Archive for October, 2011

Why I Deny Global Warming, by David Deming

Church of Darwin, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Oct 23 2011

by David Deming, Oct. 19, 2011

I’m a denier for several reasons. There is no substantive evidence that the planet has warmed significantly or that any significant warming will occur in the future. If any warming does occur, it likely will be concentrated at higher latitudes and therefore be beneficial. Climate research has largely degenerated into pathological science, and the coverage of global warming in the media is tendentious to the point of being fraudulent. Anyone who is an honest and competent scientist must be a denier.

Have you ever considered how difficult it is to take the temperature of the planet Earth? What temperature will you measure? The air? The surface of the Earth absorbs more than twice as much incident heat from the Sun than the air. But if you measure the temperature of the surface, what surface are you going to measure? The solid Earth or the oceans?

There is twice as much water as land on Earth. If you decide to measure water temperature, at what depth will you take the measurements? How will the time scale on which the deep ocean mixes with the shallow affect your measurements? And how, pray tell, will you determine what the average water temperature was for the South Pacific Ocean a hundred years ago? How will you combine air, land, and sea temperature measurements? Even if you use only meteorological measurements of air temperature, how will you compensate for changes in latitude, elevation, and land use?

Determining a mean planetary temperature is not straightforward, but an extremely complicated problem. Even the best data are suspect. Anthony Watts and his colleagues have surveyed 82.5 percent of stations in the U.S. Historical Climatology Network. They have found – shockingly – that over 70 percent of these stations are likely to be contaminated by errors greater than 2 deg C [3.6 deg F]. Of the remaining stations, 21.5 percent have inherent errors greater than 1 deg C. The alleged degree of global warming over the past 150 years is less than 1 deg C.

Yet even in a technologically advanced country like the US, the inherent error in over 90 percent of the surveyed meteorological stations is greater than the putative signal. And these errors are not random, but systematically reflect a warming bias related to urbanization. Watts has documented countless instances of air temperature sensors located next to air conditioning vents or in the middle of asphalt parking lots.

A typical scenario is that a temperature sensor that was in the middle of a pasture a hundred years ago is now surrounded by a concrete jungle. Urbanization has been a unidirectional process. It is entirely plausible – even likely – that all of the temperature rise that has been inferred from the data is an artifact that reflects the growth of urban heat islands.

The “denier” is portrayed as a person who refuses to accept the plain evidence of his senses. But in fact it is the alarmist who doesn’t know what they are talking about. The temperature of the Earth and how it has varied over the past 150 years is poorly constrained. The person who thinks otherwise does so largely because they have no comprehension of the science. Most of these people have never done science or thought about the inherent difficulties and uncertainties involved.

And what is “global warming” anyway? As long ago as the fifth century BC, Socrates pointed out that intelligible definitions are a necessary precursor to meaningful discussions. The definition of the term “global warming” shifts with the context of the discussion. If you deny global warming, then you have denied the existence of the greenhouse effect, a reproducible phenomenon that can be studied analytically in the laboratory.

But if you oppose political action, then global warming metamorphoses into a nightmarish and speculative planetary catastrophe. Coastal cities sink beneath a rising sea, species suffer from wholesale extinctions, and green pastures are turned into deserts of choking hot sand.

In fact, so-called “deniers” are not “deniers” but skeptics. Skeptics do not deny the existence of the greenhouse effect. Holding all other factors constant, the mean planetary air temperature ought to rise as the atmosphere accumulates more anthropogenic CO2. Christopher Monckton recently reviewed the pertinent science and concluded that a doubling of CO2 should result in a temperature increase of about 1 deg C. If this temperature increase mirrors those in the geologic past, most of it will occur at high latitudes. These areas will become more habitable for man, plants, and other animals. Biodiversity will increase. Growing seasons will lengthen.

Why is this a bad thing?

Any temperature increase over 1 deg C for a doubling of CO2 must come from a positive feedback from water vapor. Water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas in Earth’s atmosphere, and warm air holds more water than cold air. The theory is that an increased concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere will lead to a positive feedback that amplifies the warming from CO2 by as much as a factor of three to five. But this is nothing more that speculation. Water vapor also leads to cloud formation. Clouds have a cooling effect. At the current time, no one knows if the feedback from water vapor will be positive or negative.

