Photo adapted from Ron Neibrugge’s beautifully crisp original at Wild Nature Images
This is it: The dam wall is breached.
There are defining moments in any era, and we are right now in the midst of the Great Collapse.
Jan 30, 2010: the hottest hoax
Open Magazine's "Hottest Hoax in the World" Cover Issue
The weekend before last, a magazine cover called it Fraud. This could have been New Scientist, Scientific American, Discover, or any of the other popular science magazines, but it wasn’t. They were all scooped by an Indian publication, Open Magazine, that had only been running for a year.
The climate change fraud that is now unraveling is unprecedented in its deceit, unmatched in scope—and for the liberal elite, akin to 9 on the Richter scale. Never have so few fooled so many for so long, ever.
The entire world was being asked to change the way it lives on the basis of pure hyperbole. Propriety, probity and transparency were routinely sacrificed.
Feb 2, 2010: the Australian abandons the IPCC and the ETS
The editors suggested for the first time that the IPCC’s reputation was so damaged, the government should re-examine the evidence. This was a line in the sand that had not been crossed before, and the conspiracy tables were turned finally on the side of large funding, large institutions, and large vested interests.
Six weeks after Copenhagen, the IPCC report has been devalued by revelations of flimsy evidence and dodgy reporting. Many parts of the report contain solid science but that is not the point. It is increasingly impossible for governments to unquestioningly construct policy based on a report now so compromised. A fresh look at scientific data on climate change is needed before politicians can ask taxpayers to embark on schemes that could lead to trillions of dollars of lost wealth around the globe in coming decades.
… Australians deserve to see the evidence re-examined and tested before being asked to support major economic restructuring designed to manage global warming.
Climate change advocates argue a conspiracy among sceptics to derail action.
The past few weeks suggest the real conspiracy is between sections of the media; green advocates; business groups that signed up to the CPRS; and corporates set to make money from a carbon market – all of whom seem uninterested in revisiting the evidence, even though the ground has shifted. It is now apparent China is unlikely to put a price on carbon any time soon, opening the way for Australian jobs to be exported there if we go ahead with a carbon market. Do we really want to commit Australia to that path before we know more about the IPCC fallout?
Feb 3, 2010: Spectator headline: The global warming guerrillas
The myth is so over, that analysis of how it fell has already begun:
When Climategate broke, the mainstream media, like knights facing archers at Crécy, mostly ran dismissive pieces reflecting the official position of the Consensus. For example, they dutifully repeated the line that the University of East Anglia’s global temperature record was vindicated by two other ‘entirely independent’ records (from Nasa and NOAA), which was bunk: all three records draw from the same network of weather stations. Editors then found — by reading and counting the responses on their blog pages — that there was huge and educated interest in Climategate among their readers. One by one they took notice and unleashed their sniffing newshounds at last: the Daily Express went first, then the Mail and the Sunday Times, last week the Times and this week even the Guardian.
Feb 4, 2010: India throws the IPCC under a bus
India forms new climate change body
The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own leading scientist Dr R.K Pachauri.
Feb 4, 2010: Greenpeace tries to throw Pachauri off the gravy train
John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK, called on the Indian academic to be replaced to rebuild the “credibility” of the UN’s climate change body.
Tomorrow (Feb 13): The Australian finally tells the world about bloggers, retired scientists, the hockey stick…
The Australian goes with an opinion piece by Christopher Pearson.
What we are witnessing, in defiance of officialdom, government propaganda and the bulk of funded researchers in the field, is the collapse of a scientific paradigm. This is something that has never happened before. Politically speaking, it’s a game-changer with the potential to overturn the normative assumptions commentators rely on.
In the latest edition of The Spectator, Matt Ridley, a veteran science journalist, offers an explanation for how the consensus came unstuck. “Despite 20 years of being told they were not just factually but morally wrong, of being compared to Holocaust deniers, of being told they deserved to be tried for crimes against humanity, of being avoided at parties, climate sceptics seem to be growing in number and confidence by the day. What is the difference?
“In a word, the internet….”
And Christopher Pearson even mentions this blog.
The task is not over
Many major dailies have not yet noticed the quicksand opening up to swallow their scientific reporting. A significant slice of the population has been trained to call people names: “deniers”. A whole generation of environmental science reporters are still being spoon-fed PR from the bureaucracy and vested interests. Worse, they still think it’s “journalism” to repeat press releases without question. Roughly one-third of the people still believe the myth of the scientific “consensus”. But, one-third are wide awake, and telling their friends.
Pressure on governments is still strong. The Indian Government has since announced it supports Dr Pachauri, and the millionaire from the highest caste has claimed he is an easy target because he “represents the poor”. Sure. The Indian renewable energy minister compared Pachauri to Ghandi, whose opponents “were British” (like Christopher Monckton). And the Age printed all that with a straight type-face.
The myth is unravelling, and I thank everyone who was part of the team: everyone who put a comment on a blog exposing it, or rang a radio station, or wrote a letter to a newspaper, or who phoned a politician. We can all feel ever so slightly reassured that even the best dam walls money can buy, enforced by social pressure from the politically correct, and enthusiastically reinforced by the mainstream media, were chipped away, and eventually fatally weakened, by thousands of little hammers.
Thank God for the Internet.
ADDENDUM
Ed D has claimed that the dam shown above is suffering from low water levels due to drought caused by man-made climate change. Like all claims of this sort, it’s based on climate model predictions from models that have been falsified (there is no hotspot) and there’s no empirical evidence to back it up. As it happens the trend in droughts across the US shows no correlation with CO2 levels. Man-made CO2 didn’t start to rocket until after the monster droughts of the 1930’s and 1940’s.
Droughts across the US (from the NCDC via, hidethedecline.eu)
Cor ad Cor Loquitur.
best
Riddi
40
Arizona has announced that it’s backing out of a cap-and-trade coalition of US states and Canadian provinces.
You darn Aussies, you’ve really started something!
…and we love you for it, too!
😉
61
Collapsing, faster and faster;
http://tinyurl.com/ykw3l2ahttp://tinyurl.com/yjwxt26
http://tinyurl.com/yjwxt26
40
And more, and more;
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/06/the-times-top-british-scientist-says-ipcc-is-losing-credibility/#more-16124
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/06/ipccs-latest-blunder-africagate-as-told-by-dr-richard-north/#more-16128
31
Utah says no.
The remaining of the 57 states may also reject taxation.
21
Love the above graphic. California is now working on a bill to suspend its Cap And Trade bill.
10
It would be nice to think that the whole thing is collapsing but I would rather liken the AGW subject to being like a super tanker. It will take some time to bring to a halt. The loss of the captain doesn’t stop the ship. After the engines have stopped we need all the crew to jump overboard as well.
20
SUBJECT: The Olympic Global Warming Onslaught is Starting
Never mind that most of the ski areas in the world are having excellent seasons, including other Olympic venues like Whistler – which has already received over 1,000 cm of snow this winter. Arizona Snowbowl has received 238 inches of snow this winter! You read that correctly – Arizona.
Squaw Valley, California (site of the 1960 Winter Olympics) is reporting at least 10 feet of snow on the ground. Ski conditions around Salt Lake City (site of the 2002 Olympics) are excellent. Wolf Creek, Colorado is reporting close to ten feet on the ground. European ski areas are reporting excellent snow. Pajarito Mountain, New Mexico is reporting one of their best ski seasons ever. North Carolina ski areas are reporting some of their best conditions ever. Scotland is reporting the best ski conditions in 50 years. Washington DC is shut down due to snow.
Most of the ski areas in British Columbia have excellent snow, but be assured that the press will highlight the one area which doesn’t – and will not provide a sensible explanation for the cause. They will blame it on global warming, and will intentionally ignore ski conditions in most of the globe.
20
Like Stockholm syndrome, CCS (Climate Change Syndrome)
will take years of counseling, deprogramming, cups of tea, and
large quantities of tissue.
10
Lots of places to read about the lies from IPCC now.
You might say that ClimateGate is open;
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-climategate-shocker-even-cru.html
hehe.
Funny, how childish that curve looks. Even grown ups bought it!
10
Shouldn’t the words on the dam read Mann-Made Global Warming?
10
Christopher Pearson. summed it up beautifully –
10
Harry Chance #5 “Other 57?” I thought there was 60 (the 57 he had been to and the 3 he had not). 😉
10
Gordon Brown still has his finger in the dam wall: “Climate sceptics denounced by Brown as he launches climate change group”. Covered by the Grauniad.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/12/gordon-brown-climate-change-fundraising
10
Jo,
If people like myself feel strongly about something we are not afraid to voice our opinions – to speak truth to authority.
But on our own, we are small quiet voices. We are like “mozzies” at a barbecue – an annoyance, but easily swatted away.
You have provided us with an amplifier for our voices, and a friendly place where we can find support.
You have also let the trolls attend the party to provide the opportunity for light relief. That is gracious, and lifts the standards way above sites like RealClimate.
You have earned the respect of thousands of people across the net who, without your efforts and dedication, would not have been able to be heard. On behalf of those thousands, thank you.
Now, I believe we all have a job to finish? There will be a counter attack – you can put money on it – they have.
10
[…] The collapse of the global warming myth, […]
10
Jo,
All we need now is the final debate. To be broadcast across the lamestream media.
The people need to have a chance to learn the truth through the media they have been accustomed to watching.
Right now I think it’s safe to say that anyone in a leadership position who continues to refer to the IPCC or the nonexistent “consensus” can now safely be called a “Flat Earther” and “Corruption Denialist” until this matter has been clearly and farily debated within the public arena
Yes Mr Rudd and Mr Brown, I am calling you both “Flat Earthers”, and guess what, the label will stick.
10
Nevermind God, Jo. Here in America, we have all been told that good old, home grown Al “Mountebank” Gore invented the internet. Oh, that such BS were true so we could thank his Goreness for the internet.
10
Quick… how do we hide this decline!
Sorry, just couldn’t resist. It does beg the question, should this trend continue, exactly who the scapegoats are going to be. I don’t condone making an example of the most fervent CAGWers but you know that is how society operates. People desire some sort of closure and that usually happens with the death (or a few of them) of someone’s career. Personally I think the likes of Pachauri, Hansen, Schmidt and Jones should be nervous right now… but I leave out so many notables that are less well known by the public.
10
Thank you for mentioning it Sojean #6.
California has an initiative to suspend Arnold Schwarzeneggar’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
Here’s the thing about California’s initiative process. We need 3% of the voting population to sign a petition in order to get the initiative on the ballot.
The usual method for this – enviro or business interests pay professional petition collecting companies a dollar per signature.
The usual method isn’t going to work for us. Enviro “non profit” dollars are a no go for obvious reasons.
On the non-obvious side, business interests will not fund this petition drive either, because the venture capitalists are banking on soaking the public with their new get rich quick scheme, selling carbon credits.
We have to get a grass roots movement. We have to encourage private citizens to collect signatures the old fashion way – the way that the the framers of California’s state constitution originally envisioned the initiative process to work – collecting signatures for free.
For that to happen we need publicity.
I was born in California and have lived here my whole life. Believe me when I say there will be no in-state reporting of the suspend AB32 ballot measure.
We need your help, Jo. I’ve tried to get other climate bloggers to carry this story to the world, and been consistently given the stiff arm.
Support Suspend AB32. Nurture it, and California will make you proud.
We might be too late to lead, but by God California can sure as hell knock the global warming gravy train off it’s rails.
That perpetual motion thing where global warming commissions do whitewash investigations and the momentum keeps it moving? It’s over once Cali suspends AB 32. Dead in it’s tracks. I gaurantee it.
10
Love the artwork Jo. Pachauri is digging his own grave now. This gives denial a completely new meaning!
10
#14 Phillip Bratby
We must not forget Gordon Brown, as are Blair, Milliband, etc, Fabians and it’s their agenda that has actually been derailed with the torpedoing of HMS AGW, and they will regroup and initiate another means of arriving at their goal. Even total economic collapse can’t change their belief.
(Incidentally I noticed you have previously and elsewhere stressed the inanity of calculating averages from intensive variables – if we add Chris Essex and Ross McKitrick to our number, that makes 4 of us who are pointing this out).
10
Henry chance:
February 13th, 2010 at 4:52 am
LoL… Ah that’s something Obama will never live down…. I’m Australian and even I know you have eleventy one states in America;-)
10
Some phenomena die quietly in a corner. The stench of the rotting corpse reveals the body.
Other phenom die after a death blow. the body is buried with celebration and or mourning.
This phenom, having embarrassed more than half the globes population, will die slowly. The body will be dissected and hidden to hide the stench. Maybe the odd few will be blamed and sacrificed, but not those who know the most, they’re too dangerous to the establishment if they were to speak the truth of it all. Those looking to expose the body will be delayed and misdirected by countless inquiries.
This phenom will be quietly and conveniently forgotten by the majority only to be referred to in future class rooms.
10
Tasmanian election called. Great time to get on the Tasmanian blogs and help our southern cousins
http://www.themercury.com.au/in-depth/election.html
10
Well, I hate to be a stick in the mud, but I think it is way to early to celebrate. Things seem to be headed in the right direction, but consider:
• The UN and its IPCC are still in operation.
• NCDC is apparently still
correctingcorrupting raw data.• Hansen & NASA are still operating in much the same shrill way.
• The investigation of Mann appears to be a typical “We don’t see anything wrong here…”
• Our institutions of higher education are still in need of drastic reform.
• The useless peer review system has been shown to be corrupted, but not yet fixed.
• To date no heads “have rolled.”
I am convinced that whatever pressure can be brought to bear on Government and other complicit organizations/individuals needs to be continued and intensified. The battle is not over, so don’t make the mistake of sheathing you weapons. The perpetrators are still at large.
So take five — then press on!
Oh! And lets all give three cheers for Joanne Nova’s enormous contribution to bringing us to the final assault.
Thank you Joanne.
10
It’s the anticipated demise of a short term religion but all bets now are what will they move onto? AGW has been such a reliable horse it’s not really replacable so on what grounds will the next green war be waged? They need a new stage. Scientifically it seems to be the modelers squirming the most. They were a climate spinoff which hit the heights. They can tame down CO2 sensitivity and carry on, but if they are inherently unreliable and the models aren’t dancing anymore who will care? I know I wouldn’t be in amy rush to pop 20 years of work into the bin and go looking for a job again.
10
Larry~ I disagree to an extent, that ‘man-made’ on the dam should be ‘mann-made.’ Using chess as an analogy, I’d make him to be a knight at best. There’s definitely bigger players who’s names will be remembered in infamy long after the tarnish of meltdown-mann is rubbed off of PSU.
Which ought to take several decades, at least.
10
I have said it several times and I will say it again, it is all about the money. I must admit I was surprised to see the MSM in the US lag in ceasing on the AGW corpse. As the revalations continue to unfold the politicians will abandon the AGW Titanic ingreater numbers and the pace will accelerate. After all, no politician wants to be on board after the last life boat has been lowered!
They are trying to whitewash the Mann investigation but with a Republican governor and a state congress controlled by the Republicans I don’t think that will happen.
Does anyone know if Las Vegas have a line going yet on climategate indictments? I am willing to bet (literally) that indictments will be handed down. I still think Briffa will be the first to roll over.
While on the subjects of bets, did MattB pay off or is he looking for a cosigner?
10
Hmm… It ain’t dead until you’re standing on its throat, gun in hand, having your picture taken.
These mob are more like wounded buffaloes…. Very dangerous, and liable to be lying in ambush after backtracking and waiting for you to walk past when tracking them.
As Yogi Berra said. It ain’t over, till it’s over.
10
Eddy Aruda:
February 13th, 2010 at 10:24 am
You did need some sleep last night didn’t you Eddy lol Did he pay off indeed. R U kiddin? lol
10
Some of you are saying it aint over. True. It will be over when a govt somewhere gets thrown out coz of AGW or related issue such as ETS CPRS etc. Elections in UK and OZ this year. Doubt the govt in Oz will change, but a huge swing against the govt will make the others in Europe and Nth America really take notice.
