Summary of Andy May: “Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths” | Tom Nelson Pod #251

00:00:00 - 00:40:00

In the YouTube video "Andy May: ‘Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths’ | Tom Nelson Pod #251," guest Andy May shares his experiences with the suppression of non-consensus climate science research . He discusses two papers that were rejected without valid reasons, one titled "PETM: An Alternative Perspective" and the other about climate shifts around 1925, 1947, 1976, and 1997. May argues that both rejections were political and based on the conclusions of the papers. He also mentions the cases of Roy Spencer and William Brazell, and the firing of editors for publishing papers by Dick Linden in the 1990s. May criticizes the suppression of scientific findings that go against the consensus and raises concerns about the potential for misinformation in political summaries of scientific findings. The discussion also revolves around the scientific debates surrounding climate change, its impact on extreme weather and sea level rise, and the role of solar activity in global warming. May argues that the peer review process in science is broken and needs to be drastically revised or discarded. He also discusses the possible role of sunspots and solar output in climate shifts.

• 00:00:00 In this section of the YouTube video titled "Andy May: “Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths” | Tom Nelson Pod #251", the guest, Andy May, discusses his experiences with the suppression of non-consensus climate science research. May has been writing about climate science for about 13 years, and in his latest talk, he addresses the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the "climate consensus cabal" that hides and suppresses inconvenient truths. He shares personal examples of two papers that were invited for publication but ultimately rejected without valid reasons. The first paper, titled "PETM: An Alternative Perspective," was invited by the Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists (RM AG) and was intended to be published in their online publication, the Outcrop. The paper was reviewed by the staff and editors but was ultimately rejected due to political reasons. The rejection was a board decision made at the last minute without explanation or justification. The second paper was written for the Creative Society at their request and was about climate shifts that occurred around 1925, 1947, 1976, and 1997. The paper was never posted online by the Creative Society, and May was never given a reason why. May believes that both rejections were political and based on the conclusions of the papers, rather than any technical issues. May also mentions the case of Roy Spencer and William Brazell, who presented solid observations and facts in a paper that was rejected by the editor of Remote Sensing, Wolf Gang Vagner, in 2011. The debate between the two sides is complex and mostly over the sign and magnitude of feedbacks to greenhouse gas warming. May argues that this is how science is supposed to work, with open debate and the exchange of ideas.
• 00:05:00 In this section of the YouTube video titled "Andy May: “Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths” | Tom Nelson Pod #251," the discussion revolves around the firing of two editors for publishing papers by Dick Linden in the 1990s. The first paper, published in 1990, presented Linden's objections to the man-made greenhouse effect being the dominant cause of current warming. The paper was reasonable and did not warrant termination. The second paper, published in 2001, introduced the Iris Effect, which is now widely accepted in climate science. The Iris Effect was initially controversial, but its acceptance moved climate model results closer to observations. Despite the significance of Linden's work, one journal that published the discovery later fired its editor for doing so. The video also mentions the rejection of Albert Einstein's PhD thesis and the retraction of a paper by Gian Luca Alaman and his colleagues due to pressure from the consensus and the mainstream media. The consensus position can sometimes suppress truly innovative work, and papers are sometimes rejected simply because they challenge the status quo.
• 00:10:00 In this section of the YouTube video titled "Andy May: “Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths” | Tom Nelson Pod #251," Andy May discusses the definition of climate change impact drivers and the statistical nature of identifying climate change. He explains that even if a change occurs, it may take over a hundred years to determine if it is real climate change due to the need for extensive data. May also points out that some changes, such as a decrease in cold spells and an increase in mean air temperature, are largely benign. However, politicians often present the scientific findings differently in the summary for policy makers, which is written by politicians and not the scientists. May criticizes this discrepancy and raises concerns about the suppression of scientific findings that go against the consensus. He provides an example of the IPCC's assessment of tropical cyclone intensity frequency and duration, which has low confidence based on scientific evidence, but is presented differently in the summary for policy makers. May questions the credibility of the political section and urges listeners to be aware of the potential for misinformation.
