary conditions for climate modeling , Earth-Science Reviews 166 ( 2017 ) 206-222 , Elsevier B.V. About the author : Bevan Dockery , B.Sc .
( Hons ) , Grad .
Dip .
Computing , retired geophysicist , formerly : Fellow of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists , Member of the Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Geophysicists , Member of the European Association of Exploration Geophysicists , Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Fresh Proof Nature, Not Humans, Drives CO2 Levels
Written by Bevan Dockery
Statistical analysis of official data from the Mauna Loa Observatory of atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) reveals Nature, not humans determines the concentration of this trace gas.
Variances in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide are shown to be well correlated with changes in the seasons, phases of the moon and El Niño events rather than human industrial activity.
No studies by climatologists endorsed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) address these factors.
Figure 1 shows the atmospheric CO 2 concentration measured weekly at the Mauna Loa Observatory (see Ref.1) for the period 29 March 1958 to 30 May 2020. The Observatory is at Latitude 19.54° North, Longitude 155.57° West, Elevation 3397 metres. It is on the northern slope of Mauna Loa, an active volcano on the island of Hawaii in the mid-North Pacific Ocean.
The series shows a regular seasonal variation superimposed on an upward trend. The linear trend for the whole period of 62 years was 1.58 ppm per annum. For the 3-year period March 29, 1958 to 1961, the rate was 0.55 ppm pa.
For the 3-year period May 2017 to 2020, the rate had steadily increased to 2.91 ppm pa, more than five times greater than 60 years earlier. The acceleration in the rate of generation of CO 2 over the time of the measurements is attributed to an increase in biogenic CO 2 in response to the gradual increase in temperature since the end of the Little Ice Age.
Justification for this claim can be seen in a comparison between the dearth of life at the cold Poles and the profusion of life, in a myriad of forms, in the warm Equatorial zone. Life forms flourish with greater temperature.
As there were missing values in the time sequence, interpolation was applied using a third order polynomial fit to adjoining data strings and a ‘weekly’ time interval of 7.02416 days, that is, one fifty second part of a year, for the following analysis of the CO 2 concentration time series. The original time series consisted of 3173 values while the interpolated time series consisted of 3233 values at a uniform ‘weekly’ interval.
The amplitude of the seasonal variation ranged from 5.9 ppm early in the series to 9.3 ppm in the later part of the series, changing from year to year in an irregular fashion but clearly increasing in amplitude over time. The maximum in the seasonal variation occurred on average in mid-May at the start of Summer while the minimum occurred at the end of September, just prior to Winter.
It is attributed to the Summer sunshine causing an increase in photosynthesis which absorbs CO 2 resulting in the fall in CO 2 concentration. The decay of vegetation in the cold of Winter releases CO 2 resulting in a rise in the CO 2 concentration.
That is, the concentration is decreasing during the heat of Summer and increasing during the cool of Winter putting it at odds with the UN IPCC claim that an increase in CO 2 concentration causes a temperature increase.
The annual rate of change of the CO 2 concentration was determined from the interpolated ‘weekly’ time series by taking the difference between values 52 weeks apart and is shown in Figure 2. It displays the estimated annual rate of change of the CO 2 concentration with high frequency noise superimposed on a cyclic pattern with a linear trend of 0.0286 ppm pa per annum. The sequence of maxima and minima match that for the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index (Ref.2) shown in Figure 3.
In order to illustrate the correlation between the two series, Figure 4 shows the detrended Mauna Loa annual rate of change of CO 2 concentration, after smoothing with a low pass filter, overlain on the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index, both covering the same 61 year period.
In considering the relationship between the two series it is necessary to be aware that the Mauna Loa rate of change was derived from a weekly series of measurements taken at a single point on the globe.
The Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index is the anomaly in the sea surface temperature relative to a 30 year average over the Equatorial zone between latitudes 5° South to 5° North and longitudes 120° West to 170° West, an area of the central Pacific Ocean of 6,568,670 square kilometres. The Mauna Loa Observatory is 2,450 km from the centre of the Ninõ 3.4 area, on a bearing of 27.5° East of North.
As has been demonstrated in earlier studies of CO 2 data on www.climateauditor.com, their seasonal variation arose from biological sources in response to the associated temperature change. Likewise the close correlation between the Mauna Loa CO 2 rate of change and the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index, as shown by the coincidence of the major maxima in Figure 4, is attributed to a biological response to the major, world-wide climate event depicted by the Niño 3.4 Index.
There is a marked negative correlation in the centre of the graph annotated by ‘↑’ corresponding to the major volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines on 12 June 1991 which significantly altered the relationship between the rate of change of CO 2 and the Oceanic Niño 3.4 Index. The eruption caused an unexplained phenomenon whereby the rate of change of CO 2 dropped to a minimum as the sea surface temperatures reached a local maximum. The Mauna Loa Observatory is 8859 km on a bearing of 72.4°East of North from Mount Pinatubo.
Autocorrelation Function:
More detail of the source of variation in the CO 2 annual rate of change is shown by its autocorrelation function illustrated in Figure 5. It reveals a clear cyclic pattern based on the El Niño event as shown in the accompanying table listing the correlation maxima, Table 1.
The average from Table 1, column 4, adjusted for the multiple expressions of the El Niño event was 1313 days. The event clearly dominates the CO 2 annual rate of change indicating that this major climate event together with the seasonal weather pattern determines the rate of generation of CO 2 in the Equatorial region.
This confirms the earlier proposition that the temperature level determines the rate of change of CO 2 concentration seen in the monthly data for Cape Grim and Macquarie Island stations and Mt Waliguan Observatory described in the analysis of data from each site as reported in the pages of: https://www.climateauditor.com .
Discrete Fourier Transform:
Figure 6 shows the amplitude spectrum from the Discrete Fourier Transform of the interpolated time series for the annual rate of change of the CO2 concentration padded with zeros at each end to give of length of 4096 values.
The amplitude scale was clipped to better display the higher frequency, shorter wavelength events so it excludes the maximum of 9.4 at x-coordinate 22, equivalent to a period of 1308 days, which dominated the autocorrelation function. That is the maximum predicted to represent the response to the El Niño event already seen in the autocorrelation function.
