July 09, 2017

Dr. Tim Ball: Why it's time to shut down Environment Canada

Tim BallRebel Columnist
 

Environment Canada (EC) misled the country on global warming, which caused massive unnecessary expenditures, cost thousands of jobs, destroyed businesses and industries, and devastated communities at all levels. 

Meanwhile, their forecast accuracy beyond 48 hours has not improved; they abandoned medium forecasts (three months to one year) after results that were worse than a coin toss; and all long-term forecasts since 1990, based on their membership in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), were wrong.

John Christy presented the evidence in his congressional testimony (Figure 1).

In fact, the Canadian climate model forecasts that were part of the 102 IPCC CMIP-5 Climate Models result was the worst of them all as Ken Gregory showed (Figure 2).

EC was a major player in the entire deception of human-caused global warming. Assistant Deputy Minister Gordon McBean chaired the founding meeting of the IPCC in Villach, Austria in 1985.

Environment Canada then pushed the entire false global warming agenda with devastating and expensive impact on the entire Canadian economy. The most recent example was the approximately $3 billion commitment by Justin Trudeau to the Green Climate Fund (GCF).

President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement signals the end of the entire UN climate agenda including that Fund. Once US funding is gone, the entire UN climate program collapses.

Trump is a foreign body injected into the body politic by the people. Every segment of the body, from politicians on each side through to the media, are trying to reject him. Those who elected him are reinforced in their decision with every move he makes to keep his election promises.

Trump wisely chose to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement because it is biased against developed nations, making it a bad deal for the US.

Here is one synopsis:

To achieve the goal agreed in Paris of a maximum 2°C increase in global temperatures above pre-industrial levels, the estimated global cost is $17 trillion by 2040 (or about 800 times more than was spent on all the Apollo missions to the moon).

It would also require carbon dioxide reductions about 100 times greater than those pledged in Paris.

The Agreement assumes incorrectly that CO2 is causing planet destroying global warming, but only a few nations must reduce their production, while all others are virtually unlimited for several years to come. China is the world’s biggest CO2 producer, but is not limited in production until 2030.

In 2010 at Conference of the Parties (COP) 16, they replaced the Kyoto Protocol with the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and planned to ratify it at COP 21 as the Paris Climate Agreement.

This became necessary after the disclosure in November 2009 of the corrupt science of the IPCC via the emails leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU).

The Protocol and the GCF were designed to shut down the industrialized nations who became wealthy at the expense of other nations by using fossil fuels. They were to be punished by paying a fine for their sin of producing CO2, and the money was to be used to compensate developing nations.

In fact, it was a global scale transfer of wealth that required a single global government. It achieved Maurice Strong’s objective summarized by Elaine Dewar in Cloak of Green:

“Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.”

The Kyoto Protocol foundered on the disclosure of the manipulated science. It also failed because the US Senate rejected it. They did not want to vote against a "green" Protocol, so they created the Byrd/Hagel Resolution to decide if they would vote on it. The resolution said they should not vote on anything that would harm the US economy. Therefore the vote was 95-0 in favour of not approving Kyoto.

Obama supported the GCF as part of his legacy, and also knew that without the US, it would not happen. But there was a problem: He could not call it a treaty because that would require Senate approval.

Ironically, this is exactly what made it easy for Trump to withdraw from the Paris agreement.

Environment Canada and all other national weather bureaucracies became involved because Maurice Strong set up the global warming deception through their membership in the UN World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Virtually all climate research funding came from government sources, and they only funded research that supported their false science.

All Canadian federal research funding goes through "arms-length" agencies ostensibly to preclude political interference. However, climate funding came directly from Environment Canada to promote their version of the science.

As mentioned earlier, Gordon McBean was the person primarily responsible for the singular and devastating direction the department took. He brought his political view of environmental issues and particularly global warming, expressed in a speech to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1995. He spent his career promoting these views and virtually destroyed the Canadian Weather Service while wasting billions of dollars. The Auditor General put the cost at $6.8 billion from 1997 to 2005.

McBean also established his post-bureaucratic career by using $61 million of EC money to set up the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS), a climate research organization that he took over as Chair in the month he retired from EC.

This agency only funded research that proved the human-caused global warming theory or the negative impact of warming.

