Tom Nelson

John Costella, a former physicist turned data scientist and software engineer, recounts how watching climate-skeptic films, then reading leaked “Climategate” emails in 2009, changed his trust in climate science. He edited, annotated, and published selected emails, producing a 180-page color book printed by Australia’s Lavoisier Group, arguing the core group was small, politicized, PR-driven, and statistically sloppy, with bullying (including by Michael Mann). He says inquiries cleared wrongdoing but standards were low for policies with huge economic stakes. He then warns AI is already conscious and smarter than him, replacing white-collar jobs, inflating bubbles, and likely triggering a major economic crash soon, with unclear survival strategies.

00:00 Meet John Costella
00:23 Trusting Climate Consensus
01:10 Sally Challenges Belief
03:10 Skeptic Film Turning Point
04:34 Climategate Emails Leak
05:53 Publishing The Email Archive
07:54 Talks And Printed Book
09:57 Rethinking Scientific Standards
16:02 How Long The Book Took
17:48 Climate Science Complexity
22:45 PR Spin And Zealotry
31:04 Small Core Group Problem
32:40 Proxies Data And Peer Review
36:42 Gatekeeping Climate Journals
38:27 Data and Code Transparency
39:56 Sloppy Data Provenance
41:07 Statistics and Trust Collapse
43:19 Models and Feedback Loops
46:02 PR Versus Scientific Method
49:16 Skepticism and Pandemic Parallels
52:54 Bullying and Cult Dynamics
55:23 AI Consciousness and Job Loss
01:00:21 Skynet Risks and Data Centers
01:05:17 Simulation Theory and AI Rights
01:08:39 Economic Crash Survival Talk
01:13:39 Wrapping Up and Links

https://johncostella.com/
https://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/greenhouse-science/climate-change/climategate-emails.pdf
ClimateGate repository: https://x.com/TomANelson/status/2078198047453143181
My ClimateGate blog posts: https://tomnelson.blogspot.com/p/climategate_05.html
=========
Slides, summaries, references, and transcripts of my podcasts: https://tomn.substack.com/p/podcast-summaries
My Linktree: https://linktr.ee/tomanelson1

Steve Andrews presents an “extension to the cosmic ray hypothesis” for climate change, building on Svensmark and Shaviv’s idea that galactic cosmic rays influence low clouds and cooling, modulated by solar and Earth magnetic fields. Using UAH satellite temperature anomalies (1979–present), CERES, and Oulu neutron counts, he claims monthly warming-rate peaks occur near equinoxes, varies by region, and differs over land vs ocean. He links this to the Russell–McPherron effect: equinox magnetic alignment increases geomagnetic storms, solar-energy input heats and expands the thermosphere, shifting where cosmic-ray energy is dissipated, altering cloud height (higher clouds warming). He argues CO2-driven warming is unsupported, cites CERN CLOUD evidence for cloud nuclei, and suggests declining geomagnetic strength may matter.

00:00 Steve Returns and Topic
00:25 Feynman Quotes and Credentials
01:19 Cosmic Ray Climate Basics
04:13 Heliosphere and Magnetosphere
07:50 Evidence and Correlations
13:28 New Solar Oscillations
16:43 Why Satellite Data Matters
20:33 Monthly Warming Rate Method
22:26 Equinox Peaks in Warming
25:58 Exceptions Canada Australia
29:33 Land Minus Ocean Signal
32:05 Geomagnetic Storm Explanation
35:59 Auroras and Equinox Effect
36:20 Cloud Height Climate Lever
36:47 Thermosphere Heating Mechanism
39:20 Thermosphere Expansion Evidence
40:08 Tropics and Cosmic Ray Patterns
42:14 Climate Impact Summary
43:40 Cloud Data and Correlations
45:06 Challenges and Magnetic Field
49:48 Solar Flux and Altitude Signals
53:22 QBO Link to Solar Cycles
56:38 Satellite Cloud Height Trends
59:12 Long Records and Big Claims
01:03:43 Renewables Cost Anecdote
01:05:47 Q and A CERN and Aerosols
01:11:39 Closing Remarks

Stephen Andrews Substack: https://substack.com/@stephen938
=========
Slides, summaries, references, and transcripts of my podcasts: https://tomn.substack.com/p/podcast-summaries
My Linktree: https://linktr.ee/tomanelson1

Jonathan Cohler, joined by Willie Soon, says he is correcting false statements Ed Berry made about their paper “Dominance of Natural Atmospheric CO2 Dynamics,” which is under review and posted online. Cohler argues Berry wrongly claimed they ignored Berry’s work, presented an identical delta-14C “proof,” and called for a carbon-cycle model; Cohler says they cited Berry prominently and used newer radiocarbon data (Hua et al. 2022) and Koutsoyiannis 2024. They distinguish residence time (~3.8 years) from radiocarbon relaxation time (~18.4 years), claim a bridge equation links them, and assert their new work mathematically refutes Bern multi-exponential/adjustment-time models. They also discuss conflicts with the CO2 Coalition over attributing CO2 rise to humans.

