Sabine realises climate models have a nasty secret. But slightly misses the point.

[@davidclements1218]

Very interesting - I would love to hear Sabine's response to this.

[@reefrebels]

Yes we would like a response from her personally , hopefully our video gains enough traction to be heard

[@Seaby41]

​​@reefrebels good luck. She could be a powerful ally... if she could be turned

[@turtle-frogs]

A response would be a surprise.

[@Maryloutes]

😂

[@indenial3340]

The reason I unsubbed her. Perhaps she will go more truth oriented

[@AndreComtois]

Three environmentalists get into an elevator. After the door closes, they all fart and the temperature in the elevator rises 2 degrees. They all come to the conclusion that given the change in temperature, they will burn up in flames before the elevator reaches the 10th floor.

[@DodaandGuiga]

LoL that’s great

[@vicgallimore6756]

SOUNDS LIKE SHIT TO ME.

[@Freja_Solstheim]

One can only hope... lol

[@GamingDemiurge]

As a physicist is amazing to me how she sees that the models are bs and proceeds to ignore the evidence.

[@darrenmonsiegneur5310]

That’s because you’re a physicist and not a politician 🙏🏽

[@AndreComtois]

As Jordan Peterson points out. If the models can't predict the stock market a day in advance, how exactly are they predicting something 1000 times more complex like the climate?

[@C_R_O_M________]

It's called the n-body problem (originating from astronomy) and it's been solved in theoretical mathematics by Poincare and Sundman but when real life measurements are involved, a tiny inaccuracy produces huge mistakes. This is exactly how climate models are trying to solve for ... the future. It's impossible, not only because of inaccuracies in measurement but also because the theory itself is incomplete and could be seriously wrong (for example the ECS range of climate sensitivity). This is a 100% political scam!

[@Simqer]

Here's a tip: Stop listening to Jordan Peterson.

[@jamskinner]

@Simqer Why?

[@bunzinthesun]

Yes, there is no stock market model that can predict over any time period, or someone would own the world. There is NO chance that one can predict complex systems (butterfly effect).

[@globalwarming382]

Bcuz Peterson is a moron

[@mossig]

The most scary part is that 99% of all humans don't know how scammed they are in so many fields. And the scammers always bring up "anti" when you call them out.

[@hoptoads]

Yes, I'm anti ..... anti BS.

[@motofunk1]

Yep, and a true scientist would be more than willing to accept challenges to their conclusions, in fact they would do it themselves. Science starts with a question and the questions never stop.

[@wideyxyz2271]

Ive been around for 60 years. I dont see any exceptional changes in weather or temperatures. One thing I have learned and seen time and time again is whoever pays for a study always gets the results they want....

[@theresesilvawalker8407]

I do see changes. Big ones

[@alanrobertson9790]

@@theresesilvawalker8407 Depends where you are too. Normally I'd dismiss anecdotal evidence but in a world where statistical climate science has become politicized so you can't rely on it you can still believe in your own experiences. For UK I have not noticed a change in weather for the worse. The places which are projected to have bad climate are the poorest ones that doesn't include UK or USA.

[@jacekmarczyk4436]

Agreed! I have been travelling regularly between the North and South hemispheres for decades and I agree with your statement. It is a huge mistake to look at climate (climate is a weather pattern established over periods of at least 30 years) in a city, for example. Climate is a process of planetary proportions (it involves the Sun, the atmosphere and the oceans) and must be viewed from a global perspective.

[@Freja_Solstheim]

In the last 60 years we have added 3.5 billion people. Weather haven't changed but a lot more people are being affected by it. Also marginal areas vulnerable to weather has been covered by cities causing weather events to appear more severe. There's a river valley in Germany where they built a new town only to have it destroyed by a flood event. This was then exploited to claim climate change is real. Such corruption.

[@tcz7742]

I saw the corruption of science getting exponentially worse over my 45-year career. Very early on the climate folks became offside we my discipline of geology and Paleo climatology.

[@bartroberts1514]

Can you cite some cases? Do you mean Roy Spencer and John Christy, corrupted by Cal Beisner's end-of-days Cornwall Alliance? Weird, huh? Balliunas and Soon? Weird story, that was. The 1968 Black Report, deep-sixed by Exxon? Weird. Richard Lindzen? John Clauser? Ian Plimer? Software developer Tony Heller? Bob Carter? Warwick Hughes? Dave Archibald? Dave Evans? Viv Forbes? Jo Nova? Bill Kininmonth? Cliff Ollier? Tom Quirk? Political Scientist Bjorn Lomborg? Pete Ridd? John McLean? Economist Ross McKitrick?

[@manoo422]

When you research the science and find massive holes in its conclusions but STILL believe it hook line and sinker...then theres something wrong with you...

[@abajojoe]

I think you’re spot on. The question is “What does Sabine care about more, the truth or the popularity of her channel?”

[@reefrebels]

she should answer this herself

[@abajojoe]

I agree. But you are probably shadow banned by KZbin, and she has 100 times as many subscribers. Will she risk getting shadow banned herself? I doubt it.

[@thierrylandrieu7441]

I agree 100% … I usually like sabine’ s videos, but just try to criticize climate catastrophism on her channel… it will usually will attract bashing. On the other hand she can be very ironic, so sometimes you wonder where is she leading… but in the end I think she goes with the « green » agenda.

[@reefrebels]

@@reefrebels bu for the record, I think she is a genuine truth-seeker.