Bureaucratic scientists are a guarantee of political science. As Dr. Lawrence Peters explained,

“Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost its status.”

EC continue to push because they failed to follow the scientific method. Instead of proving that the hypothesis that human CO2 was causing warming was wrong, they only examined and promoted evidence that it was correct.

Every forecast they, as members of the IPCC have made, was wrong.

The simple and only solution to restore truth and integrity is to shut down EC and have Statistics Canada collect environmental data in its ‘resources’ wing and make that data available to anyone. At least private forecasters would be accountable to the market place.

It is time make Environment Canada accountable by closing the doors.

 

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2017-09-10 14:10:17 -0400
Perfectly said, as always Dr. Ball. The Climate Communists, like the radical feminist Communists, like the BLM Communists, like the Antifa Communists, like the “acedemic” Communists, like every sadistic government and non-government Communist organization ultimately wants ALL of YOUR money in order to have the POWER to CONTROLYOU!

Just remember how the CRTC (Communist Radio and Telecommunications Commission) in complete collusion with the CMP (Consortium Media Party) and the LIEbranos managed to obliterate the Sun News Network.

They want COMPLETE control of the narrative.

Pure,EVIL Scum!
commented 2017-08-08 11:30:19 -0400
Canada seem to be suckers for any Leftie brainwashing. The Global Warning deception is only one they have fallen for. It’s political not scientific as with their Transgender rubbish. Oh Canada get back to your roots. You are making wrong turns as if there was no tomorrow. Save yourselves whilst there is time. It will get worse if it is not stopped.
commented 2017-07-16 21:48:16 -0400
Thank you, Tim Ball, for this timely reminder. We all recall:

“Assistant Deputy Minister Gordon McBean chaired the founding meeting of the IPCC in Villach, Austria in 1985”

Nothing really has changed since 1985. Thank you for reminding us of that. Not the Minister, or the Deputy Minister, but the “Assistant Deputy Minister” was there in 1985. We should remember that, especially if we are born in the latter part of the 20th Century, or in the first years of the 21st Century.

The motto: “Never forget the assistant deputy minister of 1985”.
commented 2017-07-11 09:44:20 -0400
When Trudeau can’t think of another tax to burden us with, he will start taxing inhalations! Breaths per minute multiplied by the hour and so on. Then, he will reduce the amount of inhalation taxes by 75% so the leftist middle class and those who want to join it will say, “he’s so just and he is giving us a tax break!”

Why can’t we send Trudeau on a mission to the Sun, the premise is to determine how much of an impact this has on changing climate….but, I just want him to travel far, far away never to be seen again!
commented 2017-07-11 08:57:47 -0400
Good point, Drew. We should have an asteroid tax in place to deal with the asteroid that is surely coming. I’m sure scientists all agree that there is a high likelihood of an asteroid hiding the earth.
commented 2017-07-10 21:28:05 -0400
Andrew Stephenson yeah i am extrapolating just like the so called experts you believe. They have no more input data than i do to support their claims for many years form now. There could be an asteroid colliding with earth, there is some data for you.
commented 2017-07-10 20:39:25 -0400
Good riddance to those self absorbed deniers.
commented 2017-07-10 19:48:20 -0400
Can you imagine the size of those mastodon SUVs? Whew! What gas guzzlers they must have been! ;o)
commented 2017-07-10 15:58:55 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON commented 4 hours ago.
“Here’s the issue with the ice age argument. There’s an explanation for that – the earth’s orbit drifts back and forth over time, going from oval to circular, among other parameters (eg, axial tilt). The end of the ice age corresponded to a couple degree increase over 20,000 years and is explained by this orbital parameter.”

That is one known parameter. Science doesn’t know the all yet. But their confidence exceeds their knowledge. Again, this hasn’t just happened once. It has happened many times. Before records were ever kept or temperatures measured.

“Those shells are a hundred million years old, and as much about tectonics as anything else. "

And how do you know that? Why, IF they were 100,000,000 years old are they not fossilized under layers of sediment like the ones in the rockies? That’s how it’s supposed to work according to science. These are tiny shells smaller than your pinky finger nail. Yet they have not been ground to powder which is what would happen if they were being ground under layers of sediment for 100,000,000 years. Apparently not all that old.