Figure 6. DFT Amplitude spectrum of the annual rate of change of CO 2 concentration.
There is a multitude of local maxima in the Amplitude spectrum some of which have been assigned possible sources from the known synodic periods of the Moon and planets within the Solar System, being the time interval between instances of the Sun, Earth and a planet being in alignment. Average values for these periods have been taken from the publicly available literature but may change with time.
The periods drift due to the ever-changing configuration of the Solar System and this may contribute to a broadening of the spectral responses. There are other periodic events, such as changes in the ellipticity of the orbits which have not been taken into account in this study.
A list of possible sources is shown in Table 2 for a selection of the peaks in the DFT amplitude spectrum. They are listed by the coordinate on the x axis, in cycles per 4096 weeks, and the amplitude of response with period in years and days for ease of reference to orbital periods of the Moon and planets, e.g. x-coord 2 is 2 cycles in 4096 weeks which is one cycle in 2048 weeks which is a period of 39.38 years or 14,385 days.
Some of these may also relate to the periodicities resulting from the Short-term orbital forcing described in Cionco, R. G., and Soon,W. W.-H.[ Ref. 3 ].
Conclusion:
The major influence on the rate of generation of atmospheric CO 2 in the Equatorial zone has been the El Niño event, that is, climate change causing a change in the rate of generation of CO 2 , the complete opposite to the UN IPCC claim that CO 2 causes climate change. As far as is known, no physical process has been proposed whereby the CO 2 change could cause an El Niño event.
Furthermore, it is notable that both the synodic and draconic periods of the Moon are apparent throughout the 62-year weekly series. An explanation for the synodic period is that each New Moon reduces the incoming Sun’s radiation to the Earth and its atmosphere as it passes between the Sun and the Earth. Similar temperature minima must occur when Mercury and/or Venus pass between the Sun and the Earth.
The draconic period is due to the Moon’s elliptical plane being at an angle of 5.14° to the Earth’s elliptic relative to the Sun. As a result, when the Moon passes through one of the two nodal points, where the Moon’s ellipse intersects the Earth’s elliptic, it has the greatest influence in diminishing the irradiation of the Earth which, in turn, reduces the Earth’s surface temperature thereby causing a response in the rate of generation of CO 2 .
Except during a Solar eclipse when the drop in temperature is marked, the passing of the Moon through its nodal points may only causes a minor drop in temperature. Despite this, there is a measurable effect on the rate of change of CO 2 concentration apparent in the amplitude spectrum implying a significant sensitivity between temperature and CO 2 rate of change. This action appears to have been completely overlooked by the UN IPCC in their assessment of the forces generating the Earth’s climate.
As a number of the spectral maxima approximately correspond with the synodic periods of the Moon and the planets, the results are interpreted as showing that the Sun’s irradiance of the Earth is modulated by the movement of the Moon and planets. This must cause corresponding changes in the Earth’s atmospheric temperature which, in turn, has caused changes in the CO 2 concentration. This is contrary to the never-proven claim by the UN IPCC that increased CO 2 concentration causes an increase in the Earth’s atmospheric temperature.
References:
File: weekly_in_situ_co2_mlo.csv
Oceanic Nino Index, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/detrend.nino34.ascii.txt Cionco and Soon, Short-term orbital forcing: A quasi-review and a reappraisal of realistic boundary conditions for climate modeling, Earth-Science Reviews 166 (2017) 206-222, Elsevier B.V.
About the author: Bevan Dockery, B.Sc.(Hons), Grad. Dip. Computing, retired geophysicist, formerly: Fellow of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists, Member of the Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Member of the Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Member of the European Association of Exploration Geophysicists, Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--Assassination Link to China Spies in Canada BioLab?

As the CBC Canada report on the grave incident of a Chinese spy caught pilfering secret virus research from a top Canadian lab some observers see possible link with the strange assassination of a top Canadian bio expert in Africa earlier this year .
Earlier today we reported ‘ Chinese Spy Caught In Canadian BioLab Stealing Deadly Viruses !
’ and it begs the question : is there is a link to events below ?
In February 2020 in a story titled , ‘ Frank Plummer – Canadian Scientist Key To Coronavirus Investigation Assassinated In Africa ?
’ Greatgameindia.com reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received Saudi SARS Coronavirus sample and was working on Coronavirus ( HIV ) vaccine , died “ in mysterious conditions ” in Kenya .
“ According to CBC , Plummer , 67 , was in Kenya , where he was a keynote speaker at the annual meeting of the University of Nairobi ’ s collaborative centre for research and training in HIV/AIDS/STIs .
Dr. Larry Gelmon , who helped set up that meeting , said Plummer collapsed and was taken to hospital in Nairobi , where he was pronounced dead on arrival .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ been released.
” What is not mentioned in the CBC report however is that Plummer worked in the same National Microbiology Laboratory ( NML ) in Winnipeg , Canada from where Chinese Biowarfare agent Xiangguo Qiu and her colleagues smuggled SARS Coronavirus to China ’ s Wuhan Institute of Virology where it is believed to have been weaponized and leaked .
Infact , as GreatGameIndia reported in our exclusive report on Coronavirus Bioweapon , as Scientific Director Frank Plummer was the one who acquired the SARS Coronavirus sample of the Saudi patient at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a leading virologist at the Erasmus Medical Center ( EMC ) in Rotterdam , the Netherlands who was sent the virus by Egyptian virologist Dr. Ali Mohamed Zaki who isolated and identified a previously unknown type of Coronavirus from the Saudi patient ’ s lungs .
Fouchier sequenced the virus from a sample sent by Zaki using a broad-spectrum “ pan-coronavirus ” real-time polymerase chain reaction ( RT-PCR ) method to test for distinguishing features of a number of known coronaviruses known to infect humans .
In a bizarre coincidence ( or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 , 2020 ) now reports that an ‘ NIH Investigation Reveals China Paid U.S. Biomedical Scientists Millions in Grants on the Down Low.
