Barack Obama lives in a world of make believe facts, which he basically pulls out from where the sun never shines. Then he tells others that his lies are the only acceptable facts.

He promised to lower health care costs by $2,500 for the typical family during his first term in office.

Health Plan From Obama Spurs Debate – NYTimes.com

Instead of lowering health care costs, he increased them in almost every state and added a massive 2.5% Obamacare tax

Now There Can Be No Doubt: Obamacare Has Increased Non-Group Premiums In Nearly All States – Forbes

Last week he claimed that his daughter’s asthma was caused by diminished air quality due to global warming, but the EPA shows the exact opposite – that US air quality has dramatically improved since he was a child – and continues to get better

Air Pollution and the Clean Air Act | US Environmental Protection Agency

Radiative transfer models show that adding more CO2 to the atmosphere doesn’t have much affect on temperature, so Hansen made up a psychotic theory of positive feedbacks, which were going to push the Earth past a “tipping point.”

The most important feedback was loss of polar sea ice, which was theorized to amplify global warming. This hasn’t happened. In fact the amount of sea ice on Earth may challenge record levels later this year.

timeseries.global.anom.1979-2008

If positive feedbacks dominated, Earth would have passed many tipping points in the past. But like all long standing systems, negative feedbacks dominate and keep the climate relatively stable.

All real scientists understand this, which is why climate scientists don’t.

by Judith Curry

The House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology Hearing on the President’s UN Climate Pledge has now concluded.

I ran across three articles that further convince me that it’s foolish to use climate models to direct the U. S. or global economies.

A guest post by Nicholas Lewis

In Part 1 I introduced the talk I gave at Ringberg 2015, explained why it focussed on estimation based on warming over the instrumental period, and covered problems relating to aerosol forcing and bias caused by the influence of the AMO. I now move on to problems arising when Bayesian probabilistic approaches are used, and then summarize the state of instrumental period warming, observationally-based climate sensitivity estimation as I see it. I explained in Part 1 why other approaches to estimating ECS appear to be less reliable.

Slide 8

A guest post by Nicholas Lewis

As many readers will be aware, I attended the WCRP Grand Challenge Workshop: Earth’s Climate Sensitivities at Schloss Ringberg in late March. Ringberg 2015 was a very interesting event, attended by many of the best known scientists involved in this field and in areas of research closely related to it – such as the behaviour of clouds, aerosols and heat in the ocean. Many talks were given at Ringberg 2015; presentation slides are available here. It is often difficult to follow presentations just from the slides, so I thought it was worth posting an annotated version of the slides relating to my own talk, “Pitfalls in climate sensitivity estimation”. To make it more digestible and focus discussion, I am splitting my presentation into three parts. I’ve omitted the title slide and reinstated some slides that I cut out of my talk due to the 15…

Gordon and I have corresponded many times, and I follow his advocacy.