[@andrewclark3236]

So funny. The chart from CO2 Coalition shown at 4:21 is for temperatures taken from GISP2 Greenland ice core data only up to 1855. It's not the average global temperature of the Earth. Here is a short video explaining the deliberate doctoring of the phony graph. kzbin.infoUgkx2FOf2yiauvgaDDcxPZy371xEr8rsVHfc?si=cVDk3If2GoJToF31

[@wwiiinplastic4712]

Sabine is one of the few science KZbinrs that I think is on the verge of realizing the actual truth. The rest dropped to their knees and swallowed The Science in order to stay in its good graces.

[@orionbetelgeuse1937]

she surely knows the truth just she needs the money because she started talking about it only after moving to a new university which might ask her to do that

[@JOSEPHDANCE75]

I asked about 10 years ago why James Hansen changed the Earths average temperature from 15c to 14c. I also asked what is the Earths average temp suppose to be. Got nothing back of course. Been banned from BOM,NASA,NOAA,CSIRO since 2010. They claim we have to fight climate, stop the climate change,combat etc etc . I asked, so is weather over a 30 year period for a particular region suppose to be static or not change?

[@C_R_O_M________]

Not only that! Which climate are we suppose to fight? There are about 30 different climate systems on the planet. Which is changing, towards what way, how does it affect the others, detrimentally or beneficially, and how, at the end of the day are we supposed to predict anything when the n-body mathematical problem is certainly in the way and makes it impossible to predict anything?

[@will7its]

Like the "War" on drugs....

[@paradiselost9946]

@@C_R_O_M________ like "rising sea levels"... so, we are told about tectonic plates, continental drift, the mid pacific rift, that the himalayas are constantly growing, that all the continents are moving around willy nilly... we have countries like iceland splitting apart and increasing in areas as other countries vanish back into the mantle, and new, previously non existent one arise from the depths of the sea, yet somehow, amidst this... the oceans have a definite and precise "level" that never alters... except in those "eras of catastrophic climate change..." iunno, but when i put water in a balloon, or possibly some type of squishy, flexible "bucket"... then attempt to support it from various points, the water level never seems consistent... not withstanding that the volume of water may also be varied within rather wide limits...

[@tombradshaw5164]

15 deg C is the temperature that's used in ISA (International Standard Atmosphere), and any alteration to that cannot be justified under any circumstances. Global average temp is a real mish-mash. What temps are being measured/sensed - ground temps, soil temps, air temps, sea surface temps? If it's air temperatures, then that measurement has to taken by appropriate and approved meteorological instruments that have been housed in a Stevenson's screen, and sited according to WMO standards and criteria. Such can't be accurately conducted using satellite tech, and it can't be done in direct sunlight either.

[@barryj388]

@@will7its It's almost like the "climate scientists" have taken a page out of the Military Industrial Complex's book and found a way to engage in a forever-war, with an unseen foe (just believe us when we tell you he really is there), that will never be won but will keep providing them with cash.

[@vociferonheraldofthewinter2284]

If anyone wants to see the true horror of a corrupted field, look at 'nutrition science.' The fun part is to look into what anthropology had to say about how humans of the past ate and compare that to our recommendations. I was an anthropology major in college. One of my most memorable lessons was when I had the opportunity to compare two skeletons. One from a hunter/gatherer and the other from an agricultural society. How to you tell the difference? Well, first you count the ratio of children to adults. Lots of kids, farmers. Lots of elders and very few little ones? Hunters. Look at the teeth. Lots of tooth loss and decay? Grain eater. Healthy, straight teeth and jaw large enough for ALL the teeth to fit nicely? Meat eater. Then we look at the joints. Lots of joint degradation? Definitely a farming community. Strong, healthy joints? Hunting community. (The skeleton of the agricultural specimen was a teenage girl. Both of her knees had been worn horrifically and she wasn't even twenty. This was most likely from rocking back and forth grinding grain since she was small. When she died she had a terrible abscess tooth. the bone had been eaten away into her nose and this may have been her cause of death. Her skull wasn't even fully fused yet and she'd already had at least three children. My heart ached for her.) Welp, I fell in love and left college to start my family. Early in our marriage I had the opportunity to become a certified nutritionist. Nothing crazy. I was legally permitted to advise housewives how to feed their family and manage their own weight. (I couldn't tell a diabetic how to eat to manage their disease. Not that level. No degree.) I did that for about a year until one day I realized that the low fat/low meat/complex carbs/lots of veggies advice I was giving - and following myself - didn't work. Had a bit of a nervous breakdown and quit immediately. It wasn't until later that I realized that the advice I was giving was the EXACT diet that led to the miserable lives of the early agriculturalists that I studied in college. I was so damn brainwashed by my education that I couldn't see the forest for the trees. I was one tiny hop from putting two-and-two together and I just could NOT see it. We know damn well how to nourish our bodies and we've known for a long time. But special interests have so perverted the science that the average person is totally lost.

[@reefrebels]

interesting, thanks for sharing

[@asahearts1]

Thanks for the story. I had a similar thing much earlier in my college experience as a psych major.

[@kipper2942]

Experience totally trumps false narratives and lies feed to us. Listen to nature listen to your inner instincts, the truth of all that matters in the real world

[@Enoo-Wynn]

I think athletic footwear falls into a similar category. My feet look like I wore high heals all my life, yet I've worn runners. I think I should have been exercising my foot muscles. Instead they were schlumping over arch support etc. and now look and feel awful.

[@jimmoses6617]

@@Enoo-Wynn Try walking barefoot in the grass every day. Then switch to Altra shoes. They are "zero drop" (flat) and have a very wide toe box. I run in them, and am on my 9th pair. Good luck

[@BeachSR17]

The best question I ever heard at a scientific conference to a presenter was “do you actually believe that?”

