Tom Nelson

Interviews and presentations on climate/energy realism and more, with guests including Will Happer, Jerome Corsi, Marc Morano, Carl-Otto Weiss, Valentina Zharkova, Christopher Essex, Henrik Svensmark, Patrick Moore, Ross McKitrick, Willie Soon, Susan Crockford, Peter Ridd, Christopher Monckton, and Richard Lindzen.

Tom Nelson is a science podcast hosted by Thomas Nelson, with 434 episodes on record and a Required Pod Score of 80.

Thomas Nelson hosts Tom Nelson, a science show with 434 episodes published.

Our AI reads these to draft pitches. Use them as grounding for a pitch that cites a real guest and a specific topic.

• 

  Tom Nelson

  John Costella: “ClimateGate” #433

  Oct 2, 20261h 14m

  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

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Tom Nelson

  Stephen Andrews: “Extension to the cosmic ray hypothesis” #432

  Sep 29, 20261h 12m

  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

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Tom Nelson

  Cohler/Soon: “ Response to Ed Berry’s recent presentation” #431

  Sep 25, 202645 min

  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

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Tom Nelson

  Eric Huxter: “Metrology vs Meteorology” #430

  Sep 22, 20261h 12m

  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

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Tom Nelson

  Ed Berry: “Nature Controls the CO2 Level” #429

  Sep 18, 202659 min

  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

  ListenShow Notes

Recent guests on Tom Nelson. Study who booked and why before you pitch.

Based on semantic analysis of episode topics and host coverage, this show is a strong guest fit for executives in:

Industry fit is computed by PitchCentric using vector embeddings of the show's episode catalog.