Oh of course congressionals in US as well this year.
10
[…] Her latest post is a hoot. She’s claiming that the case for global warming is coming apart. She illustrates it with this PhotoShop™ masterpiece (note the “JoNova” in the lower lefthand corner, and note it well): JoNova defaces photo of Glen Canyon Dam. Original photo copyright by Wild Nature Images. […]
_____
Jo Nova editor’s note: The above was posted by Ed Darrell using the title of his own article on his own blog as a pseudonym.
10
The thumbs-down brigade are off to a slow start on this thread. Have the snowstorms rendered their solar-powered mice inoperable?
10
Baa Humbug:
Both major parties here are aligned to AGW anyway; they’re just not aligned in how to deal with it.
10
@ Janama
I hope you had a chance t read my post # 302 @ not FOUR degrees, 1.4 degrees. Thanks
10
Did you at least blush when you used the photograph of Lake Powell, showing the effects of global warming on its levels, to claim that global warming isn’t doing the harm it’s doing to that very reservoir?
10
@ Baa Humbug,
Thanks for your kind words. I thin the first gvernment to fall will be one in which they can call special elections. Probably the U. K., Australia or Canada. The U.S. has already been rocked by the election of Scott Brown. In November, there will be a tremedous shift in power. Obama will almost certainly be a one termer unless he veers to the center (unlikely.)
I never under estimate a politicians ability to switch canoes in mid stream. After all, politicians posit that the end justifies the means.
10
@ Ed Darrell
Maybe Jo got it at the same place Al Gore got the pics for the cover of his book. You know, the one with the hurricanes air brushed in?
I’ve noticed you fail to respond with evidence when asked. I am referring to your claim about the Sonoran desert stretching to the Midwest if temps rise 1.4 degrees. Again, the temp during the Holocene maximum was several degrees warmer than today yet the deserts didn’t expand. Can you cite any evidence to support your claim?
BTW, start referring to Jo in a more respectful manner. If you continue with your apparent trolling I am going to intellectually beat you like a red headed step child until your ears bleed!
10
Eddy Aruda:
February 13th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
I just got in to work and saw that. LMAO how am I gunna serve customers with tears in my eyes. Classic Eddy
10
D. King:
February 13th, 2010 at 6:27 am
A few 6 x 3 cells and regular visits by Big Bubba wouldn’t go astray either
10
I was surprised at the reaction of students to the PM on the “Q&A” forum. I thought we were living with a new generation of youth with an indoctrinated, never questioning, one eyed view of science.
These students were raised in an unbalanced education system that preached the “Smokescreen Al Gore fear propaganda science” and they clearly saw through it.
We live in a new age and I think it shows that those who hunger for knowledge can find it on the internet and no amount of “the science is settled” chanting will fool them, nor will the PM’s claim of “4000 guys in white coats who run around and don’t have a sense of humour. They just measure things”. The 4,000 climate scientists is really about 60. Lying to the next generation and to children for political gain? I don’t think that’s really forgivable.
10
I used to see lots of guys with no sense of humour running around measuring things, only they didn’t wear white. They wore black, had vultures sitting on their shoulders and vigourously rubbed their hands together when Clint Eastwood rode into town. 🙂
10
Scientific data and analyses show that there is no significant human-caused global warming.
During the late Ordovician the planet plunged into the Andean/Saharan ice age when the CO2 level was several times the present.
During the last and previous glaciations, atmospheric CO2 increase often lagged temperature increase by hundreds of years
Proxy data from ice cores show temperature trend direction changes. Temperature trend direction changes are not possible if NET feedback from average global temperature is positive.
Average global temperatures for over a century have trended down then up then down then up then down while average annual atmospheric CO2 levels have always risen since 1800. Lack of correlation proves lack of causation.
The Kiehl & Trenberth Global Energy Flows chart is in error for failing to recognize that part of the absorbed radiation is thermalized. This chart is widely used in the Climate Science community and is included in IPCC AR4.
A simple model accurately predicts average global temperatures since 1895 (i.e. over 114 years…and counting) without any need to consider the effects of change to CO2 level or any other ghg. The model, with an eye-opening graph, is presented at http://climaterealists.com/attachments/database/TwentiethCenturyTemperatureCorrelationupdate.pdf (Replace all references to PDO with ESST which is short for Effective Sea Surface Temperature).
It is woefully naive to think that all that needs to be done to get global weather models (calling them climate models does not make them climate models) to predict climate is to run them longer.
10
@ Baa Humbug
I am sure if Dirty Harry were commenting about the state of dissaray that the AGW crowd is in he would say the same thing he said to the charred remains of Lt. Briggs, “A man has got to know his limitations!”
10
While the demise, assuming it comes to be, of the IPCC and the associated climate change schmozzle, remember that this was just one small gambit by the UN. Lest we forget, Agenda 21 is a far more fearsome beast. I have no doubt there are aspects of Agenda 21 that have merit, but the control it implies far outweighs that of a small GHG tax.
In case you aren’t familiar with it try this link. “Sustainability” is tomorrows “climate change.” The IPCC was just the opening salvo of a much bigger war.
10
Hey Jo, theres a thought. How about a cartoon announcing Viscount Moncktons upcoming tour of USA?
Visualize…
Monckton depicted as a cowboy wearing a “skeptic” labelled sheriffs badge riding into town. 50 paces ahead, ratty looking alarmist cowboys standing ready for a shootout with legs and arms shaking like a leaf. (and a couple more in the background sneaking away)
I gotto get off the 15 cups of coffee per day
10
Eddy Aruda:
February 13th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
good one. You did get some sleep. Hows mom? all ok?
10
@ Dan Pangburn
Great post! When MattB gets back from the loan shark so he can pay off his gambling debt could you help him to understand the ice age during the late Ordovician period! I tried but wasn’t successful. If you do please do so in very simple terms. Also, you will need the patience of a saint. Experience at wrestling with a greesed pig would be helpful, as well.
10
@ Baa Humbug
Mom is doing fine, thanks for asking. I am at the hospital waiting to talk to another doctor. Hopefully, he is off the back nine at the golf course. I just hope he isn’t at the nineteenth hole pounding a cocktail. The difference between God and a doctor is that God doesn’t think he is a doctor.
10
@ Baa Humbug 47
great idea! Maybe we can use the background music from The Good, The Bad and The Ugly! Wash waaah wah. Wah, wah, wah!
10
Damn iPhone typos!
10
Even Phil Jones is starting to say that maybe the science is less than settled -see this BBC report and associated Q&A report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511701.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
10
Speaking of theme music, hear the violins playing for Professor Phil Jones admitting to the BBC that there probably was a medieval warm period. hence smashing the hockey stick to splinters.
He also admitted he didn’t keep records too well…Daahh
At the WUWT site HERE
10
Matty #27
Access to potable water.
It has already started in India.
10
@ Baa Humbug 54
Perhaps we can watch these criminals play musical chairs to a revamped version off the theme song from Gilligan’s Island! Instead of the minnow we could rename the S.S. Minnow the S.S. Data. You know, “the darn would be lost, the data would be lost.” Do you think MattB would make a good Gilligan?
10
Otter: #28
‘Using chess as an analogy, I’d make him to be a knight at best’.
And his allowable moves have always got that distinctive shape. 🙂
10
nah Eddy, Gilligan was genuinely funny. I learnt to speak english watching gilligans island.
Did you ever see my post adapting the Gilligan theme song to the CRU debacle? was about 2mnths ago
10
twawki @25
Election in Tassie?
Q: How do you like their Greens?
A: Snap frozen!
10
Ed Darrell: #37
Yes, I thought I had seen that dam before.
It is actually quite famous in Electrical Engineering circles as being the only dam in the world to be designed around a transposition error.
The story goes (and I cannot vouch for its veracity) that the design engineering team needed to know the the average observed river flow rate over the last whatever years. So they telephoned whoever measures that sort of thing, and asked. A quick two minutes on a calculator, and the average number was read out over the phone. Unfortunately whoever read it out, or whoever wrote it down, transposed the numbers. So the dam itself was designed for a much large rate of river flow than actually exists.
Normally, this would not be a problem, because dams are designed around the throughput of water needed to generate the electricity required, with any extra water being held in the lake. If too much water gets held, and the dam gets filled, the excess is spilled into the downstream river.
This lake however is also governed (as I understand it) by downstream requirements to deliver a minimum amount of water each day that is greater than the water required for electricity generation. Something to do with needing a river in the bottom of a canyon? Thus water needs to be spilled on most days, whether the dam is full or not.
As soon as your downstream water requirements exceed the natural inflows (which can also be affected by irrigation, etc) you will get the effect of banding shown in the photograph.
It has nothing to do with global warming. If it did, every dam in the country would be showing the same symptoms at the same time, and since they aren’t, it ain’t.
10
There is role for the IPCC when it finally collapses.
It should switch its efforts to motor vehicle manufacture as it has shown universally when all its wheels fall off, it still goes.
Also when the driver Al Gore is missing, people are still queuing up to support it when it’s obviously running out of warranty.
10
@ Baa Humbug
hey bro, while waiting for the Dr. I have re written the theme song to Hilligams Island. Please feel free to critique!
Just sit right back and you’ll here a tale, a tale of a great big lie
That started with the goracle a tool of th UN, a tool of the UN
The fradsters meant to enslave man, that much we knew for sure
Al gore then set sail fir a book signing tour, a book signing tour
The weather started getting cold those bloggers they were tough
But thanks to the crimes of the scientists the data did get lost, the data did get lost
The scam was exposed on this web site by ms. Joanne Nova
Phillip jonrs
Jim Hansen too
The goreacle and his wife
The modellers
Flannery the flimflam man
Here on goracle’s isle
So this is the tale of the criminals
Who will soon be doing time
They’ll have to make the best of things
While they’re doing time
The goracle and Hansen too,
Will do their very best,
To make the others comfortable
In their prison island nest
No phone, no lights, no motor car
Not a single luxury
Like lock down on Alcatraz
As primative as can be
So join us here each day my friends
Your sure to get a smile
From several climate castaways
Here on goreacle isle
10
Damn iPhone typos hilligams island
10
Didn’t quite copy and aste right from notes but I will work on it.
10
Gilligans island, damn this phone!
10
Al Gore at least didn’t use a landscape damaged by global warming to claim global warming isn’t happening (nor the opposite, which would have been more appropriate in his case).
It’s a SWAG figure, like most of those asserted here — but based loosely in actual research. You did notice, of course, that Ms. Nova cites no peer-review research in the lead post in this thread, nor even any authoritative sources. She assumes, as The Australian assumes, that if somebody steals your wallet, you have committed a crime. Having e-mails stolen is not a crime. (Is that really news to you?)
I notice you didn’t offer any evidence that 1.4 degrees would NOT do serious damage. Got any?
Do you know where wheat grows in the world? Do you know what temperatures it requires? Do you know what the average rainfall is in Kansas, and how it’s changing? Have you looked to see what increasing CO2 does to crops, and what it does in conjunction with warming?
I notice no one in the contrarian camp likes to discuss the Dust Bowl, which was a much more modest increase in temperature coupled with droughts that have been coming with increasing frequency. I notice no one has ever contested that humans caused it, and that it can happen again.
Nor do I expect you’ve got any answers now.
I notice that when I do respond with significant documentation, no one ever contests it.
Why don’t you notice some of those things?
Take a look at these:
“Global estimation of crop productivity and the effects of global warming by GIS and EPC integration,” Tan and Shibasaki, Ecological Modelling Volume 168, Issue 3, 15 October 2003, Pages 357-370 Landscape Theory and Landscape Modelling
“Yield and partitioning in crops of contrasting cultivars of winter wheat in response to CO2 and temperature in field studies using temperature gradient tunnels,” G. R. BATTS, R. H. ELLIS, J. I. L. MORISON, P. N. NKEMKA, P. J. GREGORY and P. HADLEY, The Journal of Agricultural Science (1998), 130:17-27 Cambridge University Press
“Climate Change Impacts on the Potential Productivity of Corn and Winter Wheat in Their Primary United States Growing Regions,” Robert A. Brown and Norman J. Rosenberg, Climatic Change Volume 41, Number 1 / January, 1999, pages 73-107
“Global Warming Puts the Freeze on Seed Yield (to a degree)” USDA Research Service (ARS), November 1, 2002
“Global Warming May Lower Grassland Quality,” USDA Research Service (ARS), May 30, 2007
10
Great story, but not accurate. It is true that the Colorado River Compact is based on pre-warming stream flows, however. You’re partly right, just wrong in believing warming has nothing to do with it, instead of checking the research. Hence the peer-reviewed research which points out that warming pushes the Compact to the brink, not engineering error. Fact trumps unfounded belief almost every time.
10
@ Baa Humbug 58
F#%$, I wish I would have read # 58 first! Oh well, I heard the Dr. we are waiting for paged so he must be hear somewhere. Ralph Waldo Emmerson once said, “All my greatest thoughts were stolen by the ancients.”
Damn!
10
How did humans do in that era? Do you have any idea what the wheat yields were in Kansas, or Australia, at that point? (Not a single mammal survived that era, let alone any significant population of humans. Of course, mammals had not yet evolved.)
I take it that you think the planet would be better off with all humans dead, from your advocacy that Ordovician climates are fine by you. Is that what you really think? Why else would you advocate climates that humans cannot survive?
At one point the entire planet was molten. That’s hardly evidence that you’d do well in a volcano today. Your logic acrobatics will do damage to your (virtual logic) spine.
10
Eddy Aruda:
February 13th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Not bad Eddy not bad. Here is my old one…in the context of the 30yr timeline chart
Just sit right back and you’ll hear a tale,
A tale of a fateful trick.
That started from the UEA port,
Aboard the CRU ship.
Jones was a data spinning man,
James Hansen stout and sure.
Five passengers that sailed that day,
For a three decade tour,
A three decade tour.
The weather started getting cool,
The mighty ship was tossed.
If not for the tricks of the deceitful crew,
The CRU would be lost,
The CRU would be lost.
The ship aground on the pages of,
This mighty detailed chart.
With Phillip Jo’oones
And James Hansen too,
A millionaire and his lies.
A tee vee star,
Proffesor Briffa and Michael Mann,
Here on Phillip Jone’s Isle
10
There is role for the IPCC when it finally collapses.
It should switch its efforts to motor vehicle manufacture
but that’s what Dr R K Pachauri of TERI do – they build cars. They used to be called Tata Energy Research Institute
10
The anctients? I’m not THAT old lol
10
That’s not exactly a good sign for your side.
See this one.
And see this.
Don’t miss this dustup.
Catch this assault on science.
And this astounding idea (note that Dr. Sundwall held high positions in the Reagan and Bush I administrations — he is no liberal).
So, Utah’s legislature, known as the home of crazies to all Americans, agrees with you?
And you’re happy about that? You’re proud of the fact?
10
AGW is meaningless until it it specified, “what does the world look like if there was no AGW?”
All recorded events taken as evidence of AGW are repetition of events within one hundred or two hundred years at most, and therefore, none of these events could be used in support of AGW.
Does everyone realize that even if CO2 in the air had the effect ascribed to it by Lindzen for example, THERE IS NO WAY TO MEASURE IT and it is a theoretical quantity only, because the implied amount of temperature rise falls within the range of natural variability over any period of time?
AGW is a complete absurdity, and “global warming” might equally as well be connected to thought processes or telekinesis. As far as I am concerned, anyone who could be convinced of AGW could equally as well be convinced of “global warming by thinking about global warming” via a theory of brain waves or something, assuming the idea had enough proponents with the right politics who were revered by some for something
[and who could cook up sophistry that sounded plausible enough to the soft minded]
10
Ed Darrell – various posts
My feeling is Darrell that your conviction isn’t really matched by the big drivers of the AGW movement. So when one of the next big dominoes falls(carbon price)it will be very revealing. When it gets low enough it will collapse and when the traders bail it is going to lose a lot of steam and as Eddy Aruda keeps saying: it’s all about money.