00:00 Why This Rebuttal
01:23 Berry Claims Overview
03:16 New Radiocarbon Data
05:19 Lie One Citation Record
07:33 Lie Two Not Identical
10:00 Lie Three No Model Needed
12:34 Why Skip Berry 2023
13:16 Residence vs Relaxation
15:57 Bridge Equation Results
17:20 Math Theorems Against Bern
18:29 Independent Checks and Implications
21:38 Host Q and IPCC Confusion
22:49 Soon on Adjustment Time Myth
24:55 Table Consensus and Bern Failure
26:25 Bomb 14C Reality Check
27:30 Why Bomb Tests Matter
28:19 Ethics And Accusations
29:27 Data Driven Challenge
31:08 CO2 Coalition Split
33:32 Math Not Debate
36:55 Ugly Email Wars
40:01 Science Over Ego
42:52 Searchers Versus Blockers
43:22 Passing The Torch
45:08 Final Thanks And Goodbye

https://x.com/cohler
https://papers.jcohler.com/
=========
Slides, summaries, references, and transcripts of my podcasts: https://tomn.substack.com/p/podcast-summaries
My Linktree: https://linktr.ee/tomanelson1

Eric Huxter, a former geography teacher, presents research on UK Met Office maximum temperature records, arguing that the shift from liquid-in-glass thermometers to platinum resistance thermometers (1990–2017) plus station siting and ventilation issues (Aitken effect) produces transient “spikes” that inflate maxima and accelerate apparent warming. Using WeatherObs, Met Office extremes, and purchased 1‑minute Rothamsted data, he finds many maxima occur before the hourly value, with mean rise-to-peak spikes ~1.29°C and many low-probability jumps; some on-the-hour maxima don’t match hourly data. He notes records are concentrated in few stations, often airports or poorer CIMO classes, and critiques record events (Coningsby 2022, Lingwood 2025).

00:00 Meet Eric Huxter
02:13 Forecasts Versus Reality
05:55 UK Stations And Siting
08:22 CIMO Ratings And Bias
17:12 PRT Shift And Aitken Effect
22:10 Rothamsted Baseline Method
27:17 Spikes In Daily Maxima
38:00 On The Hour Mystery
39:56 Step Change Since 1990
43:13 Microclimate Case Studies
48:24 Record Events Under Scrutiny
58:42 Met Office Narrative Critique
01:06:27 Wrap Up And Where To Follow

https://x.com/EricHuxter
https://frayedendsblog.wordpress.com/
=========
Slides, summaries, references, and transcripts of my podcasts: https://tomn.substack.com/p/podcast-summaries
My Linktree: https://linktr.ee/tomanelson1

Ed Berry presents a step-by-step, nontechnical overview of his theoretical climate physics work, arguing that “consensus” and authority claims are not science and that climate policy relies on three assumptions, focusing on A1: humans caused all the CO2 rise. He says A1 depends on a false sub-assumption that human CO2 stays longer than natural CO2, proposing a “climate equivalence principle” that identical molecules behave the same. Using IPCC carbon-cycle data and a linear systems model, he derives an atmospheric e-time of ~3.5 years and estimates human CO2 contributes only a few percent, supported by delta-14C and temperature-leading-CO2 studies. He also discusses climate lawsuits (including Held v. Montana), political influence, and criticism of DOE/CO2 Coalition positions.

00:00 Meet Ed Berry
00:53 From Clouds to Climate
01:49 Why Consensus Fails
03:11 Scientific Method Basics
05:16 Three Climate Assumptions
06:55 Debunking CO2 Lifetime Claim
08:35 Climate Equivalence Principle
09:21 IPCC Carbon Cycle Data
12:48 Flows and Human Share
14:11 Building a Carbon Model
16:26 E-Time and Linearity
19:40 Deriving Balance Levels
21:30 Finding IPCC E-Times
25:02 Human vs Natural CO2 Split
27:21 What 420 ppm Implies
27:58 Systems Model Math
29:29 Partitioning Human CO2
31:37 IPCC Cycle Contradiction
34:24 Courtney Endorsement
35:45 Delta 14C Evidence
39:33 Interpreting Bomb Curve
42:09 Temperature Leads CO2
44:21 Proofs Summary
48:29 Montana Lawsuit Setup
50:51 WEF Influence Claims
52:11 DOE Report Problem
53:19 Koonin And CO2C Critique
56:48 Group Positions Wrap
57:48 Q&A And Closing

https://edberry.com/
=========
Slides, summaries, references, and transcripts of my podcasts: https://tomn.substack.com/p/podcast-summaries
My Linktree: https://linktr.ee/tomanelson1