Global warming predictions cannot be tested with mathematical models. It is impossible to validate computer models of complex natural systems. The only way to corroborate such models is to compare model predictions with what will happen in a hundred years. And one such result by itself won’t be significant because of the possible compounding effects of other variables in the climate system. The experiment will have to repeated over several one-hundred year cycles. In other words, the theory of catastrophic global warming cannot be tested or empirically corroborated in a human time frame.

It is hardly conclusive to argue that models are correct because they have reproduced past temperatures. I’m sure they have. General circulation models have so many degrees of freedom that it is possible to endlessly tweak them until the desired result is obtained. Hindsight is always 20-20. This tells us exactly nothing about a model’s ability to accurately predict what will happen in the future.

The entire field of climate science and its coverage in the media is tendentious to the point of being outright fraudulent. Why is it that every media report on CO2 – an invisible gas – is invariably accompanied by a photograph of a smokestack emitting particulate matter? Even the cover of Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, shows a smokestack.

Could it be that its difficult to get people worked up about an invisible, odorless gas that is an integral component of the photosynthetic cycle? A gas that is essential to most animal and plant life on Earth? A gas that is emitted by their own bodies through respiration? So you have to deliberately mislead people by showing pictures of smoke to them. Showing one thing when you’re talking about another is fraud. If the case for global warming alarmism is so settled, so conclusive, so irrefutable…why is it necessary to repeatedly resort to fraud?

A few years ago it was widely reported that the increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would cause poison ivy to grow faster. But of course carbon dioxide causes almost all plants to grow faster. And nearly all of these plants have beneficial human uses. Carbon dioxide fertilizes hundreds or thousands of human food sources. More CO2 means trees grow faster. So carbon dioxide promotes reforestation and biodiversity. Its good for the environment. But none of this was reported.

Instead, the media only reported that global warming makes poison ivy grow faster. And this is but one example of hundreds or thousands of such misleading reports. If sea ice in the Arctic diminishes, it is cited as irrefutable proof of global warming. But if sea ice in the Antarctic increases, it is ignored. Even cold weather events are commonly invoked as evidence for global warming. People living in the future will look back and wonder how we could have been so delusional.

For the past few years I have remained silent concerning the Climategate emails. But what they revealed is what many of us already knew was going on: global warming research has largely degenerated into what is known as pathological science, a “process of wishful data interpretation.” When I testified before the US Senate in 2006, I stated that a major climate researcher told me in 1995 that “we have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.”

The existence and global nature of the Medieval Warm Period had been substantiated by literally hundreds of research articles published over decades. But it had to be erased from history for ideological reasons. A few years later the infamous “hockey stick” appeared. The “hockey stick” was a revisionist attempt to rewrite the temperature history of the last thousand years. It has been discredited as being deeply flawed.

In one Climategate email, a supposed climate scientist admitted to “hiding the decline.” In other words, hiding data that tended to disprove his ideological agenda. Another email described how alarmists would try to keep critical manuscripts from being published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. One of them wrote, we’ll “keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” Gee. If the climate science that validates global warming is so unequivocal, why is it necessary to work behind the scenes to suppress dissent? You “doth protest too much.”

As described in my book, Science and Technology in World History: The Ancient World and Classical Civilization, systematic science began with the invocation of naturalism by Greek philosophers and Hippocratic physicians c. 600-400 BC. But the critical attitude adopted by the Greeks was as important as naturalism. Students were not only allowed to criticize their teachers, but were encouraged to do so. From its beginnings in Greek natural philosophy, science has been an idealistic and dispassionate search for truth. As Plato explained, anyone who could point out a mistake “shall carry off the palm, not as an enemy, but as a friend.”

This is one reason that scientists enjoy so much respect. The public assumes that a scientist’s pursuit of truth is unencumbered by political agendas.

