Weird Science: The Shoddy Condition of Anarchist Climate Science

  • Posted on: 6 March 2018
  • By: Anonymous (not verified)

Weird Science - The Shoddy Condition of Anarchist Climate Study

How Do We Know If Science is "Good Science?"

A strange article popped up this past week, on an otherwise mostly rational, scientific blog: Arctic News. I had appreciated what appeared to be the raw data on the site:

When I saw the warning, I wondered who the author was and fell down the rabbit hole of peer-reviewed and industry-authoritarian science research publishing. So it seems the author, Sam Carana, is actually a Ph.d scientist, Dr. Guy McPherson, (there is some reference to this aka) who has - wierdly enough - left the country, but whose story rang bells with the narratives of Dr. Brian Martin, a valuable 'liberation scientist' in Australia.
Twenty minutes spent with this article from Dr. McPherson's blog says a lot:
So (again) its hard to ignore the sheer amount of data in Dr. McPherson's article.
I myself wrote an article on the IPCC's 4th update for IAS (who didn't publish it), which quoted Mike Davis' review that the IPCC report was understated, and precisely because of methane feedbacks. I also brought up problems with the peer-review process in science journals. At any rate, things appear to be vastly more out of control than we're being told: there's a distinct possibility of a several degrees Celsius rise in global average temperature by 2021, beyond which life ceases to exist.
After some basic deconstruction on Dr. McPherson's work, I found what I had hoped to find (even with its mind-blowing conclusions):
1. Raw data presented for the reader's own review;
2. extensive reference to the humanitarian ethics involved;
3. fully referenced corroborative articles by other scientists;
4. the author not bought and paid for by government and industry;
5. the author's attempt to tell the narrative of his discovery to a non-specialist audience;
6. the author's peers are also respected scientists, including some who are involved at;
7. the author references Truth-out, Alternet and the Intercept, publications for which I have some respect.

I'm interested in anarchist response to this data as, well, we should call it how we see it: I'm thinking of the philosophy and experience of John Trudell and other Indigenous thinkers - their teleologies (future-oriented thought).
Recently, a scalable map of sea-level rise at 2* and 4*C show what is projected for the coastal US, showing much of Boston, NYC, Philly, D.C. and all of south Florida, as well as SF, Oakland, Portland and Seattle with major portions under water (from

I feel weird writing this.
Where are my transhumanist peeps?
yours truly,



Isn’t this the dude who thinks the world is gonna be too hot for survival in five years every five years?

Mainstream climate science is sketchy for a few things...

- significant global sea rise had been predicted in the early '00s for our current period, with things like several meters rises in U.S. coastal areas, with majoe ciites facing infrastructural crisis and such. Didn't happen yet.

- the theory on thr polar Ozone Holes is a complete bad joke, or at best erroneous theory that climatologists have been donwplaying lately for saving their faces. You simply cannot have any layer of ozone over the geomagnetic poles. That's physically impossible, and reveals a flawed, over-compartmented understanding of the Earth's global geophysical processes.

Beyond that, I'm not discounting the recent data over global warming as it's been indeed happening to discomforting levels. But liberals ask a set of questions and their potential solutions that only State and corporate power can deal with. And they have apparently failed.

I would expect anarchists to have their own questions and solutions to the issue, and seek to solve the problem of progress from below... But when I look at those same old workerists, identity politicians, Throreau's eco-primmies and the occasional window-breakers, I get the deeply sad feeling that humanity is hopeless and may never overcome its own golems?

"You simply cannot have any layer of ozone over the geomagnetic poles. That's physically impossible,"


Scientists have been measuring ozone levels in the arctic and antarctic for decades.

Gimme verifiable data -not some abstract from a closed source scientific journal- of how things were in the polar circles before they've started to observe the ozone layer in these areas.