“Here’s the problem. First of all, the observed warming, a degree or so in a century, is a hundred times faster than the end of the ice age.”
What difference does it make how fast it happens? It is a tacit admission that it happens without human intervention.

“Second, the orbital paramters indicate a sight decrease in solar influx – and indeed, pre-industrially the climate had been very slowly cooling.”

Wrong. At some times it was cooling and at other times it was warming. Its what scientists call a “cycle”. Remember the palm trees on Vancouver Island? And we somehow still have polar bears. Fast evolvers those polar bears.

“There’s no other known explanation for the warming trend we’ve observed, beyond increased retention of atmospheric heat, potentially driven by accumulation of infrared absorbers. That’s the issue here … what’s causing it if not for the increased infrared absorption? Nobody can answer that.”

There used to be no known explanation for the moons phases either. But then it was figured out. Might this not be a similar scenario? Perhaps one day we will figure it out. Why jump to the conclusion that it is caused by humans? The other cycles weren’t. Science is a good servant. Scientism is a poor master. Science hoes not yet know everything.

Maurice. I think you’re onto something. That is why we have no mastodons any more. The SJW’s annihilated them for causing climate change while driving their SUVs. If it would save even one degree….
commented 2017-07-10 12:25:00 -0400
KEN DAVIDSON. Get the NRC to add you to its staff directory.
commented 2017-07-10 11:35:07 -0400
“Maurice Potvin commented 13 hours ago
Andrew Stephenson “Water expands as it warms”. Not really, Andrew. It expands slightly as it warms, but it REALLY expands as it freezes. That’s why ice floats.. And Dr. Tim Ball’s “lazy platitudes” as you call them are based on his own peer reviewed research studies.”

He has published precisely one peer reviewed paper in the last 25 years, a study about polar bears in 2007. And, yes, even that slight expansion is enough to make a real difference, 1/10,000 raises ocean levels by a foot. (I reiterate … we’ve measured rising sea levels directly What’s causing it?).

“Drew Wakariuk commented 10 hours ago
I predict the earths atmosphere will be frozen in 100 years. So lets see anyone prove me wrong.
Hey i like playing this game , any thoughts Andrew? Prove me wrong if you can. "

What input data are you using for that? I’ll gladly refute it but I need to see your input data. Oh, wait, you don’t have any? LOL.

“Whilst walking through the Great Snadhills in southern Saskatchewan I noticed sea shells in the sand. Conclusion? At one time saskatchewan was a whole lot warmer than it is now and must have been a l lot lower or higher water.

Now there were no mastadons driving their SUVs to cause this warming. Conclusion? It must have been some kind of natural warming. It has apparently happened several times. Several ice ages and tropical warming in the Arctic. Somehow the polar bears either survived or they did not take millions of years to evolve. Lots of change took place in a very short time.

Andrew, no one denies climate change. What we doubt is the claim that it is caused by humans since so much of it took place when humans were very scarce on the planet indeed. "
Those shells are a hundred million years old, and as much about tectonics as anything else.

