Jim Lakely #420

Chuck Weiss presents his background in atmospheric science, meteorology, aviation, and inventing the Windicator, then argues Oregon universities and public schools promote a politicized “climate crisis” despite Oregon’s small share of global emissions. He defines the greenhouse effect as a radiation-flux difference and claims water vapor and clouds dominate radiative processes while CO2 mainly cools the troposphere and has negligible warming influence, especially over oceans. He argues convection and the hydrologic cycle negate CO2 effects, climate models fail due to grid-resolution and energy-tracking limits, and key predictions (e.g., tropical mid-troposphere “hotspot”) conflict with balloon/satellite data. He attributes recent warming to declining albedo, alleges temperature-data manipulation, disputes extreme-weather and Arctic-ice claims, and criticizes green-energy policies as costly and ineffective.

Iain Davis discusses his book The Technocratic Dark State, arguing Silicon Valley oligarchs (e.g., Thiel, Musk, Andreessen, Altman, Ellison) steer policy toward a tokenized “everything” economy, including natural assets, carbon markets, and a vastly expanded paper valuation. He says climate narratives may be rebranded across political demographics to sell the same goal: technocratic digital control via programmable money, digital identity, AI-driven surveillance, and BIS-led cross-border “interoperable” payment standards. Davis warns censorship will shift from speech to “reach,” citing the UK Online Safety Act and arrests for online comments, and describes “everything apps,” biometrics-based payments, and geo-fenced spending as tools for automated compliance and fines. He contends surveillance is already pervasive through devices and apps, and says adoption is ultimately a public choice.

Paul Burgess presents his “Oceanic Index” model of climate change, arguing oceans regulate low cloud cover that acts as Earth’s thermostat, explaining satellite-era temperatures (1982–2025) with high accuracy and extending the approach back using proxies. He accepts anthropogenic CO2 and a direct ECS near 1–1.2°C per doubling, estimating about 0.6°C warming from CO2 since 1850, but rejects IPCC feedbacks and says a ~2.4% reduction in low clouds can account for additional warming, consistent with CERES radiation data where ocean changes lead cloud changes and then temperature. He discusses mechanisms from meteorology (marine inversion changes), historical periods (Little Ice Age, Roman/Medieval warmth) as largely natural, critiques temperature records and climate messaging, and briefly comments on Lindzen’s iris effect and energy policy debates.

Ed Hoskins presents slides comparing renewables (onshore/offshore wind, solar PV, plus biomass and hydro) with gas, coal/lignite, and nuclear on productivity, EROEI, CO2 embedded in construction, land use, materials, build time, service life, and costs adjusted for capacity factors. He cites European capacity factors since 2010 (offshore ~32%, onshore ~20s, solar ~11%), a combined renewables average near 15% and declining since 2020, and a 2023 wind lull leaving large multi-day deficits. He argues storage to cover such gaps is infeasible, renewables require backup and expanded grids, wear out faster, and become far costlier once productivity is included; nuclear is most energy-productive. He criticizes Germany’s nuclear shutdown and questions CO2-driven policy.

Dr. Randall Bock, a primary-care physician and author of Overturning Zika, argues that public-health research and media often fuel panic to secure funding, citing Peter Hotez’s warnings about dengue, chikungunya, Zika, and a “lights out” U.S. yellow fever scenario. Bock says U.S. sanitation and mosquito control limit these risks and that vaccines could be ramped up quickly. He contends the 2015–16 Brazil Zika–microcephaly crisis was driven by inconsistent microcephaly definitions, weak testing, and miscounting, noting Zika later persisted without microcephaly. He criticizes Zika human challenge trials and Fauci-era spending, discusses “science under siege” rhetoric, and briefly shares cautious views on childhood vaccination timing.