John Clauser: Crisis of Nobel Pseudoscience

2022 Physics Nobel Laureate John Clauser has found by investigating the current status of climate science that the climate alarmism propagated by IPCC and the new International Panel on Information Environment formed by the Nobel Foundation,  is pseudoscience:

• Now I am not alone in observing the dangerous proliferation of pseudoscience. Recently, The Nobel Foundation has formed a new panel to address the issue called the International Panel on Information Environment. They plan to model it after the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC.
• I think personally that they are making a big mistake in that effort because in my opinion the IPCC is one of the worst sources of dangerous misinformation.

This connects to the previous post on the conflicting views of Clauser and the Nobel Foundation. To help sort out pseudoscience from realscience, Clauser gives the advice to use mathematics: 

• Recall, if you want pseudoscience to be true, just simply spin it and it becomes true. Importantly, a referee must know and use mathematically based physics. A good scientist must also know how to derive and solve differential equations. That was the first thing I learned as an undergraduate at Caltech.
• Follow the teaching of Sir Isaac Newton. He found that the world is governed by differential equations. He had to invent calculus to do it, but he did it. A referee must correctly identify the dominant processes. That’s the starting point. The best way to do this is with order of magnitude estimates of the various conceivable processes.

This is the approach I have used with particular focus on discovering magnitudes by computation. 

In particular, there is no known or even thinkable physics indicating that a minor increase in the level of atmospheric CO2 from use of fossil fuel can cause measurable warming of a global climate subject to major impact from the Sun, clouds and ocean circulation. Zero. 

Will John F Clauser be Disinvited from the Nobel Prize in Physics?

Nobel Laureate in Physics John F Clauser has been disinvited from a IMF meeting, where he were to speak about climate models and his conclusion that there is no climate crisis.   

Clauser's view is in direct opposition to that of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which has served as a platform to sell climate alarmism, besides its main role of inviting to Nobel Prizes.   

What will now happen? Will Clauser be disinvited also by the Academy? 

A form of disinvitation by the Academy was expressed in the motivation for the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921, which explicitly stated that the Prize was not given to Einstein's relativity theory (because it was not considered correct).  One less offensive way for the Academy to handle the present conflicting views could thus be to state that Clauser was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics despite his view on climate models (because it is not considered correct).  In any case the Academy has to react... 

Finally Physics Laurate in Physics Speaks Out on Climate Alarmism

Climate alarmism can continue to bog down western societies into preindustrial state in a meaningless race to reduce CO2 emission as long as physicists do not speak out and tell that this has no physics rationale. Sadly to say, physicists have kept silent and so the destructive charade has been allowed to continue.

Now finally a Nobel Laureate, Prof John F. Clauser, Nobel Prize in Physics 2022, speaks out in unmistakably clear terms as reported by CO2 Coalition: 

• The popular narrative about climate change reflects a dangerous corruption of science that  threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people. 
• Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. 
• It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists. 
• In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis. 
• There is, however, a very real problem with providing a decent standard of living to the world’s large population and an associated energy crisis. 
• The latter is being unnecessarily exacerbated by what, in my opinion, is incorrect climate science.

This should open the mouth of all physicists with some knowledge of basic physics, Nobel Laureates or not. Let us see this happen. In particular, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences handing out the Nobel Prize in Physics, now must retract its stated support to climate alarmism formed to serve a political agenda and return to science. I have reminded the Academy about its duty to serve science and not opportunistic politics and report the response.