A lot of arguments will become irrelevant about then, and a lot of believers will be left standing. What’s the chance of Mr Pachauri lashing out on carbon credits at the moment?
10
Oh yeah thats a clever statement…..
10
My ten cents worth…
Barnett and Pierce concluded that human demand, natural forces like evaporation, and human-induced climate change are creating a net deficit of nearly 1 million acre-feet of water per year from the Colorado River system that includes Lake Mead and Lake Powell.
Assuming the above isn’t in any order of importance, a reader MAY conclude that of the 1 million a/f of water deficit could be attributed in any combination. e.g. 900k due to human demand, 99k due to natural forces and 1k due to HECC.
The team based its findings on the premise that climate change effects only started in 2007, though most researchers consider human-caused changes in climate to have likely started decades earlier.
So in citing THIS RESEARCH, we would have to conclude THIS RESEARCH finds the current changes are NOT due to human caused climate change. What other researchers CONSIDER human caused changes in climate may have LIKELY started decades earlier is irrelevant and not precise enough to make a scientific conclusion from.
But ofcourse one can cite Natalie Lockaret et al (2009) On the recent warming in the Murray-Darling Basin: Land surface
interactions misunderstood.
“The relative roles of air temperature and SSH on
evapotranspiration rates can be approximated through simple
calculations. The 2002 drought had an extra 1.5 hours of
bright sunshine per day than the 1952–2008 average. Using
the PBL model under wet land surface conditions and forced
with typical sunny conditions, the average actual evapotranspiration
was simulated. On average, an extra 1.5 hours of
bright sunshine, instead of the alternative cloudy conditions,
provides approximately 0.32mm of additional evapotranspiration.
In contrast, an increase in air temperature of 2C
causes only an additional 0.076 mm of evapotranspiration
over the entire day”.
In other words, it’s the Sunshine Hours (SSH) that cause 80% of evaporation, 20% is caused by 2DegC.
What causes that 2degC warming has been debated for 20yrs. debate still not over.
10
@ Baa Humbug 71
No offense meant bro (mate?) just poetic license and a little embarrassment! BTW, I like your rendition of the theme song better than mine. I am at home and happy to be using my ma.. er, uh laptop!
10
Hi eddy (mate or m8) Don’t be silly. You know what they say…”Great minds think alike”.
10
Scott @ 74:
Nice catch LOL. Methink Ed Darrell only posts here to spam his own blog repeatedly. At least, and unlike Twaki, he actually makes the effort to post some comments… albeit wildly inaccurate ones at times.
10
@ Ed Darrell
You wrote, “How did humans do in that era? Do you have any idea what the wheat yields were in Kansas, or Australia, at that point? (Not a single mammal survived that era, let alone any significant population of humans. Of course, mammals had not yet evolved.)
I take it that you think the planet would be better off with all humans dead, from your advocacy that Ordovician climates are fine by you. Is that what you really think? Why else would you advocate climates that humans cannot survive?
At one point the entire planet was molten. That’s hardly evidence that you’d do well in a volcano today. Your logic acrobatics will do damage to your (virtual logic) spine.
Wow! I am suspicious that this is MaatB posting under a different name to avoid paying his gambling debt?! You are not worthy of the title of troll. Your train of illogic would best be described as worthy of Quasimoto the bell ringer after undergoing a prefrontal lobotomy!
Lets take this one step at a time, shall we? Obviously, since you said that mammals hadn’t evolved you statement about humans in that era must have been an attempt at humor, or so I hope. Wheat is a domesticated crop that didn’t exist in its present form. If you are talking about crop yields maybe you are alluding to previous postings about the “Sonoran” desert engulfing the midwest if temps rise 1.4 degrees. BTW, where is the evidence I asked for to support your absurd claim about the desert extending to the midwest? Why didn’t that happen during the Holocene maximum when temps were several degrees higher? The earth being molten? Geez, why don’t you just take it all the way back to the big bang? Inside a molten volcano? That is a non sequitur and a straw man to boot! All humans being dead? Another straw man. Me personally, I am willing to make an exception with green zombies like you! Whose advocating humans live in another ice age? Another straw man. Logic acrobatics? Coming from a guy who can’t form a cogent thought that is the height of hypocrisy. Interesting ad hominem finale. I hope I am not wrestling with or trying to teach another pig to sing? I told you at 39 I , “If you continue with your apparent trolling I am going to intellectually beat you like a red headed step child until your ears bleed!” The smack down has begun.
Maybe you should try the intellectual gladiator approach and refer to yourself in your next post by leading off with these words, “Those who are about to die salute you”! Or, if you are not a glutton for punishment, take your troll bane medicine and call it a day!
10
@ Baa Humbug
Thanks for the compliment but I don’t know bro, i’ve seen you post on other sites and it is impressive! I think I’ll take Dirty Harry’s advice and know my limitations! Seriously, I’ve seen some people post here and I am awed by what I see. I try to stay humble because it is the best way I know to avoid humiliation. Although when it comes to trolls I can relate to dirty Harry. When asked how he got his name he replied, and I paraphrase, “Because I get every dirty job that comes down the pike. its a dirty job, but someone has to do it. I say to all the trolls, “Go ahead, make my day!
10
Kaye Coates:
This is enormous news. The hockey stick is dead. The MWP is real. Recent warming is not unprecedented.
10
@Eddy
LOL In view of that, the best advice I can give to those wishing to tangle with you is…..
“You gotto ask yourself one question, do I feel lucky today. Well? Do ya punk?”
10
I’m a soldier.
In my line of work, when you have the enemy down, finish them off!
The job isn’t done. We need to drive the stake through the heart.
10
@ Baa Humbug
Perhaps what I should have said to Ed Darrell was. “I know what you’re thinking, did Eddy destroy five of my fallacious arguments or was it six? Seeing how this is The Jo Nova Skeptic’s Handbook, the most powerful skeptic’s handbook in the world, you have to ask yourself, ‘Do i feel lucky’? Well, do you punk?” Actually watching him post reminds me of the scene from the movie “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” where Clint hands a note left by “the Bad” to Eli Wallich and Clint says “its for you.” Then, Eli has extreme difficulty reading the note which is addressed to the two of them and reads slowly and haltingly, ‘See you later id… id” and Clint says, “idiot.”
10
Hey JlKrueger,
Good to see you post, again. You’re right, we need to drive a wooden dagger through the heart and a couple of silver bullets , as well!
10
Eddy Aruda:
February 13th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
LMAO loved it. It “made my day” Dirty Eddy
10
@JlKrueger
You are a soldier? What branch and which country? I live in Sonoma County, California and these far left loons hate the military. What is ironic is that if it were not for the military they wouldn’t have the right to free speech which enables them to criticize the men and women who are willing to fight to the death for the afore mentioned freedom.
10
Thanks Florida, i’ll do that right now. As our California gubernator says, “I’ll be back.”
10
Wow! The guy is a piece of s–t with shoes, an a–hole with teeth, etc. I notice this bloviating buffoon doesn’t have the guts to allow comments. Thats okay, when the dust settles he will be lucky to get a job as a mop boy at the adult peep show!
____
He does allow comments. — Ed
10
Actually Dirty Eddy, I try to avoid the repetitive trolls who visit here, but when I feel obligated to respond, a line from my favourite movie comes to mind…
“Just when I thought I was out, they drag me back in.”
10
@ Baa Humbug
“Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer!”
10
Eddy,
I’m West Point Class of ’79. Retired from active duty, but currently in Afghanistan working for the US Army training the Afghan Army. I’ve been here two years, heading home to North Carolina mid-March. Prior to this job, I was in Kuwait/Iraq for almost four years training US and Coalition Forces. I’m sometimes “offline” for a while due to duty requirements. The current III Corps Commander at Fort Hood (Bob Cone) is my classmate. We were in the same company at West Point. The current commander of the 101st is also a classmate.
10
@JlKrueger
Thank you for your service to our country. When I was a kid I use to make fun of Marines as I lived in Santa Ana, California. By the time I was in my early twenties I was a little wiser and had a lot of respect for what the military does. Now, if I see someone in the military I make it a point to thank them and, if possible, buy them a beer. Again, thank you for what you do and please come home in one piece. My favorite passage from the movie Patton is in the beginning during the monologue where the general says, “Your job is not to die for your country but to make the other poor, dumb, son of a bitch die for his!” I hate to see people get killed but given a choice between every terrorist on the planet and their supporters being killed or one american I am sorry but they can go to paradise and enjoy their forty (or whatever the number is suppose to be) virgins.
10
STOP THE PRESS!!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
And this is really interesting;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OjPJnEtfUE
10
Ed Darrell: #66
It is interesting that they did NOT mention the Colorado River Compact, which I understand takes precedence?
My post was based entirely on a conversation with some engineers who worked on the project. It is up to you whether you consider that to be a peer reviewed source or not. But they had no reason to lie (embellish perhaps, but not lie).
I have not seen the Barnett and Pierce paper in Water Resources Research, because I am not a member of the American Geophysical Union, and it is only available to the public on a pay per view basis.
I presume you are a member, so can you please tell me what proportion of the decrease they place on human demand (we know from the US Census that populations in the area have increased since the dam was designed); evaporation rates over the period; and “human-induced climate change? It has to be in their analysis somewhere.
I would be especially interested in knowing how they determine that the remainder of the decrease (after human demand and evaporation have been taken into account) can be specifically placed at the door of anthropogenic climate change, and how? Are there no other hypothesise that might apply? And if there are, how were they discounted? Or is this a convenient way of saying, “we can’t account for all of the difference, so we will say that it is global warming”?
10
I think when an appreciable cut in Government funded renewable energy and announcements of fossil fuel sales are not met with religous squeels then it’s over.
Some of those things are happening, but it’s going to take time for the lot of it.
10
Eddy Aruda #90
I am not sure that I wanted to visualise this … in future, thank you for NOT sharing 😉
10
Rereke Whaakaro:
February 13th, 2010 at 8:06 pm
In view of your above comment, may I suggest a DVD called “Irena Palm”
It’s funny and sad so tissues are in order lol
10
average joe:
February 13th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
Joe when linking could you also give us a quick lowdown on the subject matter so that we don’t waste time on something we may not be interested in.
regards
10
Baa Humbug #99
I will check with my local DVD store (and pharmacy) 🙂
10
@Rereke Whaakaro
Sorry, I did not mean to offend your sensibilities or wax vulgar. Actually, I was going to suggest he use his toothbrush instead of a mop but I thought that may have been going a little too far. Again, sorry for the visual!
10
Eddy Aruda #102
Hey, no need for an apology. I was indulging in wry humor.
For the record, my very first job in life was as a bouncer in a strip club in Soho, London. I was fifteen, but lied about my age. My parents thought I was at soccer training.
There is not much that I haven’t seen over the years. I do not shock easily and I have no sensibilities to be offended.
Can you imagine how much a recently post-pubescent boy gets teased by a dozen or so “been-there-done-that” strippers?
From the movie “What’s up Pussycat”:
Peter O’Tool: “I hear you have a job?”
Woody Allen: “Yes, I help to dress the girls at the ‘Folies Bergère'”
Peter O’Tool: “Really! What a great job. How much is it worth?”
Woody Allen: “Forty Francs a week”
Peter O’Tool: “That’s not much”
Woody Allen: “It is all I can afford.”
10
I received an email from a Queensland sheep consultant a month or so ago. It contained a form from Centrelink in Queensland for Farmers to apply for drought relief. It also contained a section which the farmer had to fill in saying they were suffering from the effects of Climate Change.
Now with the collapse of the Global Warming hoax, the Queensland branch of Centrelink need to create forms for AG Warmers as their jobs disappear. (CentreLink is the Australian Social Security Department)
10
Baa humbug (69)
Listen, you mongrel! If you keep this up, people will start thinking! And who knows where that could end?? Even more unfortunately, it’s already made me start thinking of a “Tee-vee” star (aka Ginger) superimposed with Albert Gore – and I am going through a consequentional serial regurgitation esperience as we speak – big time!! Cheers for that.
No Christmas card for you this year buddy. Please post a picture of a cane toad (ugly one) when you discuss Albert Gore in the future. Apart from the reference to that parasite, it was a great comment anyway – thanks!
Cheers,
Speedy.
10
As a footnote to Baa Humbug #69.
Unfortunately or otherwise, Phool Jones’ Isle won’t sink due to global warming, with the resultant deepening of the gene pool. It anything, it is more likely that their demise would be due to them killing off the many (easily caught) Parrot Fish – a simple fish species that sleeps at night and who would convert the coral detritus into beach sand to replace the stuff that get’s blown away on a regular basis. Sand dunes sticking up in the middle of a dirty big ocean tend to have a limited life expectancy – a fact that Pacjauri et al haven’t latched onto as yet…
However, a big bag of money sitting at the UN, guarded only by some dodgey science – this is easily latched onto by the carpetbaggers in Tuvalu, Queanbeyan and the Maldives etc. It makes you wonder whether humaity’s stupidity is only matched by it’s greed…
Cheers again,
Speedy.
10
Speedy, that big bag of money you referred to…below see same old lies and a new committee to distribute the “bag”. Ban still overseeing the doomsayers, Oxfam still on another planet, and as far as the MSM is concerned…hell, read the last few paras in particular y`all;
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hKOKVOyAqm4a3vfxXbztQrasGq1g
It ain`t over by a long way – due to a categoric position held and no exit strategy…yet(?)
10
My anger and frustration at the UN comes from thinking about UN’s weakness in emergency preparedness and disaster relief – witness Haiti, and South Indian Ocean tsunami
Instead of disaster relief, the UN gave the world the IPCC as a means of “creating” victims who didn’t exist prior to the IPCC
What about me? Am I an AGW victim if my sensibilities have been assaulted by global warmers? The only compensation I seek is disbanding the IPCC and compel the UN to create a disaster relief infrastructure that people can depend on
Krueger’s analogy with enemy forces isn’t quite right. Actually these are zombies, who have been repeatedly returned to their grave since about the year 1910. Global Warmers aren’t a new species – they are reincarnations of religious fanatics that were previously debunked by such institutions as the Royal Society of London.
10
Baa Humbug:
February 13th, 2010 at 8:13 pm
“Joe when linking could you also give us a quick lowdown on the subject matter”.
Okay, will try to do that.
10
George
Don’t worry – that big bag of money you discuss will all meet IPCC and UN standards. For starters, it will be delivered to Venezuala, Zimbabwe etc in large brown bags. It will be received by peer-reviewed IPCC “bag-runners”, who will keep the contents out of our atmosphere.
The bags themselves will be environmentally friendly, recyclble and with carbon offsets from a rainforrest whose precise geographic location escapes me at the present time Bryan…
Oxfam aren’t the only ones, though they may be the worst.
I have recently pulled out of World Vision on the basis of their policies. By inference, they are supporting biofuels in preference to providing productive land for the people – which is criminal – the perpetration of a crime against humanity! I’m not saying they were evil – just stupid, and I don’t propose wasting my mortgage money on their junkets to Copenhagen, Mexico et al. There are lots of other worthy charities to support – as I say to the kids “We have enough money to share, but not enough to waste.” It defies belief thea I should share my money with peope so that they can wast ie…
The Monckton lectures included a Haitiaan selling mud-cakes to his neighbours to delay the starvation process. It seems that biofuels have made the price of basic foodstuffs too expensive for the poor. We, as a society, are to blame if we support bio-fuel production. I have a copy of my email to these turkeys available to Jo if she’s interested… It could make an interesting story, if and when the avalanche of IPCC stuff-ups starts to slow down…
By the way, it seems you have a very good grasp of the GW science. I’m reading with interest…
Best Wishes,
Speedy.
10
Aruda said:
The editor’s right. Not only do I allow comments, they are encouraged. No censoring (except for profanity — a lot of school kids use it).
But some people are so constantly in the wrong, they don’t recognize they view things through the wrong end of the telescope.
Obviously the editor has made a trip over there. There is hope, then, that facts may begin to penetrate this blog, yes?