[@johno2980]

I was amazed and disappointed with Sabine’s reaction to her realisation that the climate models are wobbly. She thinks that it may mask an even bigger climate problem. That’s a strange conclusion. Too many popular science commentators are wilfully blind to the huge red flags waving around climate science. The altering of historical temperature records is one such flag. There may be legitimate reasons to alter historical measurements but the process would need to be completely open, consistent and able to be reproduced. Instead the BoM has made the process inscrutable. It takes an expert in data management like Tony Heller to plot out the before and after temperature graphs to show that the net result is to cool the past to seem like there is a warming trend. Keep up the good work Peter, you are hugely appreciated.

[@jean-marclamothe8859]

Not a strange conclusion but a stupid one!

[@tombradshaw5164]

BOM has done a lot of work converting old Fahrenheit temps to Celsius, and therein lies a significant flaw in the data. So many approximations are not the cornerstone of data integrtity, but slight manipulation via "rounding" of values may well lead to databases imbued with mischievous error in order to create a false narrative.

[@wideyxyz2271]

There is NO climate crisis only climate TAXES.

[@kirklaird5020]

I've looked at several of Sabine's videos on climate. Clearly she doesn't know earth science - and she is far too comfortable accepting temperature data as presented - without bothering to check whether the data is good or corrupted. Lazy science.

[@Soupie62]

How do you KNOW if data is good, or corrupted? Even if you gather it yourself, you need to be an expert to ensure no external source is skewing your readings.

[@wwiiinplastic4712]

I find from my experience as a science teacher that my peers are more than happy to accept all data as they assume it has been properly vetted. And they stick to it so hard that when I present contradictory evidence that is confirmed they struggle to change their opinions.

[@OneWildTurkey]

@@wwiiinplastic4712 That's a really big point right there. Too many scientists, as well as science teachers, who place more value on their opinions than the evidence.

Even the methods of measurement were vastly altered and that knowingly produced higher (theoretically more accurate) temps.

​@@Soupie62It's easy to know. Track the funding... and almost all funding comes from those with an agenda now.

[@mountbara]

Beautifully done and I wish you could be broadcast far and wide.

[@andrewclark3236]

So funny. The chart from CO2 Coalition shown at 4:21 is for temperatures taken from GISP2 Greenland ice core data only up to 1855. It's not the average global temperature of the Earth. Here is a short video explaining the deliberate doctoring of the phony graph. kzbin.infoUgkx2FOf2yiauvgaDDcxPZy371xEr8rsVHfc?si=cVDk3If2GoJToF31

[@ausforaus7617]

We all know the intelligence of your average fashion model. We are learning that these computer models (covid, warming, etc) make the fashion models look like Einstein.

[@Seaby41]

Funnily enough my wife pointed out to me that the reason people (perhaps women and men on the more feminine side of personality? ) get caught up in this is pure fashion. It's what's in, it's what's hip. I don't think it's even so much they want to be hip, they don't want to be not hip

[@bunzinthesun]

"There's no scientific evidence to suggest that fashion models have an "average IQ at best." In fact, some studies suggest a positive correlation between physical attractiveness and intelligence." - Gemini AI

[@tonyclarke570]

All corruption in politics, scientific, social worlds should be called out.

[@DANTHETUBEMAN]

Turns out you can buy scientists for about the same amount as politicians. 😮😮

[@bartroberts1514]

So, calling out Reef Rebels, then. Weird corruption of science.

[@TheToledoTrumpton]

@@bartroberts1514 It isn't really a corruption of science, more a corruption of scientific results. And for the most part the scientists don't lie. If you have a good knowledge of statistical mathematics you can often spot the weaknesses. For example, publishing the average of the climate models to the general public hides the fact that the models vary by 3 degrees. They can't all be right, in fact all but one of them is wrong, even if one of them is right, which means averaging them doesn't make much sense from a statistical perspective. If I do a math problem 10 times and get a different answer every time, averaging all the answers is not going to give me the right answer, and if they are ALL wrong, then the average could be out by more than the best guess. The correct answer could be out by more or less than all the wrong ones. Wrong answers tell you nothing about the right answer.

[@BoyBiggles84]

Just ask Pete.. we know how that works out for those that do.. Get labeled a 'cooker' or your facts misinformation.. even locked up, or worse..

[@jimmoses6617]

Professional archaeologist here. Same in my field. Whatever the latest "cool/sexy" theory is, people flock to it, write thesis, dissertations, papers, and get funding. Today, it is all about "gender roles" and "equity' and "gender" (of course).

[@normanstewart7130]

Remember when Melissa Fleming of the UN said "we own the science".

[@will7its]

Yeah except her handlers own the science. She just thinks she does.

[@tombradshaw5164]

Yes, I do remember, and that's precisely the reason why the UN wants to corral the so-called science. Very few people in the world are even aware that the IPCC is NOT the world's climatological authority; it just happens to be the World Meteorological Organization.

[@DarthChrisB]

She wasn't lying that's for sure

[@joejugashvili3616]

What she meant was: "We own the scientists".

[@bomma2694]

I thought that was the wef, meh not much difference.

[@darrenpaches3731]

I get my climate change updates from Climate Discussion Nexus, Tony Heller, Patrick Moore, Dr Willie Soon, John Christy, Lord Monckton, Freeman Dyson.

[@Freja_Solstheim]

Don't forget Tom Nelson.

[@68ctcb]

Brilliant. Thank you.

[@Pengochan]

1:33 The biggest problem with that graph can't even be seen: All those models that were simply rejected, only because they just didn't fit what the researchers wanted to see. All the twiddling of parameters to "adjust" those models. As a physicist I'm also wondering how one can trust anything a model predicts that is several degrees off, as that in consequence severely affects e.g. humidity, size of ice caps, heat exchange with the sea ... And with tese models they supposedly found "critical points" of no return?