But science does not come easy to men. “Science,” George Sarton reminded us, “is a joykiller.” The proper conduct of science requires a high degree of intellectual discipline and rigor. Scientists are supposed to use multiple working hypotheses and sort through these by the processes of corroboration and falsification. The most valuable evidence is that which tends to falsify or disprove a theory. A scientist, by the very definition of his activity, must be skeptical. A scientist engaged in a dispassionate search for truth elevates the critical – he does not suppress it. Knowledge begins with skepticism and ends with conceit.

Finally, I’m happy to be known as a “denier” because the label of “denier” says nothing about me, but everything about the person making the charge. Scientific theories are never denied or believed, they are only corroborated or falsified. Scientific knowledge, by its very nature, is provisional and subject to revision.

The provisional nature of scientific knowledge is a necessary consequence of the epistemological basis of science. Science is based on observation. We never have all the data. As our body of data grows, our theories and ideas must necessarily evolve. Anyone who thinks scientific knowledge is final and complete must necessarily endorse as a corollary the absurd proposition that the process of history has stopped.

A scientific theory cannot be “denied.” Only a belief can be denied. The person who uses the word “denier” thus reveals that they hold global warming as a belief, not a scientific theory. Beliefs are the basis of revealed religion. Revelations cannot be corroborated or studied in the laboratory, so religions are based on dogmatic beliefs conservatively held. Religions tend to be closed systems of belief that reject criticism. But the sciences are open systems of knowledge that welcome criticism. I’m a scientist, and therefore I must happily confess to being a denier.

October 19, 2011

David Deming [send him mail] is a geophysicist, associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma, and author of the books Science and Technology in World History, Vols. 1 & 2.

Copyright © 2011 by Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Were/Are Pterosaurs Bi-Peds or Quadrupeds? The Ancient Maya Weigh In?

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature,, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Oct 21 2011

Photo: Mayan Peten Bowl
500 AD. to 800 AD. $1,895.00
“From ancient Mexico, Mayan, Peten region. Extremely fine and rare polychrome pottery bowl depicting the three failed attempts to create human beings – as published in the Maya Popol Vuh.” Gallery
Private collection

Well, here they are again; pterosaurs. If anyone out there consistently reads this blog it must seem as though pterosaurs are my favorite topic. That’s really not the case; they just seem to come up so frequently as a subject of ancient art is all. Honestly, my interests are broader than it would sometimes seem. I take them as they come.

Pterosaurs had three fingered “hands” attached to their wings at the pinky (a very long pinkie) and of course hind legs. Scientists have gone back and forth on the topic of pterosaur ground locomotion for years. Did they walk bi pedally or did they walk on all fours similar to a quadruped-or both?

The ancient Mayans weigh in with a partial answer; they could and did apparently walk on all fours. Prior specimens of ancient art that we’ve featured here indicate that they were bi pedal as well. The style and nature of this painting made it difficult for experts to identify the creature being portrayed on this ancient piece and they’ve concocted quite the story.

A comparison with recent mind’s eye depictions of pterosaurs on the ground may help the open minded see what the artist was apparently actually depicting; an out of time and place, pterosaur if you adhere to the current paradigm’s version of earth’s history.

“When setting out to restore fossil animals, an artist is faced with a unique problem that is not often faced by scientists. Where a scientist can reasonably reach the conclusion that something is not—or cannot be— known, a palaeontological artist is forced to reach conclusions on things which are unknown, and perhaps always will be.

An artist can’t paint a pterosaur in “don’t know” colours, or behaving in a “don’t know” way. Restoring pterosaurs, therefore, not only requires research into what is known about pterosaur’s anatomy, behaviour, and environment, but also a method for building up complete picture, even when there is little or no evidence to be had.”… John Conway Pterosaur

On Pterosaur Locomotion

“It didn’t take long for early pterosaur workers to figure out that pterosaurs were flying animals. Their hyperelongate forelimbs, fused torso elements, robust shoulder girdle and pectoral elements are clear indications that pterosaurs were adapted for self-propelled flight and, although some arguments have raged over the finer details of their flight styles, no-one has questioned their basic volant ability.