10
@Ed DArrell
When I clicked on the link provided by Florida I noticed I saw there was no place to comment. I did see the comments after I went back and saw the home page. That being said, I have absolutely no respect for you. The far left worries about overpopulation. I would love to see you and the rest of your ilk set a good a example for the rest of us by throwing a Jones Town style kool aid party for yourselves. Yep, please commit suicide, you and the rest of your misanthropic buddies can F@#$ off and die. Just remember to leave enough double strength hefty garbage bags for volunteers to put you in. Then, we will put you out on the street curb on trash collection day. You are deceptive, disingenuous and something I scrape off the bottom of my boot. Fillmore’s bath tub? More like the ring of scum in Fillmore’s uncleaned toilet.
Someone with your lack of character should put a job application in at the CRU.
10
Ed Darrell,
Thanks for giving me the link to the original artwork. I posted it at the first chance I got.
I gather you tried to post the following during the period your comments were held before you apologized for mistakenly calling us baseless names:
Two problems.
1) We want empirical evidence. Most of these are model projections. Just like the claims that drought has anything to do with global warming, they’re all based on climate models who’s output has been falsified. See the missing hot spot. Models are just theoretical calculations. They wouldn’t be empirical evidence even if they could predict things.
2) Other papers on your list cover agricultural research with empirical evidence, but they tell us nothing about the cause of global warming.
If you really want to help the planet, good manners and sound reasoning are essential.
10
An excellent review of the Jones’ interview is given by professor Philip Stott at
http://tinyurl.com/yejanwm
As usual, he is on the money.
10
Brian,
Unfortunately long ago already the UN started serving only itself. The solution is not to fix the UN but to blow it up and start over with an organization whose only charter is humane relief and disaster preparedness. They must be accountable to the countries that fund them through an independent oversight group of some kind with the power to investigate suspicion of wrongdoing, with subpoena power, authority to audit the books and so on. Lack of accountability is the major problem with the UN.
The current UN is a joke, J-O-K-E spelled out in ten foot high red neon capital letters.
10
@ Brian Valentine
Thanks, I enjoyed reading your post @ 112. Whether it is a silver bullet or a wooden stake, these misanthropes have to be dealt with and we must be eternally vigilant or the price of complacency will be tyranny. I would love to open my refrigerator and see Al Gore’s or Ed Darrell’s likeness on a milk carton with the words, “missing since…” underneath the picture.
10
It is now evident why the IPCC would never let anyone with the slightest skeptical attitude attend any of their spare-no-expense gatherings like the last one in Bali. I always thought that refusal meant they had something to hide and indeed they did — much more than I ever dreamed of. Letting in a skeptic would expose them too easily.
10
@ Rereke Whaakaro # 102
Thanks, I do try and be considerate of the feelings of others. When I see trolls like Ed Darrell commit character assassination, as he did to Jo on his sorry excuse for a blog site, it makes my blood boil. When I was younger, I worked as a bouncer in some pretty rowdy seaside bars, and I also worked as a bodyguard. Guys like Darrell are cowards. The guy has got the backbone of a jellyfish. Jo’s only problem I’ve seen so far is she is too nice a person, if that is possible. I’ve noticed that skeptic bloggers usually have to come out of pocket to keep their blog sites running. Meanwhile, climate criminals like Pachauri and Gore fly around the world on their private jets spewing the allegedly dangerous pollutant, and their message has something in common: Do as I say not as I do. If I ever have the opportunity to meet one of them, I will tell them where to stick their carbon footprint and in no uncertain terms. It is obvious that the misanthropic Gaia worshippers are as hard to finish off as cockroaches. The good news is, it can be done. It just takes persistence and patience.
10
@ Eddy 12.55 pm Feb 13
Thanks for the comment.
A chart showing CO2 and temperature for the last 550 million years is at http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html
Perhaps that will help. The info that was combined to produce that chart is also available on line.
10
Roy Hogue: #117
You would not want to be the ONLY sceptic let in and exposed. Some of the activists are like rabid dogs regarding their cause d’jour. They would rip you apart.
10
@ Dan Pangburn
You are most kindly welcome. I love that link and have had it bookmarked for quite some time. I enjoy helping the website stay active while our fellow skeptics in Australia get the rest they need so they can continue to fight the good fight. May the sun never set on the skeptic’s empire!
10
Q & A with Phil Jones – very enlightening
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
10
@ Florida 123
Ed Darrell is a pompous cretan. I am no wimp but I wouldn’t want to to take on Jo. The guy is way out of his league. The guy has to toe the line? Oh, poor baby, he is lucky Jo even let him back on this site, period.
10
Still waiting for darrell to explain how the Sonora Desert would expand across to Oklahoma if the Earth’s temperature rose another 1.4 degrees, when it has already been shown that the Great Plains were warmer during the MWP, than they are now…
MWP project map (global) http://www.co2science.org/data/timemap/mwpmap.html
Great Plains MWP http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/studies/l2_greatplains.php
10
Ed Darrell writes:
“Obviously the editor has made a trip over there. There is hope, then, that facts may begin to penetrate this blog, yes?”
What facts were you referring to?
I have not been able to decipher your meandering ramblings,could you factually point out why YOU dispute this threads headline?
The great collapse of the global warming myth
I just want to hear it from the AGW believers camp.That would be you?
10
Eddy Aruda: #118
It seems we both had a similarly misspent youth.
I don’t know about you, but the advice I was given when I started as a bouncer was, “Never get angry – people will mirror it back to you. Never look for trouble – there is a whole lot you wont find if you don’t look. Never throw the first punch, but always “help” the other guy fall when he stumbles.” I have always thought that was good advice for life too.
I know Ed Darrell gets under peoples’ skin. Perhaps he doesn’t realise he is doing it? Perhaps he is just trying to play with the big boys, and thinks that his article was satire? Or perhaps he just gets off on being a troll? Who knows.
What you do get from his site is that he is a teacher.
Now, there are two types of teacher:
There are those who immerse themselves in a subject to the point where they know sufficient about it to be able to answer any question that their students might ask, in ways that they can understand (these are rare); and
There are those who immerse themselves in the process of teaching according to the standards of the syllabus, and are therefore trained to absorb stuff, and then regurgitate it in ways that students can understand (these are common).
It may be he has a deep understanding of matters pertaining to geophysics, astrophysics, hydrology, and climatology. Or maybe he is just one of the catastrophe lemmings on frazzle-juice. From what I have seen, it is probably the latter. As Phil Jones might say, “He has inadequate credentials, and is therefore unqualified to have a valid opinion”.
Illegitimus non carborundum est
10
When I say Cretan I am referring to the Cretan paradox. See http://c2.com/cgi-bin/wiki/–/–www.creport.com/wiki?CretanParadox
10
Mr. Whaakaro~ you forgot those who teach gym.
And Then there’s darrell…
10
Rereke Whaakaro @120,
Yes, there’s that too — all the more reason why their house should be burned to the ground and they be exiled to some suitable desert island in the middle of nowhere!
10
Is he a school teacher, a lawyer, or combination of the two?
Here are some excerpts from testimony he gave before the Texas State Board of Education’s textbook committee, and published on his site:
Austin, Texas
July 9, 2003
.
10
ABC are planning to run a 24 hour news channel, perhaps they will report on Phil Jones BBC interview then.
Dr Jones makes several revelations regarding climate science including:
-No statistically significant warming since 1995.
-Debate over Medieval Warm Period not settled.
-The rates of warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were statistically identical
-Cooling from January 2002 is not statistically significant but has occurred (-0.12C per decade)
-Says the debate is not over!
BBC Story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511701.stm
ABCNEWswATCH Commentary
http://abcnewswatch.blogspot.com/2010/02/jones-bbc-interview-missing-in-action.html
10
@ Ed Darrell
I just skipped over to the 1.4 not four post and you are still droning on about the desert growing to engulf Oklahoma but provide no evidence to support your argument. i already know you can’t. Why do you keep putting your foot deeper into your mouth? Is this is indicative of how you prepare a case for court? If so, and I wind up in court, I need to hire you to represent my opponent!
Put up or move on, did you send your resume to the CRU yet, they may be hiring? Better yet, why not send your curriculum vitae to Michael Mann, he may need an attorney soon and you might just be the right attorney for the job!
10
Attention has focused recently on the “lack of diligence” on the part of the amateur pornographer/pervert Choo Choo Pachauri, and whether Choo Choo should “step down.”
(As far as I am concerned he cannot “stoop” any lower than the reptilian posture that people observe him in}
Calling for Choo Choo’s resignation is a waste of time. Choo Choo is merely symptomatic of a pervasive UN sociopathology.
10
Wow first decent nights sleep in a while. Hi folks 🙂
Speedy:
February 13th, 2010 at 11:59 pm
Sorry speed, no cane toad pics, though there’s lots of ’em here in Brisbane. I usually practice my 2 iron drives with ’em.
10
Unfortunately the net in all its democratic glory brings us a lot of garbage along with the sublime. Ed Darrell is clearly in the former category and represents one of those minor bloggers attempting to draw mainstream site audiences to his desperately woeful web site. I think it interesting that he is so keen to sell himsef as the fount of all wisdom on a plethora of subjects (no one is such an expert of such a wide range … geniuses like dr Karl get it wrong frequently too … I remember his geosequestration of CO2 gaffe of yesteryear).
Ed Darrell is certainly no exception but it becomes apparent from his auto-biographical mini-resume that balance plays a minor role in his life:
Source: http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/this-bathtub-this-blog/
Someone who has spent the majority of their life in mired in politics and consulting has now turned the corner to spread the balanced word on climate science? Call me skeptical (!) but in my experience it takes a bit more than that for a leopard to change his spots.
10
I posted the “peer reviewed” evidence Ed wanted at his web site and asked him to reply to my comment #75 here
“I commented about the drought at novas site comment #75 Your reply there would be welcome”.
below is his response..
I’d suggest “sorry I was wrong” would be appropriate Ed
10
Bulldust:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:37 am
Mate I cherish and repeat what my dad told me when I was a little kid, “high level of formal education doesn’t necessarily mean one is wise”.
So attorney shmattorney, shuffling papers in an office all your life may not necessarily make one wise. Heck, I’d bet London to a brick working as a bouncer at a strip club could improve ones wisdom”.
(Can wisdom be improved or is it added? maybe it is developed, i dunno lol)
10
Baa Humbug~ Things are only ‘serious’ if the people speaking to him about them, are in Agreement with him.
10
Otter:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:47 am
Yep Otter. His problem is that we showed the paper he himself cited doesn’t say what he says, and to boot we provided another peer reviewed paper debunking his views. He has got nowhere to go except to accept he is wrong and should admit it.
(he’s probably frantically searching the web for some other paper, any paper that might help him)
10
@ Baa Humbug 135
I just picked my jaw up off the ground. Ed Darrell reminds me of Inspector Moore from the Dirty Harry movie witnessing the LAW rocket demonstration where the inexperienced Moore almost gets her head blown off by the rocket by trying to stand behind it as it is being launched. I can almost picture you saying to inspector Moore (Ed Darrell), “Coming, Inspector?” At least inspector Moore had a little humility. If he is worrying about the heartland of America turning into a desert because of a measly potential 1.4 degree increase in temps, he must have the fate of U.S. national security resting in his hands to state, “Id prefer to discuss serious matters.” What a weasel segue!
10
Baa Humbug: #136
Dunno about wisdom, but it sure improved my education 😉
10
140
Rereke Whaakaro:
February 14th, 2010 at 9:04 am
And your libido my friend, and your libido lol
10
Another great post, Joanne…It’s great to see…We have a way to go though..Well, you all probably have heard that the Northern Hemisphere is getting hit with a hard Winter…Especially in the U.S.A.. We noticed a problem with our “Snow Men”. They aren’t liking it at all…I have the proof..http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1938.last
Yes, it’s hard to tell, it could be all of the AGW talk going around also….Maybe the “Snow Men” heard about the Ground Hogs day forcast! 6 weeks extended of winter in the U.S.. Yes, the ground hog saw his shaddow….You have to decide…
10
G’morn Dirty Eddy.
M8 isn’t it obvious that Ed is just parroting the alarmist line. Obviously he hasn’t engaged a single brain cell to think for himself. I don’t really want to waste time debating these lemmings but like i said before, “just when I thought i was out, they drag me back in” lol
10
Thanks Jo,
I like the ways you finish your report ‘the Great Collapse of the Global Warming Myth’: Thank God for the Internet!
“They” know the internet is the major spine in there foot! They are working hard to prevent us finding out about the truth about just about anything! Conroy is really trying to achieve this for Australia.
We cannot let this happen as there are report that some websites have already been banned from New Zealand, Canada, the US and Europe!
Keep up the hard work,
Philippe
10
I knew Ed was a lawyer from a previous post but didn’t know he was at the Department of Education. Could that explain why they’ve been so screwed up for so long?
Frankly I find his site nauseating from its name on downward and impossible to stay with for very long. I’ve a lot of respect for those of you with the fortitude to stick with it long enough to uncover this stuff. I’d rather have a tour of the Los Angeles sewer system. At least it’s useful.
10
Need a little help,
The hottest temps of the year are NOT increasing but the coolest temps are less cool. It would seem that if CO2 is the cause of any warming it only occurs at night in winter. Is this the Jones, Wang none existant UHI effect or does CO2 only come out at night.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OjPJnEtfUE
10
Philippe,
Do you know which web sites have been banned from the U.S.?
10
Mr. Aruda said:
Hey, don’t blame me. I’m not the one who made the outlandish statement that climate was warmer in the Ordovician, so no problem now.
You could always link over to my blog — you know, check things out, get some facts. In any case, your claim was bizarre, and you haven’t answered.
Tell us how well humans did in that time you cited, when CO2 was, you claim, much higher. Assuming your claim was not a bad attempt at humor, you should be able to answer, yes?
It looked like a bad attempt at humor on your part. I had hoped it was. Your defensiveness suggests it wasn’t.
Clarify — if you’re not just popping off silly stuff, how did humans make out in the Ordovician?
10
The question underpinning the scandal of Climategate and Glacier-gate is how many errors and incidents of corrupted data and alleged criminal and unethical behaviour does it take for the persons responsible to be held accountable? And/or, how many more errors are permitted before people admit to being uncertain of the science underpinning man-made climate change?
The…. “Geez mate! It’s a mistake but, you know she’ll be right, the science is still sound” type of response of the climate change Caesars and their media supporters every time a fellow climate change Caesar stuffs up is neither credible nor acceptable. The response mocks us and those for whom establishing sound science and adhering to a code of professional ethics is a reality, not a charade.
Those responsible for formulating government policy should not tolerate the current litany of scientific errors. A full and frank inquiry needs to be held into the affects that these continuing errors have had on climate science and government policy to date.
Zero tolerance to crime should also extend to scientific errors and corrupted climate science.
10
Eddy @ #111 – “The far left worries about overpopulation”
Without possibly taking your statement out of context in relation to the rest of that post and thus talking at cross purposes…so do I, man, so do I.
In the few months I have started delving deeper into the current debate (so-called), and I have said this before, the thing that probably most $%its me to absolute tears is that, whilst we are supposedly required to address imminent and catastrophic climate change through global and concerted action, the very same global PC high priests are paradoxically also applying the PC principles to inaction on the ongoing and unbridled global “breed like rabbits” mentality…whether this be on cultural, religious or traditional grounds it is “not to be spoken of”. To make it more ironic the last couple of articles I have read on the subject indicate that most population growth is occurring in the nations which are in need of most assistance.
The growth of the 19th and 20th centuries in respect to all areas of human endeavour is not indefinitely sustainable, by definition.
Yeah, there`s Agenda 21 etc, conspiracy theories abound also, but part of the mix of tools in the toolbox of solving “climate change effects” should logically be limiting population growth to maximise the efficacy of the UN “emission reduction solutions” to the “climate problem”. It is not, even though there are the occassional mutterings of “wouldn`t it be nice if…”.
