With respect to “Climate Change”, this website and my contribution to the discussion focuses on the data. I have a standing request/challenge to anyone (scientist or not) to provide an empirical Temperature/CO2 data set that shows CO2 driving the climate on any statistically significant historical time scale. Scientific proof requires empirical data. The Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) theory does not have that empirical data (because that data does not exist).

About Me

The general structure of the website is broken into two sections. One on Climate Change and the other on my experience with music. The Climate Change discussion focuses on a broad cross-section of the available temperature, CO2 and solar activity data (and their relationships). I also provide data (with links) showing real world/real time data related to subjects like sea ice, sea level, global snowfall, hurricanes, etc. I do provide my opinion but the focus for the reader should be the data. The discussion is kicked off with my Open Letter (and Addendum) with updates and new evaluations laid out in a series of One Page Summaries (OPS), Climate Short Stories (CSS) and One Page Political Summaries (OPPS). The Music section is split up into two parts, my original compilations and a wide variety of covers I like to mess around with.

So, who am I and what has led to this website? I’ll start with my name – Ronald James Davison (Ron).

I grew up in a small town in Saskatchewan that survived and thrived on agriculture and the energy industry. My family was not into agriculture, so I was drawn to the energy industry. I received my Bachelor of Science Degree in Chemical Engineering (with distinction) in 1984 and began a long and successful career as a professional engineer in the energy industry.

How does that tie into “Climate Change”, you might ask? And remember when a Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) alarmist says “Climate Change” they mean “Global Warming”.

Quite simply is the answer. Engineers are all trained in data analysis and applying the scientific method. Skills that were required throughout my career and can be readily applied to any data sets (including “Climate Change”). I also have extensive experience with computer simulations (again directly applicable to the field of “Climate Science”). And unfortunately (in my opinion), that is where mainstream “Climate Science” has fallen off the rails. Firstly, the scientific method requires empirical data to prove that a theory is correct. There is no empirical CO2/Temperature data set that shows CO2 driving the climate on any statistically significant historical time scale. No empirical data, no proof. So, what does a CAGW alarmist use as proof? Computer projections primarily. Sorry, but computer models are proof of absolutely nothing. The basic rule of computer modeling is Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO). The computer output is totally dependent on the programming. You’ll find that the current CAGW alarmist narrative almost completely ignores solar activity despite a significant solar activity influence in the historical data and virtually no historical evidence of CO2’s influence.

My own personal story was tied to “Climate Change” early in my career. I was the lead engineer on one of the first large CO2 sequestration projects in North America. The project, commissioned in May 1995, was described as an Acid Gas Disposal project (80% CO2, 20% H2S). The project has been expanded and now injects CO2 volumes equivalent to the CO2 emissions of 13,000 humans. I am very comfortable with the carbon footprint that I will leave on this planet. I summarized that project in a peer reviewed, published paper shortly after the project was commissioned. Unfortunately for our company, Canada had not jumped on the carbon trading band wagon at that point and we were not able to subsidize the project with tax-payer money like you can these days. Sad, but true! We are wasting huge money on ineffective carbon emission reduction schemes. That was my second peer-reviewed, published paper. The first was a look at Electromagnetic Stimulation of Heavy Oil Wells in the Lloydminster Area. The first paper was not directly related to Climate Change, but the process does produce less “Green House Gas” emissions than processes that burn fossil fuels as a source of heat.

I have followed the “Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Emergency/etc.” subject closely since those early days because the topic had a continually growing negative influence on the energy industry. I have been semi-retired (and more towards retired) since May 2015. My new schedule gave me more time to research the subject. As an engineer, I am not satisfied with just listening to the opinion of “experts” on either side of any subject. I prefer to look at the data and make up my own mind, so that is what I did. I downloaded a representative cross-section of Global Temperature, atmospheric CO2 concentrations and solar activity levels and reviewed their relationships. That data and my thought processes are laid out in my Open Letter. The Reader’s Digest version, CO2 has NOT been driving the climate in any significant or noticeable fashion. Conversely, solar activity’s influence shows up throughout the temperature record due to Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) changes, orbital and ocean cycles, cosmic ray/cloud cover and solar wind fluctuations, etc.

Review the data yourself and make up your own mind. The data does not back up the CAGW theory (and that is a fact, not an opinion). Many prominent skeptics (Dr. Judith Curry, Dr. William Happer, Dr. Nir Shaviv, etc.) were originally proponents of the AGW theory until they reviewed the data in more detail. The skeptic ranks also include many scientists that were originally high-profile IPCC reviewers and/or prominent retirees from NASA/NOAA and other prominent scientific institutions. Looking at the data with an open mind, will open your eyes. There are none so blind as those that refuse to see.

In late 2019, I proudly became one of the signatories to the Global Climate Intelligence Group’s World Climate Declaration – “THERE IS NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY”. From their documents, CLINTEL is “a global network of 700 scientists and professionals”. That number has grown to 1828 as of October 31st, 2023. The list includes many prominent scientists including Dr. John Clauser (USA, 2022 Nobel Prize Winner in Physics), Professors Richard Lindzen (MIT), Ivar Giaver (Norway-Nobel Lauteate), Ian Plimer (Australia), Tim Ball (Canada), Fritz Vahrenholt (Germany), Patrick Moore (Canada), Nils-Axel Morner (Sweden), Freeman Dyson (USA), Patrick J. Michaels (USA), Willie Soon (USA), etc., etc.

The “Global Warming” narrative is causing enormous damage to the world economy and even more so to Canada where we have an ideological federal government that believes they can solve “Climate Change” without the help of the biggest CO2 emitters on the planet (China, India, US, Japan, Saudi Arabia and every other major hydrocarbon producer on the planet). Shutting in hydrocarbons in Canada, just means that barrel of oil, molecule of gas or tonne of coal will be produced in a jurisdiction that has lower environmental, societal and ethical standards than Canada. All pain, no gain. In reality, more emissions and no measurable temperature reductions are the result despite the huge deficits/debt that the green revolution has driven and will continue to drive us towards.

I have chosen to speak up to defend my children’s future. Something our governments should be but are not doing.

The music side of the website combines some of my original music and a wide variety of cover songs. A few of those original songs (Edge of Darkness, Isolation 2020 and my first attempt at a video (Climate Debate 2.0)) touch on the “Climate Change” subject. To be honest, I am not a great musician or a singer, but I have developed a general strumming style (two down, two up, one down) that can be applied to 95%+ of the songs I have included. I did not learn to play the guitar until I turned 50, but I am now quite comfortable participating in a good campfire session. With some different hesitations, the 2-D, 2-U, 1-D strum can be applied to a wide variety of song types. I use Ultimate Guitar and other lyric/chord sites to get started when I want to learn a new song, but I’ve found that they don’t do a very good job of placing the chord changes at the right point in the lyrics and I can usually condense the song down to one page so I don’t have to worry about scrolling or turning a page. My style is easy to learn and those that are musically challenged (like myself) might benefit from the songs I am sharing.