However, the same cannot be said for pterosaur terrestrial ability: for almost as long as pterosaurs have been known, little consensus has existed on both how and how well pterosaurs would be able to move on land. Early workers thought pterosaurs were probably relatively confident terrestrial locomotors, although no-one could agree whether they would stand in a bird-like, bipedal fashion, a lizard-like quadrupedal configuration or an erect, mammal-like quadrupedal stance.

Pterosaurologists of the mid-20th century took a dimmer view: these workers suggested that pterosaurs could barely stand, let alone walk, and would have to push themselves over the ground with dragging bellies and useless forelimbs held aloft.

Opinions changed in the 1980s when several pterosaur workers attempted biomechanical studies of pterosaur limbs in efforts to figure out their terrestrial competence: alas, this confused matters further as different interpretations of the same material led to drastically different conclusions.

In the space of a decade, pterosaurs were restored as dinosaur-like bipeds, penguin-like bipeds, sprawled-limbed quadrupeds and erect-limbed quadrupeds.”… Mark Witton Pterosaur Terrestrial Locomotion

So There You Have It?

“So there you have it. The answer is: Both.

Pterosaurs were both plantigrade and digitigrade. Pterosaurs were both bipedal and quadrupedal. Pedal digit 5 was useful for basal pterosaurs, but not for derived flatfoots. All of these traits are like those of living lizards, the ones capable of standing, walking and running bipedally.

At such times, these lizards turn from plantigrady to digitigrady without overextending the metatarsophalangeal joints, without having symmetrical pedes and without having all of the various morphological advantages that pterosaurs enjoyed, such as an anteriorly elongated ilium, an expanded sacral series for balance and prepubes to help elevate their femora. Pterosaurs likely took off bipedally, NOT with their forelimbs as described here.

They certainly had to land bipedally.”

Pterosaurs: Bipedal? Quadrupedal? or Both?
The Pterosaur Heresies

When Really Big Human Giants Left Their Imprints On the World; There Were Giants in The Earth in Those Days

Church of Darwin, Giants in Those Days,, Science, The Flood of Noah, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Oct 07 2011

Left:”Goliath’s Footprint”; South Africa

Imagine that you’re sitting on your backyard patio sipping an iced tea when a dragonfly with a 30 inch wingspan flies over your fence and starts buzzing the pool. What do you do?

I’ll bet you won’t stay out in the backyard. You sure don’t want to encounter any relatively sized mosquitos that he might be after.

No need to worry though, because while dragonflies with 30 inch wingspans once did live on the planet, such a creature could never get off the ground today.

A large dragonfly today might weigh as much as an ounce but due to the scale effect, a dragonfly with a 30 inch wingspan would probably have weighed a pound or more.

In Genesis Chapter 6 we are told that “there were giants in the earth in those days”. Back in my childhood bible class days we were told that Goliath was about 9 feet two inches tall. That’s the way most believers take the whole “giants in those days” quote; that it referred only to human giants who might have been a couple of feet taller than the tallest of men today. However, the 30 inch wingspanned dragonfly advises us to think of giants in a different way.

Photo:Hornless rhino 17 feet at the shoulder and Argentavis Magnificens

If there once was a raptor bird with a 26 foot wingspan, beavers the size of a small car and dinosaurs 100 feet long; how big were the people? Maybe “there were giants in those days” means that at one time everything was much larger than it currently is.

What we know for sure is that we have fossils of creatures who were extremely large versions of their living cousins and/or who could not fly, run or hold up their heads under the current atmospheric and gravitational conditions.

In this article we want to take a look at some evidence of really big human giants. Not the giants of the Goliath variety; a bit over 9 feet tall but the kind of giants in whose eyes we would be like grasshoppers.

“And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight” Numbers 13:33

Frankly these giants are so big that they are almost embarrassing even to us; to those who do believe that there were giants in the earth in those days as the Bible says -but never suspected that they could have been as BIG as some of the evidence suggests….S8INT.COM

Goliath’s Footprint

“Did giants exist on earth?

This interesting rock formation may suggest so.