The “3,000 of Tuvalu” is a perfect example of Overpopulation Refugees (notwithstanding what the Greens, Oxfam and MSM are saying otherwise). Just a taste of things to come – a while back a mate of mine coined the term “Peak Human”… and we`re worried about a POSSIBLE 2 degrees arising from a PROBABLY corresponding 450 ppm benchmark which is POTENTIALLY modelled to be a CONCEIVABLE “tipping point” of no return. Say what?
10
Copied from another blog:
“Phil Jones (the disgraced former Director of the CRU of email fame), in an interview with the BBC on Friday, February 12, 2010, answered a BBC question as follows:
“‘Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?’
“‘So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.'”
10
@ Ed Darrell
Homo sapiens have been on the planet for less than 200,000 years, and the Ice age I was referring to occurred 350,000,000 years ago, you ignoramus. Did you get your law degree from a correspondence school? When you count past ten, do you have to take your shoes off? Why would I go to your Web site you village idiot? Ya, you’re a real man’s man! You wouldn’t make a pimple on a scholar’s ass. The only thing long and hard on you was the third grade. I am still waiting for you to answer how that desert is going to grow. I am on my phone because I am visiting my Mom at the hospital. When I get home, I am going to intellectually pummel you into silly putty, you dimwit.
10
george @ 150
Tuvalu became fully independent within the Commonwealth in 1978.
Sea level has been stable for the last 30 years since it was measured there.
Tuvalu’s main income is from foreign aid. Subsistence farming and fishing remain the primary economic activities. Government revenues largely come from the sale of stamps and coins, fishing licences and worker remittances.
Substantial income is received annually from the Tuvalu Trust Fund, which was established in 1987 by Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom and supported also by Japan and South Korea. This fund grew from an initial $17 million to over $35 million in 1999. The US government is also a major revenue source for Tuvalu, with 1999 payments from a 1988 treaty on fisheries at about $9 million, a total which is expected to rise annually.
In 1998, Tuvalu began deriving revenue from use of its area code for “900” lines and from the sale of its “.tv” Internet domain name. In 2000, Tuvalu negotiated a contract leasing its Internet domain name “.tv” for $50 million in royalties.
Given the significant aid money paid to Tuvalu, which shows clearly we have not abandoned them, it is blatantly irresponsible for them to claim refugees are swamping Australia and New Zealand because of sea level rise. They leave Tuvalu for better employment opportunities, to take pressure off their local population and living like Gilligan collecting aid money does not suit all people.
10
As I understand it, Tuvalu residents living along certain parts of the coastline periodically had to move because of flooding.
Then the government discouraged building in the affected areas, warning residents not to settle or build there, otherwise the Government would not cover losses or take responsibility for resettling people who did not heed the warnings.
Now the Tuvalu government allows people to settle in the affected areas because they become poster children for global warming.
Nice to see people base their economy on the phone sex business and internet gambling. Very admirable. How awful that the rest of the civilized world forced them into virtual prostitution with their dreadful carbon dioxide!
10
george @150
Overpopulation? Yeah, it’s a worry. It was to Thomas Malthus and The Club of Rome too. But the Green Revolution had different plans. Though that’s not to say we should take the position of “technology will save us” when viewing potential problems in the future. It’s just that the future is an unpredictable beast. The problems that actually happen are usually not predicted (eg. Tipping Points, Black Swan Events).
If you look at the developed western nations, they don’t really have fast growing populations. Fertility rates are low, with population growth coming from immigration from poor/developing nations. Those developing nations have growing populations since children are needed due to economic reality (ie. “retirement plans”) among other reasons. In the west we have greying populations and, and if your the panic-about-the-future-possible-problem-type, are at risk of a Low Fertility Trap. It seems to me that the best contraceptive is affluence!
Hopefully once this AGW nonsense is over there will be a renewed push to develop the poorer nations. For example, in Africa, electricity from coal is the first step to prosperity, leading to lower fertility. Well, that’s my theory.
In any case, overpopulation (of humans or any critter in an ecosystem) is a problem that will resolve itself. The only question is where along the spectrum it will be: the greying population way or the starve to death way. Though personally I’m optimistic, and have more faith in the laissez faire approach in making it painless, than the alternative.
10
Albert, I was aware of most of what you mentioned about Tuvalu on a generic overview basis, ta for elaborating on the additional specifics.
Does anyone know whether Ian Fry was hired by Tuvalu re Copenhagen, or was that a “foreign aid” effort by the gummint of Oz?
10
Eddy Aruda:
February 14th, 2010 at 12:03 pm
Dirty Eddy you are angry. I wrote another song to put a smile on your face (and your moms)
Sing to the tune of “To All the Girls I’ve Known Before”
To all the trolls I’ve known befo’o
Who’ve trolled in and out of Jo’s Blog’o
I dedicate this song
To all the trolls I’ve known befo’o
To all the trolls I’ve once redressed
And may I say I’ve held the best
For helping me to grow
I owe a lot I know
To all the trolls I’ve known befo’o
The winds of climategate are blowing
And every time they try to stay
The winds of climategate keep blowing
They just get carried away’yay
To all the trolls who made me rich
Who are now someone elses b*tch
I’m glad they came along
I dedicate this song
To all the trolls I’ve known befo’o
To all the trolls who humoured me
Who filled my nights with ecstacy
They live within my heart
I’ll always be a part
Of all the trolls I’ve known befo’o
The winds of climategate are blowing
And every time they try to stay
The winds of climategate keep blowing
They just get carried away’yay
(chorus together Eddy)
To all the trolls we’ve known before
Who travelled in and out our doors
We’re glad they came along
We dedicate this song
To all the trolls we’ve known before
🙂 🙂 🙂
10
Ed Darrell said at #147 “Hey, don’t blame me. I’m not the one who made the outlandish statement that climate was warmer in the Ordovician, so no problem now.” If I looked non sequitur up in the dictionary I wouldn’t be surprised if I saw a picture of you next to the word. I didn’t state the world was warmer nor did I accuse you of saying so, either. If you are accusing me of saying so you have used a straw man. The ice age in the late Ordovician was 350 mya and CO2 levels were 4,400 ppm yet we were in one of the worst ice ages the world has seen. Absent other factors, the world should have been much warmer in accordance with the global warming theory but it was not.
You queried, “Tell us how well humans did in that time you cited, when CO2 was, you claim, much higher.” I am assuming you are talking about the Holocene? Actually, humans prospered. If you really want to learn about how man did you aught to read, “Guns , Germs, and Steel” by Jared Diamond. During the Roman Warm Period the Roman Empire flourished. During the Dark Ages temperatures were lower and people suffered. During the Medieval warm period Europe flourished. During the little ice age which followed there was upheaval in Europe, famine and mass emigration. Are you beginning to see a pattern there, Ed?
The current inter glacial has been going for ten to fifteen thousand years, depending whether or not you want to factor in the Younger Dryas Stadial. You keep droning on about wheat production during various eras. Yet, you lack the integrity to answer questions or provide any proof to substantiate your claims (e.g., the “Sonoran” desert expansion if temps rose 1.4 degrees (see your bizarre post at # 68.) Then, answer my questions at #79. After that, answer Baa Humbugs questions and quit being evasive with comments such as, “I’m not sure what response would be appropriate. I’d prefer to discuss serious matters.” If you can’t answer the simple questions then put an egg in your shoe and beat you sorry excuse for an ambulance chaser.
You ended your post with, “Clarify — if you’re not just popping off silly stuff, how did humans make out in the Ordovician?” Are you on drugs or perhaps under a doctor’s care? Here is what you posted at # 68 “(Not a single mammal survived that era, let alone any significant population of humans. Of course, mammals had not yet evolved.)” You do know that humans are mammals, don’t you? Humans were not around in the Ordovician, or was that a Perry Mason technique you were trying to use on me, counselor?
I am usually a little more congenial but after seeing your post on that substandard blog of yours ( Fillmore’s toilet?) about Jo I am in no mood to take prisoners or give quarter. Hopefully, you are not too busy chasing an ambulance somewhere and can answer the questions put to you!
Again, after reading your comments about Jo on I am going to enjoy using you as a punching bag! Someday, a potential client of yours may google your name and see these exchanges between us. Good luck on landing that account! Instead of trying to bait me to go to your website you need to get some more experience. I have a friend who owns a charter fishing boat and is looking to hire somebody to put the bait on his customers hooks. Who knows, with time you might even be promoted to the rank of master baiter. Let me know if I can help.
10
@ Baa Humbug # 157
Still LMAO. If you change professions you should consider writing a play or music, you are talented. Regarding that troll from Fillmore’s toilet, I am on a mission.
10
bsalis
Malthus I knew of but thanks for the introduction to Taleb (my bad and ignorant!)
The Black Swan boy is unfortunately a lone pragmatic voice in the wilderness, however I believe his Rule #1 for a Black Swan Robust World is very germane to the matter at hand;
1.What is fragile should break early while it is still small. Nothing should ever become too big to fail.
As I said previously – no exit strategy required due to a monopoly on righteousness. It`s a worry.
10
Here is a keeper from the SPPI site. When an alarmist mentions “Big Oil”, whip out this..
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/
From the Climate Research Units own web site you will find a partial list of companies that fund the CRU.
It includes:
British Petroleum, ‘Oil, LNG’
Broom’s Barn Sugar Beet Research Centre, ‘Food to Ethanol’
The United States Department of Energy, ‘Nuclear’
Irish Electricity Supply Board. ‘LNG, Nuclear’
UK Nirex Ltd. ‘Nuclear’
Sultanate of Oman, ‘LNG’
Shell Oil, ‘Oil, LNG’
Tate and Lyle. ‘Food to Ethanol’
Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, ‘Nuclear’
KFA Germany, ‘Nuclear’
World Wildlife Fund, ‘Political Advocates’
Greenpeace International, ‘Political Advocates’
You might want to check out what these and the other funding companies actually do.
So can you climate scientologists please stop with the skeptics in the pockets of Big Oil thing, it’s getting old. These companies have been funding the CRU for years and years. British Petroleum and Royal Dutch Shell were in there right at the start in 1974.”
10
10
can anyone see the cartoon I posted above? I can’t
10
Baa Humbug
What cartoon? I see nothing.
10
Dang the image didn’t work
Try HERE
10
hey seargent Shultz, can you see it now?
10
Baa Humbug
Hah hah hah, good one.
10
Eddy et al,
You will love this:
From Mr. Darrell’s other website:
Now, I don’t have anything against History teachers per se (it was actually one of my favorite subjects), but given his other bloviating…
Seems his is a life spent in political and academic circles with only cursory mention of actually practicing law, so don’t ride him too hard on the lawyer thingie.
I don’t think you’ll ever get a straight answer from him. 😉
C’mon Ed Darrell, prove us wrong and actually answer the questions and present some evidence.
BTW, given what you said on your site about Jo, I too am not inclined to being kind or gentle. Be thankful we ain’t in the early 1800’s, I’d call you out for a duel. But then that might be akin to clubbing baby seals or golfing cane toads or something like that.
10
Kruegar, it must have been tough for Darrell working for Senator Orin Hatch – who is an outspoken skeptic. I defended Hatch here: http://joannenova.com.au/2009/10/a-spot-of-science-communication-pollution/. Though perhaps it was years ago…
Yes, and Ed Darrell seriously, you say things like “Al Gores movie was not wrong” — even though a Judge found there were nine errors (and who knows how many errors a judge would find now if they took recent IPCC-gate events into consideration.)
Surely you can see how this would appear delusional? You could argue (though we would hit back) that most of Al Gores movie was right, even though a Judge found some errors. But you can’t deny that the Judge found errors, which is documented and definitive?
Unless you are willing to admit the blatantly obvious, you can blather about censorship, but I see no reason to make this blog a therapy site for people who need help with basic reasoning.
And if you want to convince anyone of anything, even undecided onlookers, look to my Guide for Commentors, it’s got a handy list of the things that makes a great commenter so worth reading.
10
LMAO JLK “But then that might be akin to clubbing baby seals or golfing cane toads or something like that”.
10
Yeah, I threw in the cane toads for certain Aussie buddies. 😉
10
JLKrueger:
February 14th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
Krueg you’re itching for a fight aren’t you mate? I see you’re hunting down trolls on other blogs too. 🙂
10
My empty post at#162 is getting thumbs up???
Oh!! ofcourse, it’s valentines day. Must be the ladies. Awww shucks 😉
10
Greetings from Southern England – where it is snowing, again!
I hate to be pedantic, but in the picture, shouldn’t the ‘dam’ of ‘man made global warming’ be holding back ‘the truth’ or ‘natural climate variation’ rather than ‘AGW’? After all, the truth is what is about to burst through, not ‘AGW”.
10
And now Phil Jones has done an about face. Admits there has been NO WARMING SINCE 1995.
Truly this is a defining moment in history. Hats off to you and all the other dogged bloggers to take on the might of the UN, Western Governments, and the so-called scientific orthodoxy, to bring down this hoax.
10
Yup, the Climatgate continues to unfold;
Phil Jones U-turn in daily mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html?ITO=1490
10
I’ll readily concede that the deniers have made some progress toward capturing the imaginations of the undecided masses. That’s great. Big it up for you.
Unfortunately, your celebrations are pre-entry premature.
See, science doesn’t work like that. It’s not a democracy. It’s not a popularity contest. It’s a grinding process of ideas, discovery and refinement that leads to real knowledge (not ‘common knowledge’). And on this front, denialists are failing (and flailing) badly. The scientific community–save for the fringe-loons that exist in any grouping of people–regard the denialists and their debunked anti-science with a combination of scorn and amusement.
The closest you can come to understanding may be to recall ‘Comical Ali’ at the time of Gulf War II. Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf, if memory serves, the Iraqi Information Minister. Understand where we’re coming from now?
Suppose ‘Comical Ali’ had run a newspaper poll and found that popular opinion was turning to support, as people increasingly fell for his message that the Iraqi army was more powerful than the US. Suppose he wrote a blog post celebrating “The great collapse of the US army” based on their confidence which was based on his lies. It wouldn’t matter. Truth will out.
In our case, science will always trump popular opinion. As Kenny might say, “Good on it”. 😉
And in our case, people watching with interest who know what’s going on see the denialists very much the same way as we see ‘Comical’.
Suggestion: Don’t fall for your own spin. The science FOR AGW gets stronger by the day. The science AGAINST it gets… well, more conspicuously absent. 😀
10
Well said, Mr Cats.
Science isn’t a handful of nutters cherry-picking a selection of articles from nutty commentators & dubious publications. It’s not a stupid contest, and it ain’t a slightly more bogan version of Big Brother (despite the comments here).
10
Max Loves Cats:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Bwahhaha hahah aha BwaahhaaHAAHAA BWWAhhahhaaahaha
Oh Pls stop BWahaha haha ha ha hahaha Oh my goodness, I gotto shut up shop and go home. Bwahaha haha haha (wipes tears)
I’ll bwahahah hah deal with hahah haha ha you later BWAHAHAHAAHAHHAA
10
Was it the “pre-enty” bit that gave you the chuckles?
I hope so. Happy new year, sir. 😉
10
Today, Dr Phil has admitted that there has been no global warming since 1995.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
This must surely be the biggest nail in the coffin of the “man-made global warming” industry, and the IPCC.
Imagine the world wide implications… for the IPCC, the UN, governments around the world, politicians, warmist scientists, scientific publications, the media, academics, economists… the list goes on and on and on!!!!
The question is, who will be held responsible for this scandal, which has wasted billions of dollars that could have been better spent on genuine problems facing the world?
10
Baa Humbug # 173
Yep, your post 162 was a classic – best thing you said all week …
… Just kidding.
10
Max Loves Cats @177
“See, science doesn’t work like that. It’s not a democracy. It’s not a popularity contest. It’s a grinding process of ideas, discovery and refinement that leads to real knowledge (not ‘common knowledge’).”
“The scientific community–save for the fringe-loons that exist in any grouping of people–regard the denialists and their debunked anti-science with a combination of scorn and amusement.”