[@marcelfsilva]

if some science fields are little corrupted, the climate filed is far the most that has incentives. it is in the center of geopolitic games and the billionary enterprizes!

[@manlyadvice1789]

If you knew much about electromagnetism, you might requalify that statement. :P

[@geraldfrost4710]

Convection is the primary process that moves heat through our atmosphere, not transmission. That means wind from the surface lifting water vapor, which condenses into rain (or snow) which comes back to the surface of the earth. We're basically living in an air conditioner, one which uses water as it's heat transport medium. Vapor and liquid, which means phase changes, which are sensitive to surface wind speed and cosmic rays. This is NOT simple science! Heck, even the number of hurricanes is inversely correlated with the sunspot cycle, and no one is quite sure why.

[@reefrebels]

Convection, especially in the tropical region is crucial but diabolically difficult to model. It is a hugely non-linear (mathematically) problem which is parameterised very crudely. Deep tropical convection is also a powerful negative feedback mechanism - get it wrong and the climate model is useless.

[@geraldfrost4710]

As to Sabine, she's a scientist. She's looking at the data, and she senses that something is wrong. That's a good thing. When Einstein figured out the photo electric effect, that lead to quantum mechanics. Noticing something is out of place is the first step to figuring out what is wrong with the understanding. The next step is understanding that the errors are funding driven. The IPCC is focused on carbon driven climate change, literally by definition. There is no way they're gonna say, "Meh; it's a minor problem." If they did their funding would dry up like spit on a hot metal stove. Remember: 97% of scientists agree that they want to keep being funded. And ALL bureaucrats!

[@thereligionofrationality8257]

@@reefrebels Feedback mechanisms only apply to constructed mechanical systems. Its an engineering term. It very specifically refers to the capability of a subsystem to control the amount the energy it receives from the external environment. A thermostat in a house, for example. It can be extrapolated to a living organism (the autonomic nervous system of a living being can be compared to a thermostat), but not to the climate of Earth. Nothing Earth does controls how much energy or power it receives from the Sun. Feedback is not a synonym for Cause and Effect.

[@AegonCallery-ty6vy]

Fluid dynamics has always been tricky. Coupled w phase transition nigh on impossible to equate. However, we do know the basic physics. But somehow we managed to squeeze the mouse Co2 into the equation. The elephant H2o is not amused..

[@jehl1963]

"Heck, even the number of hurricanes is inversely correlated with the sunspot cycle..." Sunspot cycle??? Over the last 15 years the number of hurricanes to strike the US East Coast is inversely proportional to the experts predictions!

[@Appleblade]

Everyone has known since the beginning that water vapor and clouds alone introduce gigantic error bars into purportedly predictive models. It's why Freeman Dyson said "I don't think they can EVER be predictive"... and when pressed, affirmed that the climate is "just too complex" to model... saying "It's just way, way out of sight." He called it a religion, with a lot of true believers. lol

[@dckatyx9577]

Sabine is German and seems to be predisposed to government ordered solutions despite her awareness of the underlying scientific problems.

[@felmaci3910]

I thought the same. Germans can be almost autistic when it comes to thrust in authority and general naivety about the world.

[@zombieGI]

She is the most honest one out there. She cares about the data. Brings hope that maybe there are others. Ofc her fan base harras her when she gives them a cold shower. I keep asking in the comment section if anyone has a model that includes the effect of whaling, and general overfishing on plankton and others in the marine food chain that filter co2 (which seems to me to have had a bigger impact than human emissions just on a general comparison of the co2 quantities involved in the calculations). So far i know of no one that knows of such a model and my belief is it's because energy consumption is the key to controlling society not regulating whaling and fishing

[@kraftzion]

1850 was a little ice age. That's why all the climate models start there. Back up a few hundred year more and we are below average temperature. Co2 follows temperature. Not the other way around.

[@flintycustard8406]

Corruption goes back to the Garden of Eden : No surprise that it is in EVERY facet of Human endeavor.

[@johnl5316]

Prof William Happer has a great paper with a colleague that does well with temp prediction. Nir Shaviv has great research on the sun, cosmic rays, clouds, and temp

[@AquaMarine1000]

Don't forget, Willy Soon.

[@reefrebels]

Sabine made a video to debunk Willy Soon

[@fairhall001]

Google suggests retraction watch as a suggestion for my morning scroll through the internet news these days. I love it. One guy has over 200 retracted papers and they are now hiding information in the meta-data. I like Sabine and agree that she is on the verge of red pill awareness. She is probably holding back in case she gets cancelled.

[@ricshumack9134]

Thanks, great clip. I remember a time, a few years ago, when even parts of the corporate world made honesty and integrity the cardinal virtues.

[@tangoone6312]

If the Sun is not even taken into account how can any predictions be taken seriously? I quit Sabine and other Science KZbinrs when I realised they are not willing to question the consensus. Instead they appear to question but still leave the narrative unscathed.

[@acebacker1]

Well said again Dr Ridd. I watched Sabina’s videos and was similarly disappointed that she (currently at least) is missing the point. I found it fascinating that her response sadly was the “Chicken Little” one of demanding we do “something” now because things are (possibly) much worse than we fear, and the sky is falling very soon. I am not optimistic she will voice a change to The Dark Side, as her large KZbin channel is now her income stream. She not doubt fears being excommunicated from the Church of Climatism. I ceased watching her presentations generally, reasoning that if her non-climate stuff is as flawed, biased, and affected by ideology and ignorance of basic scientific method, then it’s unfortunately just more KZbin fluff. Pity. Keep up the great work!