’ In what is increasingly seen as fullscale biomedical espionage by China for some time , these events have culminated this month in the resignation or firing of over 50 scientists who had taken grant money for their work from China — and failed to disclose that funding .
A new report from Science Magazine indicates that 189 scientists at 87 institutions were initially targeted and the data , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s head of extramural research , as “ sobering , ” is just that .
In the vast majority of cases , Lauer reported , the person being investigated has been an Asian man in his 50s .
Some three-quarters of those under investigation had active NIH grants , and nearly half had at least two grants .
The 285 active grants totaled $ 164 million .
Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered .
Some 70 % ( 133 ) of the researchers had failed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a foreign grant , and 54 % had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program .
In contrast , Lauer said , only 9 % hid ties to a foreign company , and only 4 % had an undisclosed foreign patent .
Some 5 % of cases involved a violation of NIH ’ s peer-review system .
We will keep readers updated as and when further reports are made public .
About the author : John O ’ Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder ( with Dr Tim Ball ) of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert , Michael ‘ hockey stick ’ Mann in the ‘ science trial of the century ‘ .
O ’ Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘ Slayers ’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world ’ s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Assassination Link to China Spies in Canada BioLab?
Written by John O'Sullivan
As the CBC Canada report on the grave incident of a Chinese spy caught pilfering secret virus research from a top Canadian lab some observers see possible link with the strange assassination of a top Canadian bio expert in Africa earlier this year.
Earlier today we reported ‘Chinese Spy Caught In Canadian BioLab Stealing Deadly Viruses!’ and it begs the question: is there is a link to events below?
In February 2020 in a story titled, ‘Frank Plummer – Canadian Scientist Key To Coronavirus Investigation Assassinated In Africa?’ Greatgameindia.com reported that renowned scientist Frank Plummer, who received Saudi SARS Coronavirus sample and was working on Coronavirus (HIV) vaccine, died “in mysterious conditions” in Kenya.
“According to CBC, Plummer, 67, was in Kenya, where he was a keynote speaker at the annual meeting of the University of Nairobi’s collaborative centre for research and training in HIV/AIDS/STIs. Dr. Larry Gelmon, who helped set up that meeting, said Plummer collapsed and was taken to hospital in Nairobi, where he was pronounced dead on arrival. No confirmed cause of death has yet been released.”
What is not mentioned in the CBC report however is that Plummer worked in the same National Microbiology Laboratory (NML) in Winnipeg, Canada from where Chinese Biowarfare agent Xiangguo Qiu and her colleagues smuggled SARS Coronavirus to China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology where it is believed to have been weaponized and leaked.
Infact, as GreatGameIndia reported in our exclusive report on Coronavirus Bioweapon, as Scientific Director Frank Plummer was the one who acquired the SARS Coronavirus sample of the Saudi patient at the NML Winnipeg Lab from Ron Fouchier, a leading virologist at the Erasmus Medical Center (EMC) in Rotterdam, the Netherlands who was sent the virus by Egyptian virologist Dr. Ali Mohamed Zaki who isolated and identified a previously unknown type of Coronavirus from the Saudi patient’s lungs.
Fouchier sequenced the virus from a sample sent by Zaki using a broad-spectrum “pan-coronavirus” real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) method to test for distinguishing features of a number of known coronaviruses known to infect humans.
In a bizarre coincidence (or maybe not!) www.redstate.com (June 15, 2020) now reports that an ‘NIH Investigation Reveals China Paid U.S. Biomedical Scientists Millions in Grants on the Down Low.’
redstate.com reports:
“About a month ago, U.S. officials began warning American pharmaceutical companies frantically searching for a COVID-19 vaccine to be on alert that China may try to steal their research.”
In what is increasingly seen as fullscale biomedical espionage by China for some time, these events have culminated this month in the resignation or firing of over 50 scientists who had taken grant money for their work from China — and failed to disclose that funding.
A new report from Science Magazine indicates that 189 scientists at 87 institutions were initially targeted and the data, described by Michael Lauer, NIH’s head of extramural research, as “sobering,” is just that.
In the vast majority of cases, Lauer reported, the person being investigated has been an Asian man in his 50s. Some three-quarters of those under investigation had active NIH grants, and nearly half had at least two grants. The 285 active grants totaled $164 million. Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered. Some 70{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} had an undisclosed foreign patent. Some 5{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of cases involved a violation of NIH’s peer-review system.
We will keep readers updated as and when further reports are made public.
About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--Chinese Spy Caught in Canadian BioLab Stealing Deadly Viruses!

A Chinese scientist who was escorted out of Canada ’ s only level-4 biolab over a possible “ policy breach ” shipped deadly Ebola and Henipah viruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology , according to the CBC , citing newly-released documents .
The shipment is not related to COVID-19 or the pandemic .
Dr. Xiangguo Qiu , her husband Keding Cheng and her Chinese students were removed from the Canadian lab after the Public Health Agency of Canada ( PHAC ) asked the RCMP to investigate several months earlier .
According to PHAC , Qiu ’ s eviction from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shipment .
“ It is suspicious .
It is alarming .
It is potentially life-threatening , ” said University of Ottawa law professor and epidemiologist , Amir Attaran .
While Canada doesn ’ t do ‘ gain-of-function ’ experiments – which are where natural pathogens are mutated in a lab and assessed to see if it has become more deadly or infectious , “ The Wuhan lab does them and we have now supplied them with Ebola and Nipah viruses .
It does not take a genius to understand that this is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I am extremely unhappy to see that the Canadian government shared that genetic material.
” Attaran pointed to an Ebola study first published in December 2018 , three months after Qiu began the process of exporting the viruses to China .
The study involved researchers from the NML and University of Manitoba .
The lead author , Hualei Wang , is involved with the , a Chinese military medical research institute in Beijing .
All of this has led to conspiracy theories linking the novel coronavirus responsible for COVID-19 , Canada ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Wuhan .