Goliath’s Footprint, as the locals dubbed it, is one of South Africa’s little-known secrets. Nestled in the forests near the Swaziland border of South Africa, this print is definitely not a tourist hot-spot. One may speculate that erosion caused the interesting shape of this upright rock formation, but it features exactly five “toenails,” and it looks like the earth has been pushed away around the big toe.

If I encountered this photo on the internet, I might have attributed it to Photoshop techniques and have had some doubts about its existence, but I have been to the spot, and felt the grooves with my own fingers. It is very real.

If this mystery of nature was indeed made by a giant human, I don’t think I would have wanted to encounter him! Locals in the area are all mystified by the footprint. South African folklore does contain mentions of giants, but up to date I haven’t heard any stories about the origin of this giant footprint. Some say that there are similar rock formations in India and in Australia, but an internet search has not given me any results.” Source:

These next three articles all relate to some extremely large apparently human footprints discovered in the South Bay Area of California. Science has fallen into the habit of claiming that these footprints are carved-without showing in any way that the carving of giant footprints in rock as hard as granite in any way related to any cultural or religious practices or beliefs of the Native Americans they attempt to credit. The size of these footprints–on the side of a cliff-in granite make the idea of carved footprints rather incredible.

Dr. Louderback of the University of California is sent to investigate. He was one of the learned men who had decided that the giant human footprints (much smaller-only about 21 to 22 inches long) discovered near Carson Nevada were merely the fore tracks of a bear into the hind feet making what appeared to be left right human tracks-over 100 of them…

Depressions on Cliff Near Mission San Jose Furnish Basis for Study
Oakland Tribune – September 19, 1926, Oakland, California

With the finding near here of a cliff marked with depressions having the appearance of prehistoric footprints, gigantic in scale, science has been enlisted to study the mysterious markings. Some months ago similar markings were found near Livermore.

The cliff here is located on the John A. Bunting ranch, high in the foothills, three miles east of Mission San Jose. One of its indentations resembles a human footprint, and- measures five feet in length.

Close beside it is a second indentation, cast on the same gargantuan scale, and resembling the footprint of an animal. – Both imprints, or depressions, are on the face of the cliff.

The indentations near Livermore are of the same extraordinary size.

One of the depressions on the Livermore cliff measures ten –feet in length and even more strikingly resembles a human footprint than the same footlike depression found on the cliff on the Bunting ranch.

Specimens from the cliffs, which are of sandstone formation, have been sent to Prof. George D. Louderback, head of the department of geological science, University of California, who has expressed an interest in both the Mission San Jose and Livermore imprints and will determine their origin.

Giant Footprints Found at San Jose
BERKELEY, Oct. 6. 1926 Oakland Tribune—

The discovery by Professor George D. Louderback of the University of California of depressions resembling the footprints of prehistoric man and animals on a cliff near San Jose about five feet in length, are to present an absolutely new problem to anthropologists.

The prints tally somewhat with similar impressions found at Livermore some months ago, according to Professor Louderback, with the exception that the Livermore finds were about ten feet in length.

Professor Louderback is now working on this problem, using specimens obtained from each location.

The HAYWARD SEMI-WEEKLY Tuesday, September 29, 1925

The footprint, thought to be of prehistoric origin, discovered by James Higgins high on the rock formations of Bushy Peak, is claimed to be duplicated in at least two other spots in Washington Township.

Pioneer residents claim a “footprint” similar to the description given by Higgins of the one on Bushy Peak, only of greater size can be seen on the John Bunting ranch near the Mission San Jose.

This footprint measures nearly eight feet in its length. It is said, and is very deeply embedded In solid rock.

The third mysterious foot mark is said to hare been seen on the Indian Reservation, near the Pleasant Valley road, between Sunol and Pleasanton. This foot-print, like the others, is of immense size and deeply marked on a granite cliff.

Attempt to locate these prehistoric marks was made several months ago by John Harrington, a representative of the Smithsonian Institute, who is investigating Indian lore In California.

Harrington was notified of the find made by Higgins and expects to be here in the near future to picture the foot print and lead the search to establish the exact location of the prints at Mission San Jose and the Indian reservation.