[@reefrebels]

Perhaps it takes more time for her to switch sides , at least shes taken the steps to point out the errors

[@user-ju7dx8mu6d]

I have been quite disappointed in Sabine's apparent failure to read the AGW literature that doesn't support the official narrative. Usually when I encounter people who believe AGW without question, I simply right them off as confused or dimwits. However, I like much of what Sabine has to say in other areas and I hold out hope that a some point she may actually start to critically read the AGW literature.

[@Seaby41]

I share similar sentiments. There's a few similar people around. Not even scientists. Engineers, Economists etc whose artciles , podcasts, etc I listen to and value. Their work is essentially my particular industry/discipline and particularly the media surrounding it is completely corrupt..... and then they tack but climate change is totally true and we'll all be dead soon if we don't take action. And theb my brain hurts. I wonder why theirs doesn't

[@thierrylandrieu7441]

Her channel has turned pro . I do not think she could stand up to a shadowbaning … For sure she would lose more than half her followers. Now … this video is proof she knows how to confront very interesting points. She is not dumb … what she did was bring something to attention that is usually carefully not discussed.

[@paulmurphy5136]

Oh wow, that's awesome you acknowledge your awakening and I have great respect for you for doing so. I remember watching the face of Dr John Campbell when he awoke to the medical science and corruption a few years back.

[@schnauzpig]

I really hope Sabine watches this and brings her audience along. Those models would make any set of data look like a hocky stick and she thinks the problem might be that the reality might be even worse than they predict!?

[@thierrylandrieu7441]

Usually, governments prefer to say the future is dangerous … if it turns up good , they will say it was due to their actions, if it turns out bad they will say they warned but were not listened to . That’s why revolutions are scarce and far between.

[@reefrebels]

Yes we hope so too , the video needs to gain more traction!

[@schnauzpig]

@@reefrebels Thank you for opening my eyes by the way. For years now I've been red pilled on everything except for environmental policy. Watching one of your videos about the reef opened up rabbit hole of new content, particularly CDN which I have been binge watching together with your stuff.

[@crabby7668]

I doubt her audience will come along. Some get fairly snotty when she challenges orthodoxy, however slightly

[@blackberrythorns]

it's been known that the models aren't entirely accurate for a long time, there's been a split in the scientific community between the modelers and the real world empiricists across many fields. all the real world data suggests the models are too conservative and it's understood the ipcc is politicized, economists have had way too much input as well and they're clueless (see steve keen for more info. on that).

[@garryrichardson4572]

Thank you again Peter. My theory is that the catastrophe is a lie designed to control us. WEF just want the world to starve or exist on the poverty line so they don’t run out of stuff. Malthusian thinking is not an excuse for culling people. I am a Christian and believe that a creator can continue to create or allow us to create greater prosperity through cooperation with each other.❤

[@AtHomeTacticalDefense]

If fraud is what we observe around us in climate science, the assumption should be that it is normal, not the anomaly.

[@pushlooop]

if only corals and other beautiful creatures living on this marvellous planet could speak and tell a lesson to these pseudo-scientists about what is a real "climate optimum"

[@edswl7681]

First time here on Reef Rebels and could not agree more about corruption in science. Liked & subscribed! 👍

[@reefrebels]

thanks for the support

[@CHUNKYNUGGET666]

I would have to agree! Sabine is a lovely lady I’m hoping she takes this well and grows from it!

[@pedalingparson]

So much of science is post-normal science where they begin the scientific method with the desired outcomes or policy and work back from there. What could possibly go wrong?

[@johnlaudenslager706]

Everything that people think about gets corrupted by fears and needs. Does that mean we should stop thinking and acting? For instance, if we think our air is dirty to breathe and our untreated water unhealthy for us and fish, does that mean we should not try to clean it up and reduce what made it dirty and unhealthful? If we think global temperatures are rising troublesomly, we should not try to correct the perceived causes of the perceived changes, while constantly rechecking our data and models? I want us to act on the best data and models we have, AND keep rechecking the data and models.

[@dannutley931]

Terrific clip! Now Subscribed. Sabine is a truly great thinker, and will eventually see through the fog.

[@alanrobertson9790]

I used to think Sabine was a great thinker then I realised growing her youtube channel is her main concern.

[@TXDude]

I've long held that climate 'science' is merely statistics (math, and math isn't science). It only works reasonably well if you have enough data points, from enough locations from enough regular events/time. Extrapolating what must have been in the empty spots is fair enough, if you STOP!!!!! at that extrapolation. When you feed your extrapolations back into your model, you get nonsense.

[@jules2545]

It must be heart breaking to put your life into something you think is a noble endeavour and its turns out to be as bankrupt as most things humans turn their hands to involving large amounts of money and power. I work in the field of commercial Hydrography/Oceanography, early on I did fancy going down the academic path, however I am bloomin glad I did not. My nephew works on the GBR as a dive master, Over the years I have asked him to send me any images he takes of the reef. Anecdotal I know, but it is looking beautiful. Keep up the good work Dr. Ridd.

[@reefrebels]

Thank you

[@5353Jumper]

What is more likely and more artificially influential on global decision making from the below options? 1. Millions of researchers who have gone into fields centered around finding new truths, checking each others works, and discovery, are all affected by groupthink so much they are all fudging all their results. The thousandair scintists in their million dollar facilities are all money motivated by some mysterious top down money source which is trying to get them all to move in a particular direction for some purpose. 2. That the trillion dollar petroleum, transportation and petroleum invested institutions are spending billions on politicial and social infleunce to convince us that we should all keep burning trullions of dollars worth of fuels. That they are attempting to hide the damage their products are doing to our environment, perpetuate wars and social conflict, and crush competitive solution to maintain market demand for their products as long as possible. Where do you think the money motivation is?