–CBC The documents also shed light on communications from the months leading up to the shipment – including confusion on how to package the viruses , along with a lack of decontamination of the package prior to its shipment , as well as concerns expressed by NML Director-General Matthew Gilmour to his superiors in Ottawa – particularly over where the package was going , what was in it , and whether its paperwork was in order .
In one email , Gilmour said Material Transfer Agreements would be required , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the storage and usage.
” He also asked David Safronetz , chief of special pathogens : “ Good to know that you trust this group .
How did we get connected with them ?
” Safronetz replied : “ They are requesting material from us due to collaboration with Dr. Qiu.
” –CBC According to the report , the shipper of the viruses had originally planned to use inappropriate packaging , and only corrected the mistake when the WIV flagged the issue .
“ The only reason the correct packaging was used is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , ‘ Aren ’ t you making a mistake here ?
’ If that had not happened , the scientists would have placed on an Air Canada flight , several of them actually , a deadly virus incorrectly packaged .
That nearly happened , ” said Attaran .
Read the rest of the report here .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Chinese Spy Caught in Canadian BioLab Stealing Deadly Viruses!
Written by Karen Pauls · CBC News
A Chinese scientist who was escorted out of Canada’s only level-4 biolab over a possible “policy breach” shipped deadly Ebola and Henipah viruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, according to the CBC, citing newly-released documents.
The shipment is not related to COVID-19 or the pandemic.
Dr. Xiangguo Qiu, her husband Keding Cheng and her Chinese students were removed from the Canadian lab after the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) asked the RCMP to investigate several months earlier. According to PHAC, Qiu’s eviction from the lab is not connected to the shipment.
“It is suspicious. It is alarming. It is potentially life-threatening,” said University of Ottawa law professor and epidemiologist, Amir Attaran.
Amir Attaran, professor in the Faculty of Law and the School of Epidemiology and Public Health at the University of Ottawa, is concerned about the shipment of dangerous viruses sent from Canada’s only level-4 lab to China. (CBC)
While Canada doesn’t do ‘gain-of-function’ experiments – which are where natural pathogens are mutated in a lab and assessed to see if it has become more deadly or infectious, “The Wuhan lab does them and we have now supplied them with Ebola and Nipah viruses. It does not take a genius to understand that this is an unwise decision,” said Attaran.
“I am extremely unhappy to see that the Canadian government shared that genetic material.”
Attaran pointed to an Ebola study first published in December 2018, three months after Qiu began the process of exporting the viruses to China. The study involved researchers from the NML and University of Manitoba. The lead author, Hualei Wang, is involved with the Academy of Military Medical Sciences , a Chinese military medical research institute in Beijing. All of this has led to conspiracy theories linking the novel coronavirus responsible for COVID-19, Canada’s microbiology lab, and the lab in Wuhan. –CBC
The documents also shed light on communications from the months leading up to the shipment – including confusion on how to package the viruses, along with a lack of decontamination of the package prior to its shipment, as well as concerns expressed by NML Director-General Matthew Gilmour to his superiors in Ottawa – particularly over where the package was going, what was in it, and whether its paperwork was in order.
CBC News received hundreds of pages of documents through an Access to Information request, detailing a shipment of Ebola and Henipah viruses sent from the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg, to the Wuhan virology lab in China. (Karen Pauls/CBC News)
In one email, Gilmour said Material Transfer Agreements would be required, “not generic ‘guarantees’ on the storage and usage.” He also asked David Safronetz, chief of special pathogens: “Good to know that you trust this group. How did we get connected with them?” Safronetz replied: “They are requesting material from us due to collaboration with Dr. Qiu.” –CBC
According to the report, the shipper of the viruses had originally planned to use inappropriate packaging, and only corrected the mistake when the WIV flagged the issue.
“The only reason the correct packaging was used is because the Chinese wrote to them and said, ‘Aren’t you making a mistake here?’ If that had not happened, the scientists would have placed on an Air Canada flight, several of them actually, a deadly virus incorrectly packaged. That nearly happened,” said Attaran.
Read the rest of the report here.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--COLDER Greenland GAINS Ice in June – Media Silent

The month of June is breaking records across the Greenland ice sheet , and not records for warmth and melt –as the mainstream media have trained you to expect– but new benchmarks for COLD and GAINS .
The SMB gains occurring right now across Greenland are truly astonishing .
Data-driven FACTS reveal vast regions to the south have been GAINING RECORD/NEAR-RECORD LEVELS of snow & ice all month .
Never before in June has the Greenland ice sheet grown by more than 4 Gigatons in a single day ( since 1981 when DMI records began ) , but now the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such days — June 3 , and now yesterday , June 10 .
In fact , yesterday ’ s gains actually neared 5 Gts — you can see from the chart below how anomalous that gain is for the time of year : Greenland ’ s SMB should be turning negative in mid-June , on a typical year the island should have started losing snow and ice by now — yet it ’ s currently seeing gains that would be above the norm for any other time of the year , even the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funny is how quick the MSM was to call the beginning of the melt season back at the end of May .
They jumped the gun and once again successfully fooled the public into thinking the end was still nigh ( as it apparently has been for the past 30+ years ) .
Greenland ’ s latest readings leave these rags with serious egg on their faces–although I ’ m not holding my breath for any retractions… In addition , this picture of anomalous cold and snow has been the story ACROSS the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America is holding onto what was a record-busting year for snowpack , even as it now approaches summer : While the Northern Hemisphere as a whole also just witnessed one of its snowiest winters on record , according to the Finish Meteorological Institute : This is how GLACIERS build .
This is also how ICE AGES begin .
The COLD TIMES are returning in line with historically low solar activity , cloud-nucleating Cosmic Rays , and meridional jet streamflow .
Even NASA agrees , in part at least , with their forecast for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeing it as “ the weakest of the past 200 years , ” with the agency correlating previous solar shutdowns to prolonged periods of global cooling here .
Don ’ t fall for bogus , warm-mongering political agendas — prepare for the COLD — learn the facts , relocate if need be , and grow your own .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

COLDER Greenland GAINS Ice in June – Media Silent
Written by Cap Allon
The month of June is breaking records across the Greenland ice sheet, and not records for warmth and melt –as the mainstream media have trained you to expect– but new benchmarks for COLD and GAINS.