Trioxygen reacts directly to EM waves. That's established science, and it's also one of the methods to artificially create this gas; by making powerful EM radiation interact with dioxygen particles, or from Wiki:

"Ozone may be formed from O2 by electrical discharges and by action of high energy electromagnetic radiation. Unsuppressed arcing in electrical contacts, motor brushes, or mechanical switches breaks down the chemical bonds of the atmospheric oxygen surrounding the contacts [O2 → 2O]. Free radicals of oxygen in and around the arc recombine to create ozone [O3].[77] Certain electrical equipment generate significant levels of ozone. This is especially true of devices using high voltages, such as ionic air purifiers, laser printers, photocopiers, tasers and arc welders. Electric motors using brushes can generate ozone from repeated sparking inside the unit. Large motors that use brushes, such as those used by elevators or hydraulic pumps, will generate more ozone than smaller motors.

Ozone is similarly formed in the Catatumbo lightning storms phenomenon on the Catatumbo River in Venezuela, though ozone's instability makes it dubious that it has any effect on the ozonosphere.[78] It is the world's largest single natural generator of ozone, lending calls for it to be designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site.[79]"

Soooo... If you look at EM spectrum imagery of the Earth, you'll notice that the planet's gigantic geomagnetic shield is shaped like a donut, and that the donut holes are obviously focused around the magnetic poles.

Those EM waves are so powerful that they can block a huge portion of the Sun's radiations as well as even more devastating cosmic waves, like from distant gamma ray bursts for instance. So the idea that the ozone layer could still maintain itself through these donut holes of intense EM waves is as preposterous as clouds over the Moon. Actually this is a good reason to assert that the ozone layer is directly generated by the EM donut of the Earth, right below the boundaries of the ionosphere.

Hey moron, I gave you a link with the entire article. Just scroll down.

If you're internet abilities are any indication of your intellectual ones, then your 'chemistry' argument based nothing but...well, nothing, is also suspect.

I love know-it-all wikipedia scientists. lol..

The articles you linked are focused onthe cycles of ozone depletion through the years since 1979. There is no reference to any period where there was no ozone hole, even if in the first 2-3 years of the observation the hole was much smaller.

My argument about the electrochemical reaction of trixogen still stands unchallenged. You may say it's "nothing", or " moronic" or cuckoo wikipedia pseudo-intellectualism, the fact remains that ozone directly reacts to powerful EM waves like those fluctuating around thr magnetic poles.

I'm not denying that chemical interactions in the stratosphere are contributing to the depletion. Only that the claim that the polar holes have been caused by man-made pollution reeks pseudo-science right there. At best, it is outdated theory that suffered issues of overcompartmentalization, due to the climatologists in the '80s not being aware of the geomagnetic influence on atmospheric gases.

Be careful moving those goal posts. Lol...

Let me remind you of your claim: ""You simply cannot have any layer of ozone over the geomagnetic poles. That's physically impossible,"

It's not impossible. Scientists have measured ozone in the polar regions. It's not non-existent, it's just very thin. And it's thinness fluctuates over time.

"Scientists have measured ozone in the polar regions. It's not non-existent, it's just very thin. And it's thinness fluctuates over time."

More like fluctuating, not thinning. Like it's over some area or not, dependently of the EM fluxes present or not in the area. A layer of ozone (trioxygen) cannot cut through such itense EM waves, just you can't be having a still layer of fog right inside a waterfall. Ozone molecules, BY THE WAY, are polar. Bonded together at a dipole moment, forming a dipole-dipole interaction. Which means they'll hold an electric charge, or "potential".

But if you're really sure ozone still covered the geomagnetic poles at some point, for some reason, they gimme proofs.

I just did, you fucking moron.

Tired of your dumbfuckery.

No you didn't, you slimey coward. All you're doing is to redirect on peripheral matters. You still didn't disprove my claim. I acknowleged that there is no data prior to 1979 on the matter, and that this is the moment from where the ozone hole was found. There hasn't been a moment since 1979 where there was no ozone hole, therefore as far as we know, there is no reason to believe that ozone ever covered the entire mangetic polar circles.

Try harder.

Again, your claim, "You simply cannot have any layer of ozone over the geomagnetic poles. That's physically impossible,"

Not 'impossible'. The links I posted show that ozone is present over the geomagnetic poles. It is a thin layer that fluctuates seasonally yet nevertheless measurable, thus refuting your claim.

Now, you are either incredibly stupid, or you're trolling me.