Re the following: But wait; I hear you skeptics (and you right thinking people as well) “what complete idiots they must have been in 1919 to believe that they had found a fossilized human just shy of 33 feet tall”. Need I remind you that many cling like Linus to his blanket to a theory by Chas. Darwin which was almost 70 years old at that time? Or that the atomic bomb was created only 26 years later? It was not simply some misidentified bone; it was an entire fossil over 30 feet long.

If not human, then still; what 33 foot vertebrate is there out there who at that length wouldn’t be mind blowingly large?…


Vera Cruz. Mexico. Oct. 21, 1919 Syracuse Herald

— The fossilized remains of a giant, taller than any ‘human being on record, has been found by workmen in the tiny village of Nanacamilpa, near here. Several scientists are en route from Mexico City to investigate the find. Scientists admit that the fossil appears to resemble a human being, but are of the opinion that it is a vertebrate.

Postville Herald – November 7, 1919, Postville, Iowa

Natives of Mexican Village Who Cling, to Ancient-Traditions, Guard Remains as Sacred.
Mexico City. The fossilized remains of a giant measuring 32 feet 10 Inches in height were, according to a report recently discovered by workmen near the little village of Nanacamilpa, State of Vera Cruz.

The natives, who still cling to many of the traditions of their Indian ancestors, declared the giant was related to the gods of their forefathers.

They erected a catafalque in the plaza on which the giant rested in state for many days, covered with flowers and
at night carefully guarded. The discovery attracted the attention of scientists here. Manuel Ganomo director of anthropology at the National museum, expects to leave soon for Nanacamilpa to investigate. He is inclined to believe the fossil is that of an prehistoric vertebrate not a human.

300 Pound Ancient American Ax
American Anthropologist Volume 8 1906 By American Anthropological Association

A Remarkable Stone Ax.

—”What is believed to be the largest Indian stone ax in existence has recently been placed on exhibition among the collections of the Missouri Historical Society, at St Louis, by its president, Dr C. A. Peterson, by whom the specimen was procured as a loan. This noteworthy object is of granite; it measures 28 inches in length, 14 inches in width, and 11 inches in thickness, and weighs more than 300 pounds.

The ax was obtained by George M. Huss, of Birchwood, Wisconsin, from an eminence in one of the wildest sections of the territory still occupied by the Chippewa Indians of Lac Court Oreilles and Lake Chetac, in Sawyer county, Wisconsin. When found the pointed end was embedded in a small mound of bowlders and pebbles, with the body and head of the ax exposed, the whole apparently forming a shrine or altar.

In shape the ax resembles a tomahawk pipe; its upper end or head is slightly hollowed out and in this depression was ceremoniously placed a small quantity of tobacco. A well-beaten moccasin trail led up the incline of the eminence on which the shrine stood, indicating that the place had long been used for religious purposes.

The ax for a time formed the keystone of a chimney, but was removed temporarily for a loan exhibit. According to Chippewa tradition the ax has been held in veneration by these Indians from time immemorial. The object will remain in the care of the Missouri Historical Society until spring, when it will be returned to Mr Huss, who, it is hoped, will deposit it in some public museum rather than permit a repetition of the vandalism to which it was once subjected.”

“Adam’s Footprint”

Sri Pada (also Adam’s peak; Sinhalese Samanalakanda – “butterfly mountain”, is a 2,243 metres (7,359 ft) tall conical mountain located in central Sri Lanka. It is well-known for the Sri Pada “sacred footprint”, a 1.8 metres (5 ft 11 in) rock formation near the summit, in Buddhist tradition it is held to be the footprint of the Buddha, in Hindu tradition that of Shiva and in Muslim and Christian tradition that of Adam.

Source: Wikipedia Article

See Also:There Were Giants in the Earth in Those Days-28 Pages

The Attenuated Gravity of the Antique System

Recent Post: Human and Dinosaur Inner-Action; Unfortunate Humans Provide Evidence of Interaction with Dinosaurs from Inside Their Stomachs

Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs-How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction in Plain Sight