[@gadget348]

I don't know, but I do know that Greenland was green, hence its name, a thousand years before we burned any fossil fuels. And I've been aware of the fact that scientists couldn't get funding for a stick of chalk unless they 'found' evidence of climate change for at least fifteen years. I'm also aware that it is only these fossil fuels keeping eight billion of us alive.

[@johnkelly3772]

OMG I left a comment saying exactly what you said about the corruption on that very video of hers!!!!

[@jefflabute2946]

Sabine knows BS when she sees it and seems like an honest chick to me. My hopes are she will see the light (of the dark side).

[@scottw2317]

I did remember finding a discussion where her husband and herself had invested something into the scam. There are a few skeptical scientists that pull apart her videos but for the most point her cheerleading is normally ignored by those arguing over the nuance of what the data indicated. Evidence of that would be to search Watts Up With That, the largest website discussing climate change and generally from the skeptical view point. 'Hossenfelder ' when entered in to the search only yields several results going back years and WUWT doesn't only cover climate science but other science interest subjects at times.

[@thierrylandrieu7441]

I wonder if her agenda is not « agree with the green , but push towards nuclear rather than 100% renewables » …

[@gooiehoop20]

Thanks for the nostalgia. That book behind you, the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics reminds me of the bad old days when I was still a naive scientist. Now I am enlightened and do things that really matter, running a subsistence permaculture plot. Far more healthy to body and soul than a scientific career.

[@gregheth]

Thank you Peter Excellent I'll sharing this when my discussions need some backup

[@reefrebels]

Thanks for sharing!

[@MegaDeano1963]

I would also point each individual model run , gives you no indication of uncertainty associated with that individual model

[@roblouw1344]

It is nonsense to average a bunch of incorrect models and then that the 'mean' is what we should use! What kind of science is this?

[@bunzinthesun]

Yes, the models are 3X or so from each other, that's science? Taking the average of Wild Ass Guesses doesn't increase accuracy.

[@garrygraham]

The global electric circuit and magnetic field effects are not considered in the models nor in cloud formation and rainfall.

[@anomamos9095]

The measurements of global mean temperature is akin to getting hundreds of blind people in different countries to measure the length of a football field with rubber bands. Currently the amount and accuracy of temperature measurements is barely sufficient to tell that there might be a trend towards being hotter or cooler but not if that trend will continue or reverse or how long it will last. Geological and proxy studies together with astrological observations and calculations can tell us possible reasons why there’s an ice age or a warm period. If you couple the temperature data with all the other factors you can possibly predict that a trend may occur and to a mirror degree what it will be and how long it may last. With best efforts the margin of error can be determined to within about 2 degrees Celsius plus or minus. Any calculations on the effect of various greenhouse gasses have a margin of error of about five degrees but they claim ridiculous numbers of 1.5 degrees warming based on the computer models. Natural warming is calculated at about 1.2 degrees, with a margin of error of two the overlap of the so called greenhouse effect disappears in the margin of error. So basically the greenhouse effect is nothing but a lot of hot air of the socialist propaganda kind.

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

The sea levels are going to rise hundreds of feet due to glacial melting, says the climate activist with five different ocean front homes that scuttles from one climate conference to another on his private jet.

[@Oxyandy]

"UN Summit of the future Sept 2024" Wants to push through a declaration of a "Planetary Emergency".

[@Oxyandy]

I would love to post the link to this but no doubt it will be blocked by the platform. Please people look this one up if they get the numbers this is going to impact us all in a very serious way. It means they're no longer playing with modelling or whatever they are "declaring" an emergency. Give a thought for a minute on the level of power this will entitle them to.

[@johngeier8692]

Net Zero is economically destructive delusional insanity. The General Secretary of the United Nations should resign for colluding with climate hysteria.

[@alanstewart6895]

The second I heard 'end of the world' from global warming was when I REJECTED the entire theory.

[@okiwatashi2349]

If Covid taught us anything it’s that scientific models can be completely wrong.

[@geraldfrost4710]

Ask someone in Canada, "Is a +2 degrees a climate inconvenience?" "You mean a +30 day growing season? No! That's a climate catastrophe!"

[@StabilisingGlobalTemperature]

I am interested in the Great Barrier Reef: are other reefs also affected by farm waste?

[@reefrebels]

In some parts of SE Asia, yes. But not for the GBR or any of the other Australian Reefs (se www.australianenvironment.org/gbr-report-2024)

[@StabilisingGlobalTemperature]

@@reefrebels Thanks for the reply. The link is slightly faulty: I had to delete the bracket at the end.

[@Yowie722]

I realised “model$” were a heap of shit about midway through 2020 when we were told 500000 Aussies would die of CV. I now know that bad data/best guesses in, mean shit data out.

[@richarddobreny6664]

But no cloud models in these models! Like clouds are not important!

[@johngeier8692]

There is a more obvious problem with climate science. The assumption that the current mean annual surface temperature of Earth is ideal is wrong. The current mean annual surface temperature is suboptimal. Warming is initially beneficial whereas cooling is immediately detrimental. Warming has the net beneficial effects of increased agricultural yields, reduced winter heating costs, fewer deaths from hypothermia and postponement of the next glacial maximum. Additionally, the current atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is suboptimal for plant growth. Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations result in greening of the planet with increased agricultural yields. In other words, the carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels are largely beneficial and there is no utility in climate action. It is a colossal waste of taxpayers money and resources.