Here’s the issue with the ice age argument. There’s an explanation for that – the earth’s orbit drifts back and forth over time, going from oval to circular, among other parameters (eg, axial tilt). The end of the ice age corresponded to a couple degree increase over 20,000 years and is explained by this orbital parameter.
Here’s the problem. First of all, the observed warming, a degree or so in a century, is a hundred times faster than the end of the ice age. Second, the orbital paramters indicate a sight decrease in solar influx – and indeed, pre-industrially the climate had been very slowly cooling. There’s no other known explanation for the warming trend we’ve observed, beyond increased retention of atmospheric heat, potentially driven by accumulation of infrared absorbers. That’s the issue here … what’s causing it if not for the increased infrared absorption? Nobody can answer that.
commented 2017-07-10 11:12:11 -0400
As a government scientist at the National Research Council, what I have found most shocking in trying to work with ECCC is there lack of understanding on how to conduct basic scientific experiments. The federal government does not include working with the NRC in any of its mandate letters to other government agencies. As a result, most of these agencies conduct sub standard research that fails to pass the basic requirements one would expect from peer review.
commented 2017-07-10 09:53:41 -0400
The arrogance of man is truly amazing, thinking that we can control the weather! God the creator controls the weather, and he makes men who think they are in control look like fools!
commented 2017-07-10 03:07:32 -0400
“How convenient that their timeline expands as time goes by”
..-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
How convenient their timeline exceeds their own expiration date… You can’t humiliate an expired scientist who is a moron..!
commented 2017-07-10 01:52:46 -0400
All very good comments below for sure, except yours Andrew, it’s just the usual regurgitated rhetoric of the koolaid gulpers. How can so many supposed educated people be so gullibly stupid, its perplexing for sure. Your comment earlier, " It’s not really “made up BS”, considering it’s the most strongly supported theory currently existing." really says it all. You and your tinfoiled hatters are willing to destroy livelihoods, economies and even lives, based on a “theory”. Wow…..I mean……what the fuck wow!
commented 2017-07-10 01:42:57 -0400
Allan Peterson, how do you know mastodons weren’t driving SUVs? You weren’t there…. they might have been. In fact, I’d like put forward that supposition as the probable cause of climate change. There! I’ve solved the mystery…. climate change was caused by mastodons driving SUVs.
commented 2017-07-10 01:42:26 -0400
in first year engineering computer science class at the u of s many years ago, i was taught a useful acronym…gigo…garbage in, garbage out…it applies to all computer programming…even programmes that are supposed to predict man made climate change…
commented 2017-07-10 01:16:55 -0400
I’ve rooted this out before but it needs to be done again.

When I was visiting my brother in Nanaimo I noticed a fenced in area at the mall. In it was a fossilized palm tree that had been dug out of the ground during some local excavation. So apparently Vancouver Island was at one time significantly warmer than it is now and all life did not end.

Whilst walking through the Great Snadhills in southern Saskatchewan I noticed sea shells in the sand. Conclusion? At one time saskatchewan was a whole lot warmer than it is now and must have been a l lot lower or higher water.

Now there were no mastadons driving their SUVs to cause this warming. Conclusion? It must have been some kind of natural warming. It has apparently happened several times. Several ice ages and tropical warming in the Arctic. Somehow the polar bears either survived or they did not take millions of years to evolve. Lots of change took place in a very short time.

Andrew, no one denies climate change. What we doubt is the claim that it is caused by humans since so much of it took place when humans were very scarce on the planet indeed.

The reality is that we know very little of what happened in the past with any precision. Science is a good servant but scientism is a poor master.
commented 2017-07-10 01:15:43 -0400
I still remember all the phony predictions in the past , they have not come true , so the snake oil salesmen have just made their predictions for farther in the future. How convenient that their timeline expands as time goes by.
commented 2017-07-10 01:12:51 -0400
I predict the earths atmosphere will be frozen in 100 years. So lets see anyone prove me wrong.
Hey i like playing this game , any thoughts Andrew? Prove me wrong if you can.
commented 2017-07-10 01:11:12 -0400
Andrew he has actual arguments , you are just too childish to accept them. And where is the proof from your side? I see none at all, all i see is incorrect projection. When you can actually prove anything then please do so.
commented 2017-07-10 01:06:43 -0400
Andrew your comment is ridiculous. We admit that the climate changes , it is your side presenting the fear mongering and it is proven false again and again. And no one is simulating every cloud, your comparison is balderdash and does not apply to this article or the science in it.
commented 2017-07-10 01:05:03 -0400
Dr. Tim Ball, thankyou for this.
Despite all the facts Dr. Ball stated here, this planet warming scam supposedly caused by humans is still going on stronger than ever. The enablers are totally immersed in their obsession & no matter the businesses that have gone under, the jobs lost, the pain & worrying caused to the average citizen who has directly suffered from all this & their incessant narrative that we’re all going to fry if the temp increases by a mere 3degrees in the next 100 yrs is downright criminal.
The only scientist I ever hear on this matter is Dr. Ball, where are all the others. The climate scammers have turned this into a religion with hordes of people across the globe who are all too happy to follow & believe every stupid word they utter on the subject.
Yes, I agree time to shut down Environment Canada, but if the experts who agree with him don’t band together to get this going, nothing will ever happen.
commented 2017-07-09 22:55:26 -0400
hey “short eyes”..
You have to be tough to be stupid and you are one of the toughest people I’ve ever engaged..
But even tough girls like you break down and cry when they can’t admit their wrong.. The caliber of your spin does not meet or exceed the caliber of me disproving your previous statements.!!
I’m a fairly intelligent man Andrew.. not the sharpest knife in the drawer, good as some but better than most, however the spin applied to your rebuttle wouldn’t make any sense to the smartest man on this earthly plane because it has no substance Andrew… Just like you no substance.!!
You’re pathetic new lens only assist you in convincing everybody you’re incapable of admitting you were wrong.!!
Here’s a piece of advice for you Andrew it’s an old quote and I can’t remember who said it but here we go… “It’s far better to keep your mouth shut and have everybody only think you’re an idiot then opening it even once and removing all doubt”
commented 2017-07-09 22:28:04 -0400
Andrew Stephenson “Water expands as it warms”. Not really, Andrew. It expands slightly as it warms, but it REALLY expands as it freezes. That’s why ice floats.. And Dr. Tim Ball’s “lazy platitudes” as you call them are based on his own peer reviewed research studies. Unlike your lazy platitudes, which certainly aren’t based on anything you’ve actually accomplished. Near as I can tell you just pull this shit out of your ass (pun intended). You still haven’t backed up any of your claims with provable fact based logic. It’s an interesting truism that when people don’t have an argument to support their position they tend to ramp up the rhetoric and fall back on ad hominem attacks on the character of their opponents rather than the substance of their disagreement. You’re behaving true to form, Andrew. Have a nice day.
commented 2017-07-09 22:15:30 -0400
@ Andrew Stephonson -“It’s not really “made up BS”, considering it’s the most strongly supported theory …”

