This outline from Dr Tim Ball about the science and future of the climate/weather debate is well worth reading. The changes that are sending messages with Donald Trump cabinet selections have already created a major stir in the losing side and their compliant media. This augurs well for major changes in the way science has been bludgeoned in the last couple of decades. Where it all started:
[…] Maurice Strong set up the IPCC through the UN World Meteorological Organization (WMO). This organization is comprised of weather bureaucrats from every UN member nation. They created, controlled, and promoted the IPCC agenda so that politicians had no choice, as Strong intended. This, and President Obama’s use of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), are proof that bureaucracies must not have control going forward. Their role must be as passive collectors and disseminators of data. They should not be involved in research. This was a major part of the problem with the IPCC and weather office involvements. Scientific bureaucrats are automatically compromised by their career being subject to the whim and will of their political bosses. Skepticism, the very hallmark of science, is automatically stifled in such a hierarchical structure.
Strong, Obama and Gore were all a part of the failed Chicago Carbon Exchange! Dr Tim Ball then goes on to say:
[…] My warning was because it is likely that my three lawsuits are related to my activities. Voltaire said
“It is dangerous to be right when people in authority are wrong.”
Many were unsure if the people in authority were finally right. Trump’s meetings with carbon footprint hypocrites Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio, seemed to signal something different. All this was put to rest with the appointment of Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Scott Pruitt as head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Conversations and information gleaned at the Heritage Climate Conference on Thursday assures me accurate climate science is in charge. The challenge is to deprogram the people, remove the exploitive agencies and rules they created, and set up a system that is as free of politics as possible. […]
Read the whole thing. Speaking of the new people in authority, this post gives me thrills, the new adults running the show, are asking questions that must shake the outgoing bureaucracy to their core. Their homework is shown to know extraordinary details. Willis writes:
Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach Over at the Washington Post, Chris Mooney and the usual suspects are seriously alarmed by a memo sent out by the Transition Team at the Department of Energy. They describe it in breathless terms in an article entitled “Trump transition team for Energy Department seeks names of employees involved in…
There are a lot of questions, a small sample here in bold with Willis adding his comment, but go and read the whole astonishing lot of 74 questions.
[…] The new Administration asks where the current denizens would cut ten percent … then when they are told it, they know they might want to cut somewhere else … useful info either way.
32 Does the Department have any thoughts on how to reduce the bureaucratic burden for exporting U.S. energy technology, including but not limited to commercial nuclear technology?
Likely not … but worth asking …
33 Is the number of Assistant Secretaries set by statute? Does the statute establish the number as a minimum or a maximum, or is it silent on the question?
Assistant Secretaries are now on DEFCON 1, or DEFCON 0.5, their hair is totally engulfed in flames …
34 Can you provide a list of all current open job postings and the status of those positions?
35 Can you provide a list of outstanding M&O contracts yet to be awarded for all DOE facilities and their current status?
36 Can you provide a list of non-M&O procurements/awards that are currently pending and their status? […]
Scary, for them!