I think you contradicted yourself here. Science is not democracy, but the scientific community, save for the fringe, means the majority is right?!
Regardless of the real impact of human CO2 on climate, scientist do not control public policy, they only advise. Whether a government adopts drastic action on AGW (eg. ETS) is determined mostly by public opinion. That is something most people here are more immediately concerned about.
10
bsalis:
February 14th, 2010 at 9:31 pm
“See, science doesn’t work like that. It’s not a democracy. It’s not a popularity contest.”
EXACTLY! Thats what we have been trying to tell the ADW’ers all along!
But no, they had to go on and on with their “Concensus” and “Robust” propaganda.
Now, finally, Science can move on. And I mean proper Science. Not the Voodoo
science from the IPCC. Not Post-Modern-Science created by neo-Marxists.
Proper old school Science.
10
Max Loves Cats #180
I see that the trolls are back …
I’m glad you said that. It saved me the trouble of bring it up.
Perhaps it might have saved us all some trouble if you had pointed it out earlier to the Hockey Team.
If you go back through the archives on this site, you might discover that a lot of the posts from regulars express disgust at the lack of scientific rigour being shown by the folks at CRU, NISS and Penn State.
And to those charges, we can now add the falsification of data by giving it “added value”, whatever that means, and by cherry-picking ground stations, and by having dogs that eat the data, and by refusing to release code and data that was paid for by the public purse.
Those regulars on this site who just happen to be retired or working research scientists, applied scientists, and engineers, are actually disgusted by the arrogance and cynical games played in this whole charade by people doing non-science.
Scientists should speak truth to authority. Since when has the scientific mandate be to “give the client what they want” to get more funding? Leave that crap to the consultants (and lawyers).
What the hell happened to truth? Oh, it is tied up in a whole bowl of Fortran spaghetti that is so badly written, that nobody can figure out how it works in order to maintain it, without unintended consequences sneaking in, let alone audit it.
People will not soon forget this scam. The politicians will NEVER forget, nor forgive this scam. The Global Warming scam has done irreparable harm to all branches of science.
Now, please take your childish writing style, and go away.
10
Mervyn, Mockton-conquerer Tim Lambert cuts off your Jones Daily Mail rubbish off at the pass: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/02/daily_mail_caught_in_another_l.php#comments
10
Captain Penlite:
February 14th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
OK I’m home now, have calmed down. Yet another captain, lots of captains lately.
Cap’n you said..
I think we all agree that EVERYBODY and I mean EVERYBODY on your side of this debate has been using the word CONSENSUS. C.O.N S.E.N.S.U.S. From your top scientists, to presidents, prime ministers, blog owners and their talking horses have been trying to beat us down by referring to the CONSENSUS of 4000 scientists, 2000 scientists or was it 98% of scientists for nigh on two decades now.
And you come on to this blog and tell us “science isn’t a popularity contest”?
No wonder you had me in stitches. I’ll bet even MattB the resident alarmist (who can’t find a home at an alarmist blog it seems, very nice fellow though) shook his head and went “tch tch” to that own goal.
Now c’mon cap’n, tell the truth. You’ve been reading the comical stuff that Dirty Eddy, Speedy, J L Krueger, Rereke and I have been posting and you decided to join in the fun right? RIGHT???
10
MattB:
February 14th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
Errrrr I had a look at your link Matt. How exactly does he cut off Jones at the pass?
As Pauline hanson would say…”Please explain”.
10
mervyn sullivan:
February 14th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
Spot on Merv old boy. Jones has been there right from the very beginning. He resides at the very top floor of the AGW Enron building.
For him to make those comments (yes yes MattB, interpret them anyway YOU like) is a kick in the guts for the alarmists.
I reckon he felt he was hung out to dry. So he’s not too “careful” about what he says and how he says it. Usually when people are under as much pressure as Philly is, truth tends to come out of their mouth. Brain too jelly like to construct lies.
10
Charlie @ 174~ I would say the AGW behind the dam is accurate, considered this way: The Truth is the landscape beneath the murky waters of AGW. The dam is the wall of lies, obfuscation, distraction, callumny, narrow-minded thinking and outright religious Hatred generated by the AGW believers.
10
sure you read the links Humbug? as it is the Mail being cut off at the pass, not Jones. Of course my interpretation is tainted and yours is holy and good – I see now.
10
So lets have a look at Phillys considered written answers shall we? Why rely on Lambert.
(ps I listened to Lambert Monck debate and have already stated he did a good job for his side, respect
My comments in italics (in English not Italian)
Q-Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?
PJ-yada yada yada
“Here are the trends and significances for each period”:
Period Length Trend
(Degrees C per decade) Significance
1860-1880 21 0.163 Yes
1910-1940 31 0.15 Yes
1975-1998 24 0.166 Yes
1975-2009 35 0.161 Yes
In the last 35 years, during the anthropogenically significant emission period we have warmed……well….we have warmed……ummmmmm we warmed NO FRIGGINGING DIFFERENTLY to any other period.
MEANING:- “There has been NO DISCERNABLE human influence on climate.
Well, that just totally stuffs it then doesn’t it? No need to ask anymore questions. Everything else is IRR frigging RELEVANT
In it’s SAR (2nd assessment report) the IPCC said for the first time,
So then, if there is any alarmist reading this, and can provide proof that they can DISCERN a statistically significant human influence in the….what was it? oh yes 0.161C warming from 1975 to 2009 as opposed to the IPCC stated natural warming of 0.15c from 1920-1940 and the 0.163c from 1860-1880, I’ll eat my Snowy River Akubra hat.
I’ll admit, you gotto hand it to Phil Joneses scientific acumen. The man can rattle off global temps to one hundreth of a degree. That’s some talent 😉
10
MattB
Not a nice feeling, being on the RECEIVING end of MSM bias (for a change!) is it? And I say that not even assuming the Daily is indeed guilty of the accusations of fabrication…
For anyone interested here is Lambert`s assessment of the debate with Monckton. Awaiting developments re the Pinker thing with interest;
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/02/moncktons_mcluhan_moment.php
Note that the article is followed by a quasi-transcript summary, you won`t find in there Lambert being asked about oceanic compared to atmospheric CO2 content and answering with words to the effect of “I don`t have that information to hand…but lots”
Monckton then gave the answer of course.
10
who says only the last 35 years is anthropogenic?
10
MattB:
February 14th, 2010 at 11:45 pm
You said…
So LAMBERT cuts off Jones Daily Mail? Here is all that Lambert wrote..
Here is the question and answer relevant to this…
So what am I “ONLY JUST missing Matt?
10
MattB:
February 15th, 2010 at 12:22 am
Now don’t start playing games with me Matt. I’ll search thru my 16gig usb key if you insist. But if you do insist and I quote you the IPCC quote, will you give your word in front of all the blog readers that you will never ever again support the AGW case?
10
MattB:
February 15th, 2010 at 12:22 am
No guts no glory. Didn’t expect you’d take the challenge.
You do realise you’ll cop it plenty from Dirty Eddy now don’t you Matt? Be a man and take the challenge.
10
Rereke (186)
You are so right! As a fan of the scientific method, I am outraged by the abuse of science perpetrated by the Hockey Team for their own selfish and perverted purposes. People like “Professor” Pits-man couldn’t even begin to start to comprehend that people like you, Baa-Humbug, George, Janama, Chris Monckton, Valentine, Jo Nova, Bulldust, Anthony Watts, Steve McIntyre, Madjac etc etc et al would give a rats and offer the reseach and comments pro bono. They’d need a dirty big government grant before they’d drag their sad rear-ends out of bed – and its provsion would be precluded on them spouting the politicall correct AGW line before it even got considered…
Maybe there’s no money on this site, but it’s been said before (was it Dirty Harry?) that this is where the air is cleaner…
I shouldn’t forget our resident trolls in this credit. This site has its own built-in straw men like MattB and Ed Darrell, who provide a community service by making us consider our own arguments and the glaring deficiencies of the AGW camp. Let us treat them with kindness and sympathy, and remember that one man’s personality disorder is another man’s passion…
Truth will find a way – we just need some patience in the meantime.
Cheers,
Speedy
10
Bsalis (183)
Quite true, but the worst types of scientists (eg Mann, Briffa, Jones etc) tend to politicise their work by making outlandish claims that cannot be substantiated. By going straight to an uncritical and uneducated journalistic class, they then bypass the critical scientific review process and convert their theories into “accepted” facts. This is how James Hansen was able to pass off his most ludicrous predictions as fact, and thus gain public approval and political clout. You can easily think of others – does the word “hockey stick” come to mind?
This behaviour is unscientific and its immoral.
Speedy.
10
JLKrueger et al,
Ed Darrell has danced around every little challenge I’ve thrown at him, not to mention the rest of you. His strong suit is evasion. He’s a master of that art, not that we haven’t seen others. He’s lacking in basic humility and is arrogant into the bargain. He’s modified his approach only just enough to avoid having Jo toss him off.
So my point is that evasion is all we’re ever going to get out of him. I’ve given up on responding to him and I suggest that everyone consider doing the same. Nothing will get rid of him faster than being totally ignored. He contributes nothing and uses up our time and energy fighting with him. Butting heads with such a man just gets you a sore head.
Just some food for thought — some of you will no doubt disagree and that’s OK with me. But at this point I can’t go on without letting my own opinion be known.
10
Roy Hogue:
February 15th, 2010 at 1:28 am
Owwwww not fair. have you ever seen a cat play with a caught mouse before killing it? t’s so much fun. 🙂
10
Looks like MattB’s given up and gone to bed. I hope he didn’t kick the cat too hard.
But just to show that I wasn’t bluffing (and Matt knew it) here is the relevant quote from the IPCC.
AR4 WG1 FAQ 3.1 Page 104 Fig 1
“Results from climate models driven by estimated radiative forcings for the 20th century (Chapter 9) suggest that there was little change prior to about 1915, and that a substantial fraction of the early 20th-century change was contributed by naturally occurring influences including solar radiation changes, volcanism and natural variability“.
10
Hi Max (177)! I love cats as well, though I struggle to get through more than one at a time.
As to your comments, you yourself sound more like someone in the Fuhrerbunker trying to control armies that no longer exist in territory you no longer control. You think that Climategate, Glaciergate, Africagate, Baa-Gate (or Aus-gate, whatever) etc etc are arguments for the AGW cause? You don’t think the lamestream media hasn’t noticed this? Sorry, they’re not quite that dumb…
The argument for AGW came from Arrhenius in the 1890’s, who proposed that CO2 traps infrared in the atmosphere. Qualitatively, quite correct and no-one will argue. However, we have moved on since then and now understand that there is already enough CO2 in the atmosphere to absorb practically all the earth’s infra-red in the 14.5 micron band, so any further CO2 concentrations will, as Winston Churchill once noted simply “make the rubble bounce” – it won’t and doesn’t matter in any practical sense.
If you want to save the planet, have a party and serve your cat with a honey soy and ginger sauce on a bed of rice. Use the money saved on cat food to help the people of Haiti, Somalia etc.
Other recipes available.
Cheers,
Speedy.
10
Humbug,
Yup, lots of fun. But isn’t it getting a little out of hand? How much time and effort has Eddy Aruda spent on this? Eddy, no slap intended. I perfectly understand how you feel.
10
Hi Roy (204),
I’ve got to admit that arguing with these guys is akin to shooting fish in a barrel. At the end of the day, the AGW advocates are asking us taxpayers to shell out some hard earned loot for their theories. We have a right to ask them to substantiate these theories in a practical (not theoretical or dodgey modelling sense). And every single one, from James Hansen to Penny Wong and downwards has been unwilling or unable to provide that proof. The end game occurs as soon as we ask them to show a practical substantiation of their hypothesis.
Until that day arrives, I know my money will be staying firmly in my sky rocket.
Cheers,
Speedy.
10
Humbug @161,
To our shame I see the U.S. Department of Energy listed in the acknowledgments. Nuts!
But the thing that scares me is this:
How many climate change monsters have they created? My nightmare has always been that they go for the children and the college student. If the current generation of true believers is a problem, wait for the next generation. THE JOB IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING DONE!
10
Roy Hogue:
February 15th, 2010 at 2:37 am
I dunno about that Roy. The key is will govts around the world still have the guts to continue with this farce, considering the populace is getting sick and tired of the alarmism for nigh on 22 yrs now. Especially in view of the latest “Jonesgate” revelation that the recent so called warming is not unprecedented and the fact that Obama has all but given up the ghost, China and India will never sign up, I’d say it’s all over bar the shouting.
p.s. you are absolutely right about us beating up on the troll. Lets call an ambulance and be done with it.
10
Phil @ Post 14 re Gordon Brown plugging the dam.
At least some of us in the UK know that Gordon is a moron (to paraphrase an old 70’s song) who wrecked our economy, but believes he is a master of it. See the following for a comparison of the UK’s net worth since he became chancellor.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7216274/What-has-Gordon-Brown-done-for-Britain-since-his-first-Budget.html
So I listen to his views on global warming with as much contempt as when I listen to his self praise on his stewardship of the economy! Rather tellingly he kept quiet during the slow motion car crash that was Copenhagen once he realised that he wouldn’t be able to bask in its glory and crow about saving the world (again).
Thank heaven that a general election is just around the corner. I don’t think Gordon reads things like this blog and things a little closer to home
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7231386/African-crops-yield-another-catastrophe-for-the-IPCC.html
10
Humbug,
I’m hoping you’re right. But the EPA is still going full speed ahead and will try what Obama can’t get the Senate to pass. And the next generation will have a lot of brainwashed believers who will point to their education as more proof that AGW is real.
We cannot let up one bit on this!
10
When all else fails with a global warmer, I ask them to tell me about some evidence they have witnessed wherever they have lived that is consistent with “global warming.” After all, “global warming” is supposed to be “global” – but why is it that it always seems to happen somewhere else? I haven’t heard a credible story yet.
Jim Hansen, describing his models, stated that “observant residents of North America will have perceived the coming of Spring a little earlier every year.”
My wife, a professional gardener said, “nonsense, give or take a couple of weeks the coming of Spring has remained the same for the thirty five years that I have worked out of doors.”
Meaning that Jim Hansen was just mouthing off about things that he never actually witnessed. (nothing new there)
10
Brian,
My neighbor across the street has a fair size tree that characteristically has begun to bloom again around Christmas. It’s been that way for the 40 years I’ve been here. But this year it was late. Spring is coming later these days maybe!? Too cold for it this year I think.
10
@ MattB
Hey, it is good to see you are alive! I thought Mr. Courtney sold your note to a leg breaker in Australia and you were in the trunk of a car or buried six feet under. You do remember your wager? Are you going to pay off or are you going to add deadbeat to your stellar list of accolades and accomplishments?
You wrote, “MattB:
February 11th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
I am willing to bet that the science used by the IPCC uses the best that science has to offer when it is considering how the oceans will react to increasing atmospheric CO2 in terms of what proportion will end up in the ocean vs the atmophere.
But you never know maybe the worlds leading ocean scientists are also in on the deal and are keeping mum while their science is bastardised by the pseudoscientific cabal and the IPCC?”
You also wrote, “February 11th, 2010 at 6:30 pm My money is on the scientists.
Richard S. Courtney replied
“Richard S Courtney:
February 13th, 2010 at 12:46 am
I accept the bet and offer to put up US$10,000 at odds of 2:1 in your favour.
He then totally eviscerated you and your pathetic feeble arguments. Anyone who reads the thread at Not FOUR degrees, 1.4 degrees will see it.
You wrote at # 194 “who says only the last 35 years is anthropogenic?” Thanks for bringing that up Matt.
You wrote,”MattB:
February 11th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
And then Eddy, the Ice Age that knocked off the Ordovian… guess what – it was caused by SOMETHING ELSE! Not falling GHG levels in the atmosphere.
CO2 was at 4,400 ppm during that Ordovician (not “Ordovian”). You never answered the question because you can’t. I am still waiting for evidence that it was something else. Either back your statement with evidence or admit, as always, you are wrong!