The SMB gains occurring right now across Greenland are truly astonishing.
Data-driven FACTS reveal vast regions to the south have been GAINING RECORD/NEAR-RECORD LEVELS of snow & ice all month.
Never before in June has the Greenland ice sheet grown by more than 4 Gigatons in a single day (since 1981 when DMI records began), but now the past week has gone and delivered two such days — June 3, and now yesterday, June 10.
In fact, yesterday’s gains actually neared 5 Gts — you can see from the chart below how anomalous that gain is for the time of year:
Greenland’s SMB should be turning negative in mid-June, on a typical year the island should have started losing snow and ice by now — yet it’s currently seeing gains that would be above the norm for any other time of the year, even the depths of winter.
What’s funny is how quick the MSM was to call the beginning of the melt season back at the end of May. They jumped the gun and once again successfully fooled the public into thinking the end was still nigh (as it apparently has been for the past 30+ years).
Greenland’s latest readings leave these rags with serious egg on their faces–although I’m not holding my breath for any retractions…
In addition, this picture of anomalous cold and snow has been the story ACROSS the entire Northern Hemisphere ALL season.
North America is holding onto what was a record-busting year for snowpack, even as it now approaches summer:
While the Northern Hemisphere as a whole also just witnessed one of its snowiest winters on record, according to the Finish Meteorological Institute:
This is how GLACIERS build.
This is also how ICE AGES begin.
The COLD TIMES are returning in line with historically low solar activity, cloud-nucleating Cosmic Rays, and meridional jet streamflow.
Even NASA agrees, in part at least, with their forecast for this upcoming solar cycle (25) seeing it as “the weakest of the past 200 years,” with the agency correlating previous solar shutdowns to prolonged periods of global cooling here.
Don’t fall for bogus, warm-mongering political agendas — prepare for the COLD — learn the facts, relocate if need be, and grow your own.
Read rest at ElectroVerse
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--The UN IPCC’s core climate hypothesis is dead

Below are the first two sections of the Introduction to my definitive paper on why IPCC ’ s core hypothesis is invalid .
All the math and physics are done , but I am expanding the Introduction because too many people with PhD degrees still get confused .
They don ’ t understand the basics of science because they have little or no background in the philosophy of science and logic .
But this is really simple stuff that we can teach to high school kids .
– Ed The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims on its core hypothesis .
This hypothesis has three parts : • Human carbon emissions caused all the CO2 increase above 280 ppm .
IPCC claims its core hypothesis is true and concludes without scientific validation : The truth is IPCC ’ s “ high level of confidence ” vanishes because it assumes incorrectly that IPCC ’ s core hypothesis is true .
1.2 What this paper does Simple observation of IPCC ’ s report [ 1 ] shows IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle does not agree with its natural carbon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 6.1 shows something is wrong with IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle .
To test the above observation , this paper derives a “ Physics ” carbon cycle model that uses only one simple hypothesis : This hypothesis is used in many scientific and engineering models .
Even IPCC uses this hypothesis in several places .
It is the simplest possible hypothesis for carbon cycle models .
This simple hypothesis is compatible with all applicable physical and chemical laws .
This simple hypothesis shows it is possible and preferable to calculate the natural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results of the separate calculations can be added together to produce the total carbon cycle .
IPCC ’ s carbon cycle model has four key reservoirs : land , atmosphere , surface ocean , and deep ocean .
IPCC ’ s data show carbon levels for each reservoir and the flows between the reservoirs for both natural and human carbon cycles .
IPCC ’ s data for its natural carbon cycle is not perfect but it may be the best data we have .
IPCC says its natural carbon cycle data is good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paper calculates the six e-times for IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle data by simply dividing levels by their outflows .
Why six ?
Because the atmosphere and surface ocean have two outflows while the land and deep ocean have only one .
With these six e-times , the Physics carbon cycle model is complete , and it exactly replicates IPCC ’ s data for its natural carbon cycle .
Then this paper calculates the human carbon cycle model .
This model begins with all reservoirs empty and inserts IPCC ’ s data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ atmosphere .
In each model year , the Physics model lets human carbon flow between the reservoirs according the e-times defined by IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle .
This simple calculation shows the “ true ” human carbon cycle because it requires human carbon to obey the same physical rules as IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle .
However , this “ true ” human carbon cycle differs significantly from IPCC ’ s claimed human carbon cycle .
The fact that IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle is significantly different from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle – proves IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle is invalid .
IPCC treats human and natural carbon differently , which is unphysical .
Inspection of IPCC ’ s data shows IPCC did NOT derive its human carbon cycle from its data for the natural carbon cycle or from any data at all .
IPCC forced its human carbon cycle to match its core hypothesis without any consideration of IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle data .
Therefore , IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle has no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle is a fraud .
This conclusion is independent of whether IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle or the Physics natural carbon cycle properly represent the unknown true natural carbon cycle .
All models are approximations to reality .
All that matters here is that the Physics model properly represents IPCC ’ s natural carbon cycle .
Therefore , the Physics model properly calculates IPCC ’ s true human carbon cycle .
This is sufficient to prove IPCC ’ s human carbon cycle is a fraud and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
All three parts of IPCC ’ s core hypothesis listed in Section 1.1 are false .
There is no other testable hypothesis to replace IPCC ’ s failed core hypothesis .
The political implications of IPCC ’ s scientific fraud are significant .
IPCC told the world that its human carbon cycle was valid .
IPCC ’ s fraud negates all its claims about human-caused climate change .
IPCC ’ s fraud negates all IPCC ’ s so-called scientific papers that incorrectly assume IPCC ’ s core hypothesis is true .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Henceforth , no true scientist can claim or assume that natural carbon emissions stayed constant after 1750 and human carbon emissions caused all the increase in atmospheric CO2 above 280 ppm .
About the author : Dr. Edwin X Berry is a physicist , a Certified Consulting Meteorologist ( CCM ) by the American Meteorological Society ( AMS ) , and CEO of Climate Physics , LLC .