• 00:15:00 In this section of the "Andy May: “Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths” | Tom Nelson Pod #251" YouTube video, the discussion revolves around the scientific debates surrounding climate change and its impact on extreme weather and sea level rise. The speakers challenge the notion that higher temperatures lead to stormier weather, citing research by scientists like Zong-Liang Yen, Phil Jones, and Anders Mberg, among others, who dispute the IPCC and Al Gore's claims. They argue that as the planet warms, the equator-to-pole temperature gradient decreases, providing less power for storms. The speakers also question the notion that the rate of global mean sea level (GMSL) rise is accelerating, stating that the evidence is not definitive and that much of the change in sea level rise is linked to changes in regional atmospheric circulation, not melting glaciers. They also point out that no acceleration is detected in the Eastern Pacific or the Arctic Ocean, and deceleration is detected in the Southern Ocean. The speakers suggest that the assumption that sea level rise is mostly due to man-made global warming may not be true and that the complexities of global sea level rise are often overlooked.
• 00:20:00 In this section of the YouTube video titled "Andy May: “Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths” | Tom Nelson Pod #251," Andy May discusses the role of solar activity in global warming. He explains that according to IPCC models, human activities are the sole cause of global warming since 1750, but the possibility that nature contributed to the warming is still open for investigation. May presents a graph comparing solar activity reconstructions from sunspot observations, which shows that the modern solar maximum, which lasted from about 1930 to around 2010, was the longest since 1200 BC. He argues that solar variations could make a difference in the Earth's climate, but censorship of scientific findings that challenge the accepted narrative on human-caused climate change is unscientific and wrong. May criticizes the media for exaggerating the dangers of climate change based on climate models that have been shown to be inaccurate. He also points out that warming occurs mostly in the higher latitudes, while temperatures in the tropics barely change.
• 00:25:00 In this section of the podcast, Andy May discusses the suppression of inconvenient truths in the field of climate science. He argues that the transport of heat from the tropics to the poles acts as a heat engine that produces weather, and as the world warms, less heat is transported to the poles, resulting in fewer and less severe storms in the mid-latitudes. Contrary to the consensus view, May asserts that sea level rise since 1900 is mostly natural and not caused by human activities. He criticizes the UN climate change reports for bias and censorship, stating that natural factors such as ocean oscillations and the Sun have a dominant effect on our long-term climate. May believes that censorship and suppression of free speech are enemies of science and innovation and highlights the importance of individual visionaries like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk in bringing about technological advancements. May also expresses his concerns about the broken peer-review system and the dominance of a few publishing companies.
• 00:30:00 In this section of the podcast, Andy May expresses his concerns about the peer review process in science, particularly in fields like climate science, economics, and medicine. He argues that larger publishing companies have too much influence over what gets published and that the process is broken. May cites examples of innovative but controversial papers being suppressed, including those by Einstein and Lindon. He also questions the future of organizations like the IPCC and COP meetings, expressing surprise that they have survived despite criticism and lack of progress in understanding the impact of CO2 on climate. May believes that the peer review process needs to be drastically revised or discarded, and expresses hope that in 20 years, these organizations may no longer exist due to the mounting criticism and lack of progress. He also challenges the narrative that people are more alarmed about climate change now than they were 10 years ago, arguing that published research over the last decade should make people less alarmed and more aware of nature's role in climate and the diminishing influence of CO2.
• 00:35:00 In this section of the podcast, Andy May discusses the possible role of sunspots and solar output in climate shifts, specifically the 1976 Pacific climate shift. He explains that while there is a correlation between solar activity and climate shifts, the exact mechanism is unclear. May emphasizes that oceans act as an accumulator of sunlight and solar radiation has a significant impact on ocean temperature, while greenhouse gases have a minimal effect. He also notes that warming climate shifts may occur more quickly than cooling shifts due to the dampening effect of the oceans and the role of extreme weather events like El Niños and hurricanes in releasing heat into space. May also mentions a correlation between upper mantle activity and climate shifts, but stresses that correlation does not imply causation.
• 00:40:00 In this section of the YouTube video "Andy May: ‘Suppression of Science and Inconvenient Truths’ | Tom Nelson Pod #251," Andy May discusses a correlation he noticed between climate shifts and something else, but admits he doesn't know much more about it or how the mechanism would work. Tom Nelson, the video's host, expresses his appreciation for May's work and encourages listeners to consider May's perspective instead of Greta's. May thanks Nelson for having him on the show and they sign off.