You wrote, “MattB:
February 14th, 2010 at 11:45 pm
sure you read the links Humbug? You have some nerve Matt, remember this?
MattB:
February 11th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
As the Ordovician progressed, we see evidence of glaciers on the land we now know as Africa and South America.”
Now hear is the clincher:
“At the time these land masses were sitting at the South Pole, and covered by ice caps.”
So you are complaining we were gripped by an Ice Age, ignoring the fact that all the land was at the south pole!! where it is cold!!”
If you would have read the information at http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html you would have known that the one super continent, Gondwanaland, although occupying the antarctic circle, covered almost the entire southern hemisphere. In fact, there were glaciers at the equator. If you are going to ask people to read links than do so yourself and stop being a hypocrite. Also, you would embarrass yourself less often.
If you change your handle, may I suggest Omega Male? Quit blindly believing and fearlessly following. There is life after an endless appeal to authority. Remember, if you are not the lead dog the view never changes.
10
Hey Brian, haven’t you noticed lately that “Prophet Al Gore” has been very quite lately…Well he was found.
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1951.0
Isn’t it funny that Life comes “Full Circle”! 🙂
10
@ Max loves cats # 177
You wrote, “In our case, science will always trump popular opinion.”
Really? Einstein said, “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” Your theory has more holes than swiss cheese.
@ Speedy 203 Great post! I looked at the site and decided to take my dog for a walk. I decided to use the Hitler analogy. Remembering my embarrassment from my “Gilligan’s Island” post I decided to check to see if there were any more posts before I invested my time in writing a post about Hitler and I saw that you had beat me to the punch. Again great post!
10
That vile snake, that unspeakable slime, Al Gore, is just waiting in the grass to lash out at the first opportunity he can at some news about the Arctic, or a typhoon, or a hurricane.
Gore tried to make something of himself over some meaningless conjecture he heard whilst in the class of the only science course he ever took.
In doing so he made himself a bigger failure that he already was (if that’s possible)
10
Speedy #198
Well, thank you. That’s the nicest (and slowest) thing you have ever said to me … 🙂
10
“Nothing emboldens sin so much as mercy”
The Bard
Show them none! Go Eddy! Go Brian…this is fun.
10
Brian Post 215,
I think I see Him in “Ice” . Everythings OK, isn’t it??? 🙂 Referring to my Post 213!
10
Roy Hogue: #200
I get your point Roy, but I don’t think it is such a good idea. Lots of other folks browse this site without ever contributing (especially since the level of debate is so high – sic). We need to take pot-shots at the trolls for a couple of reasons.
1. It removes the idea that their odd ideas are relevant to the main issues being discussed; and
2. It keeps our aim in, and our weapons clean.
10
Rereke,
You’re right of course. I just think it’s gone a little overboard.
I’ve done the same thing myself, but at some point it becomes just beating a dead horse. And as I said, others will disagree and that’s OK.
There are more like Ed — not so objectionable maybe, but also begging to be held accountable. There’s no shortage of targets.
So peace! I’m not trying to be a dictator.
10
Point to an uplifting, or humane, or admirable thing Al Gore has said, RES and I will then speak less caustically of him.
I can think of a thousand things G Bush Jr said that were so, “help your neighbors,” “everybody has something to contribute to help,” and a host of others.
In neither word nor deed has Al Gore demonstrated anything but an ego that is wholly unwarranted of the person who owns it
10
AGW alarmism is not over until the IPCC and Al Gore are stripped of the Nobel prize (or the muppets that made the award are in an appropriate psychiatric facility).
10
Albert Gore made a special trip to petition the Royal Family of Sweden (and billed them for the expense, mind you!!!) to convince them that he and his idiotic flick were Nobel quality.
I’m surprised no Nobel Laureates have returned their prizes in protest (or disgust)
10
Here is another paper that the AGWers of the world can evade as if it was never written. It finds previous claims that carbon emissions permanently increase global temperature are false. It uses the AGW data to prove that point.
Polynomial Cointegration Tests of the Anthropogenic
Theory of Global Warming
10
The least reflection would show the inescapable conclusion that if it were so, Lionell, then the atmosphere would have permanently saturated eons ago
10
@ Res #217
Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I like your quote. When it comes to Ed Darrell’s idiotic posts I am reminded of Shakespeare’s Henry VI. “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers!” I am all over that guy like a cheap suit.
@ Brian Valentine
I don’t know if snake is appropriate. Snakes actually have some value in the great scheme of things. How about parasite?
From the Miriam Webster online dictionary:
Main Entry: par·a·site
Pronunciation: \ˈper-ə-ˌsīt, ˈpa-rə-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from Latin parasitus, from Greek parasitos, from para- + sitos grain, food
Date: 1539
1 : a person who exploits the hospitality of the rich and earns welcome by flattery
2 : an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism
3 : something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate return
— par·a·sit·ic \ˌper-ə-ˈsi-tik, ˌpa-rə-\ also par·a·sit·i·cal \-ti-kəl\ adjective
— par·a·sit·i·cal·ly \-ti-k(ə-)lē\ adverb
synonyms parasite, sycophant, toady, leech, sponge mean a usually obsequious flatterer or self-seeker. parasite applies to one who clings to a person of wealth, power, or influence or is useless to society . sycophant adds to this a strong suggestion of fawning, flattery, or adulation . toady emphasizes the servility and snobbery of the self-seeker . leech stresses persistence in clinging to or bleeding another for one’s own advantage . sponge stresses the parasitic laziness, dependence, and opportunism of the cadger .
He seems to meet the criteria to qualify to be described by all three definitions and all of the synonyms.
I always enjoy your posts, Brian, deep, profound and thoughtful.
10
Roy Hogue: #206
Yup, the strategy, in any strategic propaganda programme, is to target the next generation and the one following.
So first you focus on the educators – people like poor deluded Ed Darrell, for example (he actually believes in whatever position he adopts, as most brain-washed people do) – then, you leave it to them to bring the kids along. It also helps to have the government pay for expensive prime-time television ads, as in the UK.
You then go for the young “free-thinkers” in the universities, pointing out how they are being manipulated by “the system”, or by certain religious groups, or by the industrial complex, etc. The idea is to get these people paranoid enough to become foot-soldiers for the cause. They are the people who feel good protesting against global warming in minus 15 degree temperatures.
Finally, you go for the young journalists who are trying to make a name for themselves at the same time they are trying desperately to figure out how the system works in the real world. You “give” these young hounds story lines, or “leads” that they can follow up in their own time. You can even give them little bits of information along the way – the odd fact there, a reference here – to keep them on track. The Watergate story is a classic example of drip-feeding information to get the result required.
We have witnessed, and are still witnessing, this process conducted on a grand scale. I can’t call it a conspiracy, because that word implies something plotted against the established order. It requires a word we don’t yet have. A word that implies something plotted by the established order against the “common people” of the world.
That there are people who would consider such things, like Maurice Strong for example, is almost beyond comprehension. But they exist, and they need to be thwarted.
10
@ Roy Hogue
I absolutely understand where you are coming from. That being said, I view Ed Darrell as a heavy bag and MattB as a speed bag. By pounding on them I stay in shape mentally.
10
I would like to mention that Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi isnt afraid that anyone will debunk his theory.
Now he is in the Examiner again. This time he sendt a letter to EPA, telling them how foolish they have been.
Was it B.Boxer her name was? She will go completely ballistic!
http://www.examiner.com/x-32936-Seminole-County-Environmental-News-Examiner~y2010m2d12-Former-NASA-scientist-defends-theory-refuting-global-warming-doctrine
10
Roy Hogue: Post 209,
I hope you know Obama is NOT going to let anything stop him on Cap & Trade Issue…Here’s why!
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1955.last
And I wouldn’t put it pass Him to do it!
10
Well perhaps, but only to the maximum mental weight and speed they possess.
I laughed heartily at the image this quote brought to my mind. Thanks Eddy.
10
@ Average Joe #229
Thanks for the link. My two favorite Q and A’s were:
Examiner.com: Have your mathematical equations been challenged or disproved?
Dr. Miskolczi: No
Examiner.com: You used empirical data, rather than models, to arrive at your conclusion. How was that done?
Dr. Miskolczi: The computations are relatively simple. I collected a large number of radiosonde observations from around the globe and computed the global average infrared absorption. I performed these computations using observations from two large, publicly available datasets known as the TIGR2 and NOAA. The computations involved the processing of 300 radiosonde observations, using a state-of-the-art, line-by-line radiative transfer code. In both datasets, the global average infrared optical thickness turned out to be 1.87, agreeing with theoretical expectations.
10
@ Average Joe
This Dr. Miskolczi thing is very interesting! As an old rawin & dropsonde guy I am impressed that he is using high quality upper-air soundings instead of the jiggered and, in my opinion worthless from the start, climate history surface temperature obs. A 1950’s raob report is quite likely to be more accurate than most folks would suspect.
I do feel though that 300 radiosonde reports are a drop in the bucket, especially for a 61 years period. Surely this must be 300 launch stations for a period of 61 years. I wonder if there were 300 radiosonde stations in the world in1948? (Unless I’m out-of-date, the U.S. currently has about 100 operational upper-air sites, most taking two runs a day – at 0000 and 1200Z.)
It is entirely possible that I just read too much into the report, or maybe the reporter just got it wrong. Or both!
10
Average Joe,
That link on Dr Miskolczis work is really intriguing. it is not somethign I have heard about before, so it does interest me. It looks like this could be another entry for Jo maybe?
I would like to know more.
10
Sheesh when a guy gets hounded just for asking a question you know the blog is just a bunch of crazy loons. Thanks for the ref Humbug.
Eddy I prefer my bets of Trading Places denominations. I’ll hand over my $1 as and when Courtney’s ramblings become consensus – as you know that is how I judge things.
10
The consensus comprising – whom, Matt?
Can you list the people who must be included amongst this “consensus” for it to become an acceptable (to you) “consensus”?
If your “consensus” needs to include Penelope Wong, Jim Hansen, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, and Mister Australia Himself, the inimitable Tim Flannery – then I think you will be holding onto your dollar for a long time to come
10
BGV @ 236
You are forgetting those other luminaries Tom Cruise, Leonardo DiCaprio and Lucy Lawless.
10
Can anyone explain the difference between “scientology” and “AGW theory” (if there are any differences)?
10
MadJak
This link below was the first I had heard of Miskolczi, lots more around – google is a wonderful thing
http://pathstoknowledge.net/2010/01/13/ferenc-miskolczi%E2%80%99s-saturated-greenhouse-effect-theory-c02-cannot-cause-any-more-global-warming/
10
MadJak
More on Miskolczi, a long read (which I have to re-read!) but a fair bit of elaboration by someone else on the basic premise theorised;
http://ker-plunk.blogspot.com/2008/06/saturated-greenhouse-effect-wrecks.html
10
I have known of him for some years, yes, and to be fair, I did disagree with him over his assumed condition of an “equilibrium.”
Incidentally Eddington’s analysis of Milne-Schwartzchild’s condition gave the radiative pressure for equilibration of radiation with gravity (and thus a star’s maximum diameter) – I don’t know what they refer to in this synopsis
10
Brian I’ll hand it over when that paper is endorsed by the IPCC (or any equivalent new body). That gives Richard a fighting chance of getting the $1 even if the IPCC only endorses it because it has been swamped by skeptics.
I love the concept though:
I say “I’ll bet…”
Richard replies “I’ll take that bet, make it $10k at 2:1, and by the way here is a paper I wrote that got nowhere so I win.”
Eddy “Omega Male” Arruda chimes in parroting anything he can grasp. Oh year Eddy sorry about Ordovian… damn iPhones yeah?
I may try that at the TAB… Make a bet on the dockers winning the premiership at 100:1, then photoshop the skipper holding the premiership cup, and wander in and ask them to pay up:)
10
Brian – I think there are aliens in scientology.
10
Yep, read somewhere there was a potential problem, as far as some people were concerned, with the premise of concomitant H20 reduction for equilibrium maintenance.
Keep watching the atmospheric water vapour stats, eh?
10
Oops, not fast enough, thought I`d get away with it!
My post #244 was in response to post #241…and the moral of the story is…d`oh.
10
I think Eddy’s distaste for “believers” in phenomena that can be perceived only by themselves (and who demand that the rest of the world act to do what they say to “fix” whatever their delusions tell them is “wrong” with the world)
– is exceeded only by my own
10
@MattB
MattB blathered, “Eddy I prefer my bets of Trading Places denominations. I’ll hand over my $1 as and when Courtney’s ramblings become consensus – as you know that is how I judge things.
Unfortunately Matt, in the real world science isn’t done by consensus. I will not waste my time trying to enlighten you about the scientific method as have already stated you would prefer to accept an appeal to authority. Do you still believe stress cause ulcers? After all, that was the “consensus” until it was discovered a few years ago that it was caused by a bacteria, h. pylori.
BTW, its not a dollar, it is $2,000 dollars you owe Mr. courtney. If we were to accept the “consensus” on this and put it to a vote, I am willing to bet $5 to a hole in a donut you would still have to pay.
Face it Matt, you are a dead beat.
10
MattB demurred, “Brian I’ll hand it over when that paper is endorsed by the IPCC (or any equivalent new body). That gives Richard a fighting chance of getting the $1 even if the IPCC only endorses it because it has been swamped by skeptics.
The paper was peer reviewed. You seem to have the memory of a gnat. Also, I checked the appropriate link and it is $10,000 you owe. Courtney finished demolishing you and ended with, “When you fail to find any reference in any IPCC Report to our paper that I cite here (there is none despite my mention of it in my peer review for IPCC AR4) then please contact me so you can pay me the money.
Well Matt, put up or shut up!
BTW, is Matt your middle name? If it is, your first name should be “Door” as he wiped the floor with you. I thought I was watching a lion mauling a crippled water buffalo. Try being a man for a change, admit you were wrong and pay up. Since you like being payed to do research, prove him wrong and pick up that easy $20,000! Oh yah, I forgot, you are a graduate of the Homer Simpson School of Rhetoric so that won’t happen.
10
Eddy you clearly don’t have the foggiest idea what you are talking about? Firstly I think you will find that Richard’s terms were I’d owe him $10k and he’d owe me $20k. I can’t find the post but I’m sure he offered 2:1 odds. Firstly I never made any such bet with Richard in the 1st place, I did use a colloquialism “I bet they used…”… but regardless – Richard waving around some half assed piece of pseudo science that clearly no other scientist in the world thinks is work wiping his ass on… well it would take more than that to prise me from 10,000 of my hard earned.
10
@ MattB
For a guy who wastes everybody’s time and jerks everybody around you you don’t seem to like it when the tables are turned. Nobody really expects you to pay. However, you said when I asked you to provide evidence or links that I would have to pay you to do research. Well, you can pick up an easy $20,000 dollars and get “paid” to do what you should have been doing all along. When I provide you with a link you don’t even have enough class to read them. Instead, you open your mouth and stick your foot in it.
Let me cite you an example, I provided you this link: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html. We were discussing the Ordovician ice age. Not only did you say make false statements (e.g. the CO2 content was dropping when it was 4,400 ppm) but you made the following statement:
MattB:
February 11th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
Ok Eddy in 102… here is what wikipedia says about the Ordovian:
“The Early Ordovician climate was thought to be quite warm, at least in the tropics. As with North America and Europe, Gondwana was largely covered with shallow seas during the Ordovician. Shallow clear waters over continental shelves encouraged the growth of organisms that deposit calcium carbonates in their shells and hard parts. The Panthalassic Ocean covered much of the northern hemisphere, and other minor oceans included Proto-Tethys, Paleo-Tethys, Khanty Ocean which was closed off by the Late Ordovician, Iapetus Ocean, and the new Rheic Ocean.
As the Ordovician progressed, we see evidence of glaciers on the land we now know as Africa and South America.”
Now hear is the clincher:
“At the time these land masses were sitting at the South Pole, and covered by ice caps.”