[@judymiller975]

Senator Renick explained about this a while ago in Parliament. I noticed that most of the seat there were empty. This tells me not a lot of our pollies are interested in facts.

[@DANTHETUBEMAN]

100 lighting strikes per minute,, how much Ozone does that creat? 🤔

[@senyaw53]

Thank you for your honesty an integrity. It's a pity this information never makes it to general media.

[@jimsheldonswe7846]

You have got it. Been saying same thing for a long time now. We need more guys like you to keep speaking up.

[@josephwarra5043]

"Sabine! You are my daughter!" "Nooooo!"

[@stevecam724]

The earth is coming out of an ice age, it is warming up.

[@DJ2024-t4j]

While I agree the Science isn't perfect that doesn't mean I am going to blindly listen to coal, gas and oil simps. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. That is a fact. More greenhouse gasses means temps going up faster than should be expected and that is not ideal.

[@petergrimshaw492]

Thankyou. Very interesting and balanced review. There is so much hype it is tricky to get at the science.

[@5353Jumper]

So many people hear that the models might be inaccurate jump to the conclusion that nothing is wrong and we should just keep burning fuels and consuming more of everything each year. There are 3 scenarios: things are better than the models suggest, the models are accidentally correct even though we do not have all the variables, or things are worse than the modles predict. So there is a 2/3 chance (not really but maybe you know what I mean) that things are actually bad and all our carbon emissions are on the way to causing mass human tragedy. Even if our emissions are not going to cause mass tragedy through global temperature increase maybe we should still consider reducing our general consumption and in particular fuel consumption for other reasons: - break reliance on oligopoly industries - break politicial influence from oligopolies - cleaner air - more functional society - reduce wars - simplify lifestyles - more competitive energy market with multiple redundant sources - extend the time we have enough easily extractable petroleum - cleaner water - endpoint energy generation - some electrified technologies are just plain better even if we are not concerned with emissions So even if the science is wrong and carbon emissions are no big deal for global temperatures, we should still be moving in the durection of reducing societies' reliance on fuels.

[@richardharris7214]

Good vid. Sabine used to very watchable but I think her family must have been kidnapped or her funding stopped because she has lost her reasoning lately and now conforms to the alarmist's narrative. I still watch her videos occasionally because of that captivating accent. [seeing the mess the UK is in now I sometimes wonder if it been better if her lot had won].

[@がうがうわんこ]

It’s been a while since I saw Sabine last time, cuz her channel is on my neglect list. Her family being kidnapped might be a case.

[@mnntropy5615]

This is the first time I have seen your channel. I'm so glad that someone is calling out Sabine on this, because she is currently just lost on this topic. I haven't seen you on the Tom Nelson channel. You REALLY need to go on his channel to help spread the word!

[@C_R_O_M________]

Sabine is NOT brilliant, she just have a very strong left hemisphere that tries to invent causality at every turn. Unfortunately for her, the left hemisphere (termed as "the interpreter" by split-brain researcher Michael Gazzaniga) is incredibly vulnerable to arbitrary assumptions. You pointed out major uncertainties that she, herself, admitted for her own field of expertise, yet she appears to willfully swallow the bait with the hook when it comes to climate science. Doesn't she know that countless prominent scientists in the field are opposing the agenda? Scientists like Lindzen, Happer, Singer, Soon, Curry, Spencer, Christy, Svensmark, Giaever, Clauser, Shaviv, Michaels, Leggates. yourself, Scafetta, and thousands and thousands more? Doesn't this fact ring a bell for her? If not, I'm afraid she's only "brilliant" (I doubt that she is in general) in her area of expertise and that's not enough.

[@reefrebels]

it will take time , perhaps for her to switch sides, but at least she acknowledges the errors and i think shes genuine

[@gslim7337]

We don't understand fully the behaviour of particles as they migrate across the liquid-gas barrier hence why we have pages and pages of different mass transfer models based on operating conditions. All of them have some level of deviation and error. So why in this one aspect of management have we deviated from the probability assessment / cost of mitigation approach?

[@andyjay9346]

You know there is one climate model that is best of all and never fails. YOU! You're the climate model. Just go outside if it's dry then you know it's not raining. If it's hot you don't need a wooly jumper. If it's cold you do. If you want to know the weather next week then turn on the radio and reverse what they say. Works every time. So simple, so accurate and costs nothing. Cheers.

[@madMARTYNmarsh1981]

Given your use of the term 'wooly jumper' would I be right in guessing that you are British? If so, do you remember Michael Fish? I stopped trusting meteorlogists when he stated, with no doubt, that there would NOT be a hurricane in Britain in 1987. I was 6 at the time. His error has stuck with me since because my mum was pregnant with twins. She got hit by a flying fence panel that was blown by the wind and lost the twins. Obviously, Fish is not to blame for that (I shouldn't have to say it, but some people like to force words in our mouths) but it still broke my trust in the field.

[@simonwatkins999]

That's the weather, not climate.

[@5353Jumper]

You are confusing climate with weather.

[@scottmiller2591]

What Michael Crichton called the Gell-Mann amnesia effect. "It must be just my little corner that's messed up. This article is wrong. But I'm sure every other article outside my expertise is correct."

[@pooletranslation7581]

Excellent video! She is so good and thorough and entertaining on so many other topics, and yet her stance on Climate Change, basically tears down all her cred...I so hope she makes it.

[@michaelhutchings8599]

Svensmark: The Could Mystery is a great documentary

[@dallasweaver4061]

As a fellow scientist who started solving environmental problems like acid rain, water shortages (RO membranes), solid waste disposal, landfill gas recovery (methane), groundwater pollution (MTBE), etc. which are no longer as big of problems (no longer news) and teaching these subjects, I have seen the same loss of rigorous science as all the leadership and funding has become dominated by activists.