His expertise is in atmospheric physics , climate physics , numerical models , and the philosophy of science .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

The UN IPCC’s core climate hypothesis is dead
Written by Ed Berry, PhD, Atmospheric Physics, CCM
Below are the first two sections of the Introduction to my definitive paper on why IPCC’s core hypothesis is invalid. All the math and physics are done, but I am expanding the Introduction because too many people with PhD degrees still get confused.
They don’t understand the basics of science because they have little or no background in the philosophy of science and logic. But this is really simple stuff that we can teach to high school kids. – Ed
by Ed Berry, PhD, Atmospheric Physics, CCM
1. Introduction
1.1 IPCC’s claims are based on invalid hypothesis
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [1] bases all its climate claims on its core hypothesis. This hypothesis has three parts:
Natural carbon emissions remained constant after 1750. Natural carbon emissions support a CO2 level of 280 ppm. Human carbon emissions caused all the CO2 increase above 280 ppm.
IPCC claims its core hypothesis is true and concludes without scientific validation:
“With a very high level of confidence, the increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning and those arising from land use change are the dominant cause of the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.”
“The removal of human-emitted CO2 from the atmosphere by natural processes will take a few hundred thousand years (high confidence).”
The truth is IPCC’s “high level of confidence” vanishes because it assumes incorrectly that IPCC’s core hypothesis is true.
1.2 What this paper does
Simple observation of IPCC’s report [1] shows IPCC’s human carbon cycle does not agree with its natural carbon cycle. IPCC’s own Figure 6.1 shows something is wrong with IPCC’s human carbon cycle.
To test the above observation, this paper derives a “Physics” carbon cycle model that uses only one simple hypothesis:
Outflow equals level divided by response time, herein called e-time.
This hypothesis is used in many scientific and engineering models. Even IPCC uses this hypothesis in several places. It is the simplest possible hypothesis for carbon cycle models.
This simple hypothesis is compatible with all applicable physical and chemical laws. This simple hypothesis shows it is possible and preferable to calculate the natural and human carbon cycles separately. The results of the separate calculations can be added together to produce the total carbon cycle.
IPCC’s carbon cycle model has four key reservoirs: land, atmosphere, surface ocean, and deep ocean. IPCC’s data show carbon levels for each reservoir and the flows between the reservoirs for both natural and human carbon cycles. IPCC’s data for its natural carbon cycle is not perfect but it may be the best data we have. IPCC says its natural carbon cycle data is good to about 20 percent accuracy.
This paper calculates the six e-times for IPCC’s natural carbon cycle data by simply dividing levels by their outflows. Why six? Because the atmosphere and surface ocean have two outflows while the land and deep ocean have only one. With these six e-times, the Physics carbon cycle model is complete, and it exactly replicates IPCC’s data for its natural carbon cycle.
Then this paper calculates the human carbon cycle model. This model begins with all reservoirs empty and inserts IPCC’s data for annual human carbon emissions into the atmosphere. In each model year, the Physics model lets human carbon flow between the reservoirs according the e-times defined by IPCC’s natural carbon cycle.
This simple calculation shows the “true” human carbon cycle because it requires human carbon to obey the same physical rules as IPCC’s natural carbon cycle. However, this “true” human carbon cycle differs significantly from IPCC’s claimed human carbon cycle.
The fact that IPCC’s human carbon cycle is significantly different from the true human carbon cycle – that corresponds to IPCC’s natural carbon cycle – proves IPCC’s human carbon cycle is invalid. IPCC treats human and natural carbon differently, which is unphysical.
Inspection of IPCC’s data shows IPCC did NOT derive its human carbon cycle from its data for the natural carbon cycle or from any data at all. IPCC forced its human carbon cycle to match its core hypothesis without any consideration of IPCC’s natural carbon cycle data.
Therefore, IPCC’s human carbon cycle has no basis in science. Put politely, IPCC’s human carbon cycle is a fraud.
This conclusion is independent of whether IPCC’s natural carbon cycle or the Physics natural carbon cycle properly represent the unknown true natural carbon cycle. All models are approximations to reality.
All that matters here is that the Physics model properly represents IPCC’s natural carbon cycle. Therefore, the Physics model properly calculates IPCC’s true human carbon cycle. This is sufficient to prove IPCC’s human carbon cycle is a fraud and that IPCC’s core hypothesis is false.
All three parts of IPCC’s core hypothesis listed in Section 1.1 are false. There is no other testable hypothesis to replace IPCC’s failed core hypothesis.
The political implications of IPCC’s scientific fraud are significant. IPCC told the world that its human carbon cycle was valid. IPCC’s fraud negates all its claims about human-caused climate change. IPCC’s fraud negates all IPCC’s so-called scientific papers that incorrectly assume IPCC’s core hypothesis is true. All such “scientific” papers are wrong.
Henceforth, no true scientist can claim or assume that natural carbon emissions stayed constant after 1750 and human carbon emissions caused all the increase in atmospheric CO2 above 280 ppm.
Reference
IPCC. 2013. Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles. Fig. 6.1, p 471. CrossRef
Read more at edberry.com
About the author: Dr. Edwin X Berry is a physicist, a Certified Consulting Meteorologist (CCM) by the American Meteorological Society (AMS), and CEO of Climate Physics, LLC. His expertise is in atmospheric physics, climate physics, numerical models, and the philosophy of science.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--Hydroxychloroquine Farce Has Tragic Consequences

“ Follow the science ” — these are reassuring words in a pandemic like Covid-19 , when widespread fear of a deadly virus can be exploited by unscrupulous politicians , snake-oil salesmen and cranks .
Public trust in scientists has risen recently .
But we may be hitting the limits of this trust , just as many countries enter the crucial phase of reopening their economies with a raft of new social-distancing measures meant to ward off a second wave of infections .
We ’ ve seen several confusing U-turns and unresolved debates on issues such as the effectiveness of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schools .
Faith in authority is ebbing globally , even in high-trust countries like Sweden , where a famously hands-off approach to lockdown is spreading ripples of doubt .