So you are complaining we were gripped by an Ice Age, ignoring the fact that all the land was at the south pole!! where it is cold!!”
If you would have read the linked article you would have known that the supercontinent, Gondwanaland, encompassed virtually the entire southern hemisphere. There was ice at the equator. as the article at the link states, there were no other factors to explain the ice age with CO2 being greater than an order of magnitude greater than they are today. It wasn’t volcanoes, asteroid strikes or anything else that caused the ice age. In fact, you could have learned a lot from that article but you did not read it. If you want me to treat you with courtesy and respect I suggest you start posting in good faith. You did read the link I provided regarding wikipedia, I hope. Believe me, I was doing you a favor. If you want to keep embarrassing yourself than keep quoting wikipedia.
You say at # 249 that you couldn’t find the link, why? It took me all of thirty seconds to find the link to your comments on February 11th, 2010 at 5:42 pm. You say I cut and paste? Well, when I make a statement I copy or link to the pertinent information to substantiate my argument. You, on the other hand, do not.
Seriously Matt, if you have a shred of decency you will substantiate and bolster your arguments by citing, quoting or linking to a source that will lend some credence to what you argue. Your standard operating procedure is to engage in Ad Hominem attacks, make endless appeals to authority (argumentum ad veracundiam) and employ straw man arguments. i wish I was always right but I am not. When I am wrong I admit it. I use to be a proponent of the AGW theory but when I looked at the science I changed my mind. If you want to believe in Global warming thats fine. If you continue to act as you have I will continue to make you pay the price.
The ball is in your court, Matt
10
I’m pretty comfortable with my interpretation of the Ordovician thanks Eddy. Sorry for posting Wiki it was just pretty obvious from our earlier discussions that you were coming at things from a pretty basic level of scientific education/understanding. Maybe I misjudged you so I indeed will read your links and maybe we can get things back from your preferred schoolboy bully wimp tactics of hiding behing Courtney and sniping at me about some mythical bet I’m supposedly committed to.
10
MattB writes:
“Richard waving around some half assed piece of pseudo science that clearly no other scientist in the world thinks is work wiping his ass on… well it would take more than that to prise me from 10,000 of my hard earned.”
A paper you fling names at,but not even try a credible counterpoint against it,is that true?
10
@ Mattb
I normally don’t go into my background because, as you know, I despise appeals to authority. I am intelligent and knowledgeable. I certainly don’t know it all. When you are green you grow, when you are ripe you rot. My dearly departed father encouraged me to learn something new everyday. The reason an appeal to authority is fallacious and illogical is that it doesn’t matter who makes the argument. What is important is the argument itself. Trust me Matt, I am humble enough to know that there are people who come to this website who are smarter than I am. I argue sincerely and try to bolster my arguments with independent third party verification. Can you honestly say you do, Matt? When I spent my time trying to reason with you in good faith and you respond with a statement about needing to get paid to do what is incumbent upon anyone who makes an argument it doesn’t reflect well on you. There have been several instances when the “consensus” was wrong. From the time of Galileo to the recent past (remember the h. pylori example?) the consensus has been often debunked. By the way, I have never been a bully. I don’t know if I was the toughest kid in my class but I was high enough on the pecking order where the other tough kids did not want to find out. I am fifty now but when I was young I was the Pacific Light Heavyweight Regional Champion for the World Tae Kwon Do Federation. I retired undefeated. That being said, there were people a lot tougher and better than me back then. Now, with the cage fighting and what not it is a whole new game. I’ll tell you what I am going to do Matt, I am going to consider things squashed between us as long as you post in good faith. I am not asking you to be perfect but I expect you to do better and I know you can.
It is up to you Matt. We can start anew or I will continue to call you out. I hope you take the moral high ground, Matt. It is your choice.
00
@ MattB
When it comes to the Ordovician, you are entitled to your opinion of the facts but not to your own facts. You have mentioned the Milankovitch cycles. I am familiar with them. In order for an ice age to occur, normally, but not always, it takes an absence of free flowing ocean currents caused by continental alignment. Also, there needs to be a land mass at one of the poles. Today, we have those conditions. We have Antarctica, a continent at the South Pole and we have an absence of free flowing ocean currents (e.g. North, Central and South America, Eurasia and Africa. When these conditions apply we have an ice age the milankovitch cycles (axial tilt, axial wobble and the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit. We are in an interglacial (Holocene) and are in the Pleistocene ice age.
The Greenhouse Gas theory does indeed state that there are other factors that effect climate. However, the effects of CO2 are suppose to be monotonic and the alleged positive feed back effect on water vapor, if true, would require that every bit of ice would have been melted but that did not happen in the late Ordovician ice age.
00
[…] The great collapse of the global warming myth « JoNova […]
00
Typo
Was: When these conditions apply we have an ice age the milankovitch cycles (axial tilt, axial wobble and the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit. Should have been: When these conditions apply we have an ice age the milankovitch cycles (axial tilt, axial wobble and the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit) ice ages can occur
00
Cousin Eddy writes: “From the time of Galileo to the recent past (remember the h. pylori example?) the consensus has been often debunked.”
Yes, debunked by SCIENCE. Not by anti-science masquerading as skepticism.
Your list (currently:1 but even I can think of a handful more) of debunks is quite obviously the exception rather than the rule. Hanging your hopes on a repeat of (your interpretation of your) “h. pylori example” rather than the Newtonian physics example may be unwise. 😉
00
If you like I can stroll across campus and ask Prof Barry Marshall what he thinks about AGW in relation to his discovery about h. pylori Eddy.
00
LOL @ spdfgh the band.
Steady Eddy’s ““h. pylori example” also shows that:
+ the earth will turn out to be flat so the Flat Earth Society (http://theflatearthsociety.org/) are right to maintain their skepticism of the overwhelming evidence supporting the ‘oblate spheroid theory’.
+ evolution will turn out to be a hoax so the creationists (http://icr.org) are right to be skeptical about the overwhelming evidence that the world is older than 6,000 years.
+ vaccines cause autism so Jenny McCarthy (http://GenerationRescue.org) is right to be skeptical about the overwhelming evidence that they don’t.
Why? Because “From the time of Galileo to the recent past (remember the h. pylori example?) the consensus has been often debunked.”
Uh…. no. Science, over time, improves our understanding of the world. THAT’s the real message from your “h. pylori example”. Your hope is, along with the (other) nutters I listed, is that we can return to the dark ages. I sincerely doubt it.
00
ADDENDUM
Ed D has claimed that the dam shown above is suffering from low water levels due to drought caused by man-made climate change. Like all claims of this sort, it’s based on climate model predictions from models that have been falsified (there is no hotspot) and there’s no empirical evidence to back it up. As it happens the trend in droughts across the US shows no correlation with CO2 levels. Man-made CO2 didn’t start to rocket until after the monster droughts of the 1930’s and 1940’s.
Look at the bottom of the post to see the graph. It comes from the excellent new encyclopedia hidethedecline
00
Denny,
I have no illusions about Obama. He’s scared me since I first became aware of his past. He lies without the slightest pang of conscience.
But I hear many things and can’t verify them. This will take a lot of people cooperating with him and he has many more angry Americans on his hands than just those who show up at Tea Parties. But he scares me all the same.
He has a couple of things in common with Ed Darrell, his mind is made up and is now as closed as a bank vault on Sunday morning and he never gives up. You couple that with his past associations from which you must conclude that he sees no problem with illegal means and we’ve elected the Devil himself as President of the United States. You can add his pathological personality in there too.
The Roman Empire lasted about 800 years as a recognizable entity (hope I have that number right, memory plays tricks on old guys like me). How long will we last?
We must be prepared to resist on any level necessary.
00
Jo @260,
You didn’t, did you? Say it ain’t so! You’ve got to leave poor Ed something to feed his delusion. Now what will he do?
00
spdfgh the band at #257 and Max Eats Cats #259:
You responces to examples that consensus has often been proven wrong demonstrate the usual complete lack of ability in logical reasoning adopted by warmers.
The fact that science progresses by overthrow of scientific consensus does not indicate that all examples of such consensus is wrong. And nobody claims this (although any present scientific understanding is likely to be replaced in future).
The fact that science progresses by overthrow of scientific consensus demonstrates that the existence of such consensus is not evidence the consensus is right.
In science the validity of anything is not determined – and cannot be assessed – by comparison with any consensus view, understanding and/or interpretation. Determination of ‘truth’ by votes is the practice of politics, and it is a denial of science which relies on empirical data as evidence.
So, you are plain wrong in your claims that you are supporting science when – in fact – you are attempting to displace the scientific method with a practice of politics.
Any appeal to any authority is irrelevant to any scientific appraisal of anything.
In summation, you are plain wrong.
Richard
00
Max Loves Cats is a wake up call. While I also appreciate the collapse of bad science, he serves as a good reminder that the war is not over. While “good science” may be on the side of the skeptics, politicians and the MSM are on the side of bad science. And they carry a lot of weight with the uninformed public.
Let us drink a toast to another chink in the armor of deceit. But let us not linger long on our celebration less we forget the enemy of truth and science still controls most of the high cards.
00
Keep in mind those two words: Power and Money and how much of both will be lost to various parties if they admit to the fraud, or fail to morph it into something equally profitable.
Intertia is a good word, too. So is Education. As in the millions of kids growing up with a total belief in catastrophic warming and how horrible humankind is to the environment.
The work has just begun.
00
Rich S Courtney writes “You responces to examples that consensus has often been proven wrong demonstrate the usual complete lack of ability in logical reasoning adopted by warmers.”
Except that our “examples that consensus has often been proven wrong” were tongue-in-cheek examples provided to show how silly Eddy’s illogic was. Therefore you’re saying Eddy has demonstrated “complete lack of ability in logical reasoning”.
Excellent point, sir. Excellent point.
Also a wonderful demonstration of the comprehension level your ‘side’ possess. 😉
00
Band the, (WTF is spdfgh)
your “side” equally demonstrates their comprehension. By the way, my scientists are better than yours…nah nah nah……
Wow is that seriously all you have?
00
spdfgh were an Aussie band in the early 1990s. not recognising spdfgh also perhaps identifies a weak science background though Mark.
00
If it was LRB I’d have known
00
spdfgh the band:
Your comment at #266 demonstrates that you not only lack ability to think logically, you also lack ability to comprehend what you try to read.
Please again try to read what I wrote at #263. It does say what you claim it does, and it cannot be interpretted to say what you claim it does.
Jeez! How I wish it were possible to infuse a handful of brain cells into warmers!
Richard
00
OOps I intended “doesn’t say” not “does say”. Sorry.
Richard
00
Here is a pretty damning article about the IPPC and global warming in
the Wall Street Journal.
Got it covered pretty well, dont you think?
“The Continuing Meltdown (of AGW “theory”);
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703630404575053781465774008.html?mod=WSJ_article_MoreIn
00
Brian G Valentine:
February 15th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Hi brian. you were asking…
No, but I can explain the similarities..
00
@Louis Hissink:
February 13th, 2010 at 9:39 am
“…the inanity of calculating averages from intensive variables…”
I wonder what the average global wind speed is?
00
Could you find it in your heart to release from “moderation” my comment #66?
00
Eddy Aruda said:
Right. Dick the Butcher said that. In context, Dick’s crew had just effected a coup d’etat of sorts, and the discussion was on how to best deprive the people of their rights.
Since lawyers stand up for people’s rights, Dick said, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
Then another character rushes in, announcing some anti-revolutionary has been caught and is to be tried for his life.
At the trial, the man is accused of [*gasp*] knowing how to read. Well, readers who think about things are certainly a threat to Dick the Butcher and his crew and their plans to oppress the people. But Dick steps up and announces that, he knows the man. Dick has drunk beer with the man, and he’s a rather stand up fellow.
The judge will hear none of it. Not only is the man a reader, he has instructed young people in how to read books!
Lawyers, readers and educators are all threats to those who wish to deprive a people of its freedom. And so the man is condemned to death.
Ayuda, we have your number. First you want to deprive people of their rights, then you want to dumb them down. An ignorant peasantry is more easily led astray, right?
00
Ed, Do you mean like the warmers want to do? Dumb us down into believing your pseudoscience? Like taxing (taking) us right into third world status? Like depriving us of free speech?
No I don’t think Eddy meant all of Henry VI, I think he just meant the kill all the lawyers part.
00
Ed,
This is personal with you isn’t it? You can’t let any comment against you go unpunished. And you’ll stretch any comment well beyond the breaking point to do it.
Do you know how many like you have showed up here before you did? I can’t count them all. We’ve seen your peer reviewed papers in many variations and they haven’t passed muster yet.
If I were you I’d quit while I’m not too far behind. You cannot win an argument here with the stuff you’ve been posting.
00
I think it depends on if Gore is talking or not…..
00
@Mark D.: February 17th, 2010 at 10:00 am
LOL! He could probably power his own house with it, too. And that despite the fact that he…“…personally uses more electricity in a week than 25 million Ugandans do in a year”
00
Roy Hogue said:
At my blog, you complain I don’t answer your posts. Here you complain that I answer all of them (which obviously I don’t).
You know, Roy, I don’t think it’s a problem with Ed Darrell who occasionally drops by and posts here.
00
You now see what I mean. I did not say on your blog that you don’t answer posts. I said that you don’t answer questions put to you in response to what you post, instead preferring to evade the answer by diverting attention and hoping no one will notice. Nothing in that says you answer every response to your posts, only that when you’re asked a question and do respond you never really answer.
You carried on at 276 knowing full well what Eddy Aruda did and did not mean. You’re too intelligent a man for me to believe otherwise.
I stand by the two points I posted on your site.
You know your Shakespeare a whole lot better than you know global warming. You know or have had ample opportunity to know what evidence is required to make your point but you know you don’t have that evidence so you keep on with appeal to authority. You also know that appeal to authority is a logical fallacy but don’t let that bother you a bit because it’s all you have left. Unfortunately peer reviewed garbage is still just garbage.
If you’re going to stick around why don’t you wander on over a few threads to, “4. Carbon dioxide is already absorbing almost all it can,” and see what you can learn?
00
Ed, I have released both your comments that were held in moderation #66 and #73. Note that I already replied to your attempt to post empirical evidence. Thanks for trying. see my reply in #112.
I use the moderation thread in a different way to other blogs. I don’t want to moderate or edit individual comments, but if people won’t respond in a polite or reasonable manner I hold all their responses til they do. Hence I read the moderation thread only to see if people are replying directly to the specific bench mark they need to reach in order to get off that list (ie evidence or apology).
00
Thank you.
00
Ed,
And all that’s missing from 66 is the empirical link between what’s happening and carbon dioxide.
73 adds weight to my point that you let nothing you don’t agree with go unpunished. And it’s off topic as well.
And take note please that I’ve never called you names or engaged in character assassination. I’ve just told you in straight forward terms what I think is wrong with your position, strong words perhaps, but that’s all. Contrast me with the way you first appeared on joannenova, condemning and name calling. And you’re still doing it, just a little more subtly as in 73 where you attempt to shame us.
Is there no possibility that you could be wrong? I could be. And all it would take to show me that I am is that empirical link between anything happening on this planet and CO2.
00
Richard S Courtney: Post 272,
Mr. Courtney, my experience shows me that Alarmists, in general, do not “possess” Common Sense.
00
@ Ed Darrell
You wrote, “Ayuda, we have your number. First you want to deprive people of their rights, then you want to dumb them down. An ignorant peasantry is more easily led astray, right? Not actually, the quote from Shakespeare was made in jest. After reviewing your non sequitur comments I must continue to intellectually beat you until you have had enough. BTW, the quote I just listed is a straw man by you as I never said that, what a surprise! The day you can make an intelligent argument is the day I will give serious consideration to you or your arguments. Until then, i will view them as sheer diction.
00
spdfgh the band:
February 15th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
Cousin Eddy writes: “From the time of Galileo to the recent past (remember the h. pylori example?) the consensus has been often debunked.”
Yes, debunked by SCIENCE. Not by anti-science masquerading as skepticism.
Your list