[@runestone1337]

I unsubscribed from Sabine's 'Woman's Physics and Fashion Weekly' (as I call it) last year after she failed to properly correct her wildly inaccurate death stats related to the Spanish 'flu. As an engineer, I've got no time for people who twist facts to bolster their own BS.

[@mrpyther5944]

I unsubscribed when she used Michael Phelps' feet to argue that biological males against females isn't unfair. She and Neil deGrasse Tyson are just woke 💩💩

[@bolschewistischerepublikta4462]

Shes a green agitator, disguised as neutral observer.

[@Policy-Principle]

Nice to see a healthy discourse with your KZbin counter part.

[@theresesilvawalker8407]

You play ostrich; Imma gonna go garden in my t-shirt. In Canada. In November. How odd that there are so very few insects this year! Birds are missing too. But comfort yourself with game playing.

[@theresesilvawalker8407]

At least you won't need to worry about eating bugs! Algae and yeasts mixed with petrol byproducts and animal feed byproducts perhaps instead.

[@haroldpierre1726]

This video reminds me of the importance to listen to experts in the field to explain their specialty and not people outside of the field. Don't go to a gastroenterologist to learn about neurosurgery. Don't go to a physicist to learn about climate science.

[@MarioSchlemmer-s5k]

She is very proud that her chosen field physics was the driving force in the creation of modern industrial civilization. Accepting the responsibility for the catastrophe would hurt her ego.

[@randydewees7338]

I think Sabine's desire for fandom will ultimately win out over her acceptance of the corruption of climate science.

[@northernvibe4870]

Really enjoy these vids Doc. Keep it up

[@prime-rib]

Well done. There are many well-credentialed scientist using youtube to point out the corruption in their various fields. I enjoy them all, including Sabine. Hopefully, they will get more traction within the fields themselves. I just found your channel and will check you out some more. Thanks.

[@gregharding7329]

Sadly I worked in a field where I sometimes required an expert. One thing I learnt very quickly is that I could get one expert to say something was black then find another expert who would categorically state the thing was white. Much is the same as scient. The Hubble and James Webb Telescopes are just brilliant pieces of engineering but one of the big things they have discovered is that what was settled science of the big bang theory is now in tatters.

[@Daviecrockett64]

Thank you for your video Peter, one of the things that bugs me about the CO2 argument is that carbon dioxide is actually a very efficient refrigerant, in terms of heat acceptance and rejection, The main downside to using it in refrigeration are the high pressures involved in the phase change from gas to liquid. And you rightfully point out water is our most predominant greenhouse substance.

[@michaelstockley7897]

I really like this channel, I also like Sabine's. I think her view on climate is wrong, but much of her other stuff is very good. I hesitate to use the word corruption. To me it implies bad intent. I have friends who are medical professors, they agree you need to do the "right" research to get funding. To me that's just a normal response to the incentives the system provides. Most people respond to reward mechanisms in an entirely predictable manner. Scientists are no different. To me it's the media (incented to sell news) and politicians (incented to get votes) who are the real ones who have been corrupted.

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

Corruption leads to corruption. It is all corrupt. There is no difference between a politician changing their vote for money and a "scientist" changing their research for money.

[@jimfairgray4607]

But the scientists working in their respective fields know that there is corruption, to a greater or lesser degree, in their own select areas. These people also have mortgages and bills to pay and going against the flow causes much emotional pain. Just check out Judith Curry, Will Happer, and our very own Dr Peter Ridd to see what happens when you challenge the status quo. I remember when the NZ climate minister announced funding grants researching " How to reverse Global warming" in 1996 and some scientists remonstrated with him saying they didn't believe there was such a thing. His reply was that 'That was what was on offer and to proceed as if it was real and if so what could be done about it." We've now spent 28 years and billions of dollars researching a non event!

[@deersbrook4485]

I started watching her videos but then realised she'd been 'got at' like the rest of the climate crisis proponents. I don't watch her videos any more.

[@reefrebels]

maybe she does realise the full extent of corruption in science , but perhaps it takes time for her to switch sides

[@quitecapable]

That was my take away from her video too. But you put it so well. It is hard to imagine sabine doesn't have a fine mind and isn't ultimately a truth seeker. Has courage and the price to her for being skeptical would be a lot less than for many. I see two unhappy possibilities,, her skepticism is actually much deeper, but she believes she can help the truth more by appearing to remain on side, a fifth columnist, or the forces which drive us are powerful, subtle, and invisible and can control the best of us.... Which means for every furphy we spot, there are a dozen we advocate.... Unfortunately I think it is that one. Just as communism may be a good system which humans can't implement, maybe the scientific method is the same,, and ideology is a necessary part of the process for implementing it for shoe wearing apes.....

[@reefrebels]

She is a truth seeker. I don't doubt her sincerity

[@iaincook5835]

I love Sabine!

[@maddogmcgruels5643]

It is so astonishing she cannot make the connection. A highly educated, grown adult in complete denial. So sad and weird to watch at the same time.

[@user-tn1vc1xz5d]

Temperature anomaly also affects error. Lets say temp is averaged over the surface, averaged over the year. Then you subtract the same averaged over many years. You take two big numbers and make a small number via the subtraction. Big increases in error from the averaging and from the subtraction. The error in the anomaly value can be bigger than the absolute value. Ok, AGT is not calculated quite like that but you get the idea 😂😂. As an old prof once said, its like weighing a ship's captain by weighing the ship and captain, then subtracting the weight of the ship.