There you go!!! – with the THEORY argument – why can’t you libtarded Climatards ACCEPT Facts! & F**k the theory bullshit! Your theory is FRAUDULENT in so many ways – only an arrogantly ignorant lunatic could continue blindly following bullshit! Years ago it was an “accepted” theory that the earth is flat (funny some Islamists still believe this!) – well that theory sure as hell got shot to hell. – and if you would accept facts – this climate “theory” bull-crap – it too is shot to hell!
Now QUIT being a FRAUD – it is still illegal to do FRAUD!
commented 2017-07-09 22:13:21 -0400
@Andrew Stephenson….why are you so Hell bent on being miserable?
commented 2017-07-09 22:01:03 -0400
“Leviticus 2013 commented 3 hours ago
“Thermal expansion”… Andrew you have hit an all-time high note in hilarity.. now you failed to mention with that whether it’s the land expanding due to heat which would actually push back the oceans or is it the water is now so warm that it’s expanding… Both are impossible and have life on this earthly plane…”

Water expands as it warms, Leviticus. No, land has not been expanding comparably, because it doesn’t mix. Why are sea levels rising?

By the way, we have ice cores going back the better part of a million years.

“Maurice Potvin commented 3 hours ago
Andrew Stephenson, again I say, OBJECTIVELY, between you and Dr. Tim Ball, which one of you do you think has more credibility? Really!!! Give a good logical, fact based reason why we should believe you over him? Not an emotional reason, deductive logic provable fact based reason.”

Oh, I’m sure Dr. Ball would have plenty of credibility, if he had an actual argument instead of the same lazy platitudes.

“Dirk Kanis commented 2 hours ago
Andrew’s single atom brain doesn’t comprehend beyond town limits let alone grasp we are still on the up cycle from the last ice age. "

Actually, we’re not. The interglacial peaked in what is called the “climate optimum”, about 8000 years ago, and has been slowly cooling. Until, gee, about 100 years ago when for some reason things began warming sharply, with no clear explanation beyond the atmosphere’s sudden increase in infrared absorption.

“Peter Netterville commented 3 hours ago
I see that Andrew is on this thread pretending he matches DR. Tim Ball’s education and intellect. "

If he’s so smart, why is he relying on vague allegations of wrongdoing while being unable to table a model of his own? He’s like Jordan Peterson, he’ll say whatever makes the crowd toss money at him. Apparently, being “Dr” makes his mercenary act more reputable, since nobody did look up “appeal to authority” fallacies.
commented 2017-07-09 20:00:38 -0400
My argument against the global warming /climate change propaganda is real simple, SPRING/SUMMER FALL/WINTER ,always has been ,always will be.