Which is it?

just when I was liking an @news comment thread.

Some good ol' empirical chemistry and electricity theory cutting through all the green rhetoric. I like the smell of ozone on an electric train in the morning,.,

Also the damn high priest of the transhumanist Big Bang theory Stephen Hawking should stop filling pure minds with his false speculations and how is he thinking clearly if he eats meat. His techno speak gives folk in wheel chairs a bad bad name, thinks he's the smartest guy in the universe cos he said oh, before the big bang there was nothing. Duhhhh

"pure minds"

"how is he thinking clearly if he eats meat"

Seems bizarre to me to even entertain the idea that such a marginalized and tiny minority of a political position would have much to contribute to such a big problem. About the only thing I'd even expect anarchists to do is dismiss any liberal ideas about state solutions and keep having that discussion and challenging reformist bullshit.

As for "solving the problem of progress from below", you might as well be asking what my-little-pony fans are doing to fix climate change? WELL BRONIES?! WHATS THE PLAN?

Well, for one thing, I'm aware that a goodly number of scientists
are undercover anarchists, but aren't going to blow cover for a
black bloc demo... that said, its not bad to get word around
that things are getting extreme, like a brick wall approaching...
completely agree that depending on the tech elite got 'hacktivism'
nowhere... its prolly best not to discuss some strategy and tactics
on a public site... as far as marginality, maybe less so in the eco-community,
at least that was my experience at Pittsburgh G20...

Interesting couple of 15minute videos from Peter Beckwith, a climatologist at UOttawa.

also there is the Arctic Methane Emergency Group

and Peter Wadhams from CambridgeU.

I don't view that as a good thing unless they do some whistleblowing already. State Royal science has nothing to do with anarchy. Nomadic and renaissance science is a different matter. I would not involve myself with anything that involves large scale state/capital funding.

I think a heavy critique of the religion of the atom is more needed then ever. The knowledge power structure is one of the oldest forms of power there is, I view it as more important then the political economic structures. A state(statheist) scientist is probably worse then a capitalist or state legislator on the whole. While I don't agree with ITS and their murderous methods I do agree with the emphasis against.

Rainbow Dash will save us

Sam Carana is not Dr. Guy McPherson. How did you come with this. Is every article on Zero Hedge penned by Tyler Durden? The article on a blog is shoddy because you don't agree or like it? Ok.

IMSVMHO we have just enough time to start formulating anarchist strategy to adapt and survive the multi-aspect fallout of climate change. The alternative is that our people go down first.
Besides, the movement is equally unprepared for a victorious revolution.
Perhaps someone should do something about it... ;-)

I'm a Warrior of the Rainbow and anarchistic tribal hippie, and many of us believe the Tower of Babel is about to collapse again. Sadly, its Three Stooges slapstick and nobody can save them instant karma. For example, one in five Americans insist the sun revolves around the earth and they continue to vote for whoever advertises the most, as their patriotic duty. The lights are on, but nobody is home, and forty years of research have confirmed the republican party is organized along the same lines as a flock of chickens, the neurons in your brain organize along the same lines as a flock of chickens, and the only reliable way to assess anyone's career potential, is the amount of working memory they possess.

You could call me a "natural philosopher", and I'm writing a book called "Truly Ignorant Wisdom", that proves to academics in the most personal and objective ways imaginable, that they are full of shit. They are teaching complete idiots how to destroy the world, expressing dismay when they succeed, and then complaining that there is nothing anybody can do. I wish them a lot of luck with that but, these days, its either laugh or cry, and I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints.

"...there's a distinct possibility of a several degrees Celsius rise in global average temperature by 2021, beyond which life ceases to exist."

how does a several degree rise in global average temperature mean that all life ceases to exists? So let's say the world gets hit by an enormous 6 degree celsius rise in global average temperature by 2021. Couldn't this turn the tundra or sub-arctic regions of the world (or the poles...) into perpetual spring/fall climates?

Science (TM) had a theory that global warming was going to cause a global ice-age, which could still happen, but the problem with climate science is that there's so many variables involved and people have already altered the planet to an incredible degree.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Enter the code without spaces.