And now the messy rush to find a treatment that works — even if it means throwing long-standing scientific standards out of the window — is veering from farce to tragedy .
Last week , highly respected and peer-reviewed journal The Lancet retracted a bombshell study that suggested hydroxychloroquine , a contested potential treatment for Covid-19 , was linked to an increased risk of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scale of the retrospective analysis , drawn from more than 96,000 patients in 671 hospitals , had been enough to convince institutions running several global trials of the drug ( including the World Health Organization ) to slam on the brakes .
Only afterward did odd inconsistencies in the data , such as an inflated number of victims in Australia , lead to questions about how exactly its provider , Surgisphere Corp. , had compiled it .
A lack of convincing answers — flagged by the paper ’ s own co-authors — led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other journals have subsequently been retracted .
This kind of embarrassment is nothing new , even for The Lancet , which in 2010 retracted a paper linking autism to vaccines — 12 years after it was first published .
We should be thankful this case was dealt with quickly .
But the damage can ’ t be undone .
Yet more precious time studying potential treatments for Covid-19 has been lost , and the retraction played into the hands of conspiracy theorists who promote the unsubstantiated idea that special interests want hydroxychloroquine , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running .
( The drug ’ s top supporter , French scientist Didier Raoult , used the hashtag “ # LancetGate ” on social media . )
Surgisphere has defended its approach to consolidating medical records using artificial intelligence and machine learning , according to Bloomberg News , and says it ’ s not responsible for the source data .
This is a wake-up call for how the public , the media and the scientific community evaluate research , even the gold standard of peer-reviewed papers .
In theory , it should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journals , which ask relevant experts to confidentially review papers ahead of publication .
But , in practice , there are problems .
Over the years , researchers have pointed to a lack of consistency and objectivity in responses by peers ; a 2012 study found that when papers have been retracted there was often some kind of misconduct involved , including suspected or confirmed fraud .
The lack of credit and scientific glory involved in reviewing a paper , along with the knowledge that other people will analyze the study too , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Hydroxychloroquine Farce Has Tragic Consequences
Written by Lionel Laurent
“Follow the science” — these are reassuring words in a pandemic like Covid-19, when widespread fear of a deadly virus can be exploited by unscrupulous politicians, snake-oil salesmen and cranks. Public trust in scientists has risen recently.
But we may be hitting the limits of this trust, just as many countries enter the crucial phase of reopening their economies with a raft of new social-distancing measures meant to ward off a second wave of infections. We’ve seen several confusing U-turns and unresolved debates on issues such as the effectiveness of cloth masks or the risks of reopening schools.
Faith in authority is ebbing globally, even in high-trust countries like Sweden, where a famously hands-off approach to lockdown is spreading ripples of doubt. And now the messy rush to find a treatment that works — even if it means throwing long-standing scientific standards out of the window — is veering from farce to tragedy.
Last week, highly respected and peer-reviewed journal The Lancet retracted a bombshell study that suggested hydroxychloroquine, a contested potential treatment for Covid-19, was linked to an increased risk of death and heart ailments.
The sheer scale of the retrospective analysis, drawn from more than 96,000 patients in 671 hospitals, had been enough to convince institutions running several global trials of the drug (including the World Health Organization) to slam on the brakes. Only afterward did odd inconsistencies in the data, such as an inflated number of victims in Australia, lead to questions about how exactly its provider, Surgisphere Corp., had compiled it.
A lack of convincing answers — flagged by the paper’s own co-authors — led to the retraction. Other studies in other journals have subsequently been retracted.
This kind of embarrassment is nothing new, even for The Lancet, which in 2010 retracted a paper linking autism to vaccines — 12 years after it was first published. We should be thankful this case was dealt with quickly.
But the damage can’t be undone. Yet more precious time studying potential treatments for Covid-19 has been lost, and the retraction played into the hands of conspiracy theorists who promote the unsubstantiated idea that special interests want hydroxychloroquine, a generic drug, out of the running. (The drug’s top supporter, French scientist Didier Raoult, used the hashtag “#LancetGate” on social media.)
Surgisphere has defended its approach to consolidating medical records using artificial intelligence and machine learning, according to Bloomberg News, and says it’s not responsible for the source data.
This is a wake-up call for how the public, the media and the scientific community evaluate research, even the gold standard of peer-reviewed papers. In theory, it should be hard to game the system that underpins journals, which ask relevant experts to confidentially review papers ahead of publication. But, in practice, there are problems.
Over the years, researchers have pointed to a lack of consistency and objectivity in responses by peers; a 2012 study found that when papers have been retracted there was often some kind of misconduct involved, including suspected or confirmed fraud. The lack of credit and scientific glory involved in reviewing a paper, along with the knowledge that other people will analyze the study too, might be hurting the quality of gate-keeping.
For the full article visit bloomberg.com/opinion
****
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--Public trust in scientists damaged by Covid-19 Fiasco

A paper , Revenge of the Experts : Will Covid-19 Renew or Diminish Public Trust in Science ?
, examined how exposure to previous epidemics affected individuals ’ levels of confidence in science and scientists , focusing on those who experienced an epidemic outbreak in their country of residence while they were in their “ impressionable years ” between age 18 and 25 .
It found that such exposure had no impact on people ’ s views of the value of science as an endeavour .
However , it significantly reduced their confidence in scientists and the benefits of scientists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In particular , they were less confident about the trustworthiness and public-spiritedness of scientists .
The declining level of trust in scientists was driven by the sample of individuals with little or no science education , according to the authors , Cevat Giray Aksoy , lecturer in economics at King ’ s College London ; Barry Eichengreen , professor of economic and political science at the University of California , Berkeley ; and Orkun Saka , lecturer in finance at the University of Sussex .
The paper adds that the epidemic exposure effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not have a negative impact on the perception of other public health professionals , such as doctors , nurses , NGO workers or traditional healers .
Furthermore , there is no such association for individuals who experienced an epidemic outbreak in their country before or after their formative years .
