Dr. Tim Ball – Climate, NOAA, and Free Speech

by on January 1, 2013      

in Environment, Law, Government, & Military

Dr. Tim Ball

Dr. Tim Ball

Climatology expert Dr. Tim Ball, the co-author of Slaying the Sky Dragon and a frequent guest on It’s Rainmaking Time!®, is currently facing two lawsuits for speaking truth to power. The outcome of these lawsuits will set critical precedents for free speech about the organizations behind the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory. Dr. Tim Ball returns to the show to highlight the subversion of science for political and media extremism, discuss the history of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and highlight its relevance to the various weather bureaus, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU). We will also look into what NOAA could have done to prevent significant damage from Hurricane Sandy. These prominent organizations, currently the most influential voices in the official climate change dialogue, seek to ruin Dr. Tim Ball’s reputation and silence him for the rest of his life. As dissent in the scientific community comes under threat, it is more important now than ever to question authority and the dangers of politicization. Join us with Dr. Tim Ball at the threshold of free speech in the shadow of climate change.

Play

{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Ultan Murphy January 9, 2013 at 5:44 am

Hello Kim,

The podcasts are usually of a very high standard but this interview is poor in terms of content by comparison to previous interviews. There is so much more that could be asked of Tim Ball that the world is waiting to hear. Perhaps listeners, AGW skeptics, or even alarmists, could e mail a list of questions for you to put to Tim for a future interview?

Otherwise keep up your outstanding work keeping us healthy, wealthy and wise.

Reply

2 Site Admin January 14, 2013 at 3:41 pm

Ultan,

Thank you for your comment. You may want to review the other 8 segments Kim has produced with Tim to see if some of your questions are answered.

Reply

3 Jim Clayson January 8, 2013 at 2:05 am

Nice sparring and some very good data coming out of that.

The concept of privacy is inextricably linked with liberty. With respect to Dr Ball, history is our teacher and history shows a tiny minority of individuals hate privacy because it gives people the space with which to make mistakes which don’t affect others. Very often it takes the placing of a thing’s opposite next to it in order to show the differences. This minority, who is so obsessed with stopping others from becoming able, are simply looking for a foothold to stop others from showing them up. But we don’t have to give up liberty to be free – that’s would be nuts.

When it comes to the government and what it is doing with your money, there should be no more privacy than the privacy you give your finance broker over return on your investment or what your mechanic spent your money on or your telephone company, dentist etc. etc. When a government or company is unaccountable to you, the citizen or customer, then only is there ‘too much privacy’. It is linked to the concept of private property. If there is no privacy or, as government would say ‘secrets’, then nothing can stop them from obtaining any information about you – including coming onto your property at will and spying on you at anytime they choose without your permission. I don’t know about you but that doesn’t sound like the kind of transparency the founders of the US constitution and bill of rights had in mind. Government tends towards totalitarianism, not liberty. That is the trouble, it is a genie that has tended to require a lot of blood, over centuries, to put back into the bottle. We have plenty of history to reflect on. The fact that a lot of information is a matter of public record, does not mean that a lot of people will get to hear about it so one has to indulge one’s curious side occasionally.

The old ‘if you have nothing to hide then what is the problem,’ claim(which I myself once used) assumes that government would not find a (fear inducing)’reason’ to be exempt from those rules. It basically overlooks the frailty of government as a means to protect life, liberty and property. Which is that governments have tended to attract people who do not have man’s best interests at heart. They have to be guarded, always and forever. As Jefferson said, the price of freedom is eternal vigilence.

Growing the scope of the state may seem like a good idea when mainstream media is driving us into fear but it behooves citizens to question the source of the fear. That source is most empowered through government. Doing away with privacy would amount to increasing the scope of the state ostensibly for reasons of national security but which really have more to do with personal insecurity.

Reply

4 max January 9, 2013 at 7:44 pm

Totalitarian is already here. America is over with.

Reply

5 max January 2, 2013 at 6:56 pm

LOL, Kim’s been eating her Wheaties! Great interview.

Reply

6 Dan Pangburn January 1, 2013 at 4:28 pm

An equation based on rational physics that, without considering any influence from CO2 whatsoever and using only one independent variable (the sunspot number), has calculated average global temperatures since they have been accurately measured world wide (about 1895) with an accuracy of 88% (R2 = 0.88, correlation coefficient = 0.938). Including the influence of CO2 (a second independent variable) increased the accuracy to 88.5%. This demonstrates that atmospheric CO2 has no significant influence on average global temperature.

When calibrated to measurements thru 1965 and using actual sunspot numbers, it predicted the average global temperature trend value in 2005 within 0.054°C. When calibrated thru 1995 and using actual sunspot numbers, it predicted the average global temperature trend value in 2011 within 0.004°C. The analysis includes the flat temperature trend of the last decade. The equation, links to the methodology and source data are at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true. No one else has been anywhere near this accurate.

That the equation is valid is demonstrated by accurate calculation and prediction including the flat temperature trend since 2001. Results are shown in graphs. When calibrated through 2011 and using predicted sunspot data, the equation predicts an average global temperature downtrend for at least two more decades.

Reply

7 Robert January 1, 2013 at 10:42 am

Happy New Year or as Tim always tells us, New Year, who am I to say it should be happy.What a great way to start a new year I see as decisive in many ways for the good or for the bad. More and more people are aware of the big ( global warming ) lie those in power want to sell us. Therefore this could be a very dangerous year for you, Tim Ball and all those who try to explain what is really going on . We are a threat to their power structure and they know this. A free United States of America is crucial for this or as Reagan once told us “America Is The Last Stand On Earth”

http://youtu.be/qPvuYxUxEto

Your president and his club (democrats and republicans) are the worst thing that ever happend to the free world. Don’t let them wreck your constitution. This year will be ‘We The People’ or a small dictatorial group of Evil controlling every aspect of your life.

Let’s hope we have a prosper year.

Reply

8 Robert January 1, 2013 at 11:13 am
9 Kelly Manning January 18, 2014 at 9:33 am

Steve Goddard, Ha!

Thanks for the laugh.

Remember this epic failure by Goddard:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/15/goddard_arctic_ice_mystery/

If you page down to the bottom you find notices from both Goddard and the Register editorial board that Goddard got it backwards, as usual. Despite that Climate Change deniers still cite Goddards story as some sort of proof that Global Warming is not happening.

The only time Goddard gets it right is when he admits, after being prodded by his editor, that he got it wrong.

scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2008/08/26/how-to-admit-youre-wrong/

Reply

10 Doug January 1, 2013 at 9:49 am

Hi,

In the podcast “Climate, NOAA, and Free Speech” with Tim Ball at 1:08:05 you mentioned a name. I’m unsure of the spelling but it sounded like – Stephen Spudamor(?).

Is there a place on the web where I might listen to what he has to say?

Thanks.

Reply

Leave a Comment