The study combined data from the Wellcome Trust ’ s 2018 Global Monitor survey , which includes responses to questions about confidence in science and scientists from more than 70,000 individuals in 160 countries , with data on all global epidemics since 1970 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on public health should “ think harder about how to communicate trustworthiness and honesty and , specifically , about how the generation currently in their impressionable years perceives such attributes ” .
Dr Aksoy said the findings reveal that there is “ a divide between what scientists do and…the perception in the public ” .
“ Previous research shows that the communicator ’ s credibility and perceived expertise are key in scientific communication and gaining public trust .
At a time of an epidemic , scientists are called to address the public ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , if scientists fail to explain their findings clearly and concisely and fail to inspire trust in public , people will probably see them as elitists or inaccessible , ” he said .
Dr Aksoy added that governments ’ attitudes towards scientists were also “ really important ” .
“ If politicians use science as a facade of authority and as a scapegoat , the public will eventually blame scientists for not being able to deal with the problem in an effective manner , ” he said .
A separate survey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the proportion of Germans who said they trusted science and research “ wholeheartedly ” shot up to 36 per cent in mid-April , four times the share recorded in the same survey in 2019 .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Public trust in scientists damaged by Covid-19 Fiasco
Written by Ellie Bothwell
A paper, Revenge of the Experts: Will Covid-19 Renew or Diminish Public Trust in Science?, examined how exposure to previous epidemics affected individuals’ levels of confidence in science and scientists, focusing on those who experienced an epidemic outbreak in their country of residence while they were in their “impressionable years” between age 18 and 25.
It found that such exposure had no impact on people’s views of the value of science as an endeavour. However, it significantly reduced their confidence in scientists and the benefits of scientists’ work, the research revealed. In particular, they were less confident about the trustworthiness and public-spiritedness of scientists.
The declining level of trust in scientists was driven by the sample of individuals with little or no science education, according to the authors, Cevat Giray Aksoy, lecturer in economics at King’s College London; Barry Eichengreen, professor of economic and political science at the University of California, Berkeley; and Orkun Saka, lecturer in finance at the University of Sussex.
The paper adds that the epidemic exposure effect is specific to scientists; it does not have a negative impact on the perception of other public health professionals, such as doctors, nurses, NGO workers or traditional healers. Furthermore, there is no such association for individuals who experienced an epidemic outbreak in their country before or after their formative years.
The study combined data from the Wellcome Trust’s 2018 Global Monitor survey, which includes responses to questions about confidence in science and scientists from more than 70,000 individuals in 160 countries, with data on all global epidemics since 1970.
The authors suggest that scientists working on public health should “think harder about how to communicate trustworthiness and honesty and, specifically, about how the generation currently in their impressionable years perceives such attributes”.
Dr Aksoy said the findings reveal that there is “a divide between what scientists do and…the perception in the public”.
“Previous research shows that the communicator’s credibility and perceived expertise are key in scientific communication and gaining public trust. At a time of an epidemic, scientists are called to address the public’s concerns and advise those in charge. However, if scientists fail to explain their findings clearly and concisely and fail to inspire trust in public, people will probably see them as elitists or inaccessible,” he said.
Dr Aksoy added that governments’ attitudes towards scientists were also “really important”.
“If politicians use science as a facade of authority and as a scapegoat, the public will eventually blame scientists for not being able to deal with the problem in an effective manner,” he said.
A separate survey, published last month, found that the proportion of Germans who said they trusted science and research “wholeheartedly” shot up to 36 per cent in mid-April, four times the share recorded in the same survey in 2019.
Read more at www.timeshighereducation.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-06-15--Doctors File Lawsuit Against FDA For Misrepresenting Covid Cure

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons ( https : //aapsonline.org ) filed a lawsuit against Department of Health and Human Services and the FDA for “ irrational interference ” by the FDA with timely access to hydroxychloroquine .
Never in history have we seen such a determined effort by the scientific community and pharmaceutical industry to downplay and lie about the use of a successful drug to treat a deadly disease .
Hydroxychloroquine is the first choice in a study of 6,000 doctors treating the coronavirus .
In the field and in independent testing hydroxychloroquine displayed amazing results in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was great pushback against hydroxychloroquine for two reasons .
The first reason was because it was safe and very inexpensive .
The second reason is because Donald Trump promoted its use .
So the so-called experts went to great lengths to lie and smear the use of this drug as we have discussed previously .
Now the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons sued the FDA for its irrational interference to access of the life-saving drug .
This is a huge scandal that will be completely ignored by the biased mainstream media .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Doctors File Lawsuit Against FDA For Misrepresenting Covid Cure
Written by Jim Hoft
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (https://aapsonline.org) filed a lawsuit against Department of Health and Human Services and the FDA for “irrational interference” by the FDA with timely access to hydroxychloroquine.
Never in history have we seen such a determined effort by the scientific community and pharmaceutical industry to downplay and lie about the use of a successful drug to treat a deadly disease.
Hydroxychloroquine is the first choice in a study of 6,000 doctors treating the coronavirus.
In the field and in independent testing hydroxychloroquine displayed amazing results in treating the COVID-19 virus.
But there was great pushback against hydroxychloroquine for two reasons. The first reason was because it was safe and very inexpensive. The second reason is because Donald Trump promoted its use.
So the so-called experts went to great lengths to lie and smear the use of this drug as we have discussed previously.
Now the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons sued the FDA for its irrational interference to access of the life-saving drug.
Via Ned Nokolov.
Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. @NikolovScience On June 2 2020, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (https://aapsonline.org/ ) filed a lawsuit against Department of Health & Human Services & FDA for “irrational interference by the FDA with timely access to hydroxychloroquine…”: https://aapsonline.org/judicial/aaps-v-fda-hcq-6-2-2020.pdf … Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. @NikolovScience Why is an effective & inexpensive drug treatment of #COVID19 being suppressed by FDA?
There is one plausible answer: the successful treatment of COVID19 patients with hydroxychloroquine threatens the sale of billions of doses of a COVID19 vaccine to the World later on… 301 Twitter Ads info and privacy 175 people are talking about this
This is a huge scandal that will be completely ignored by the biased mainstream media.
Read more at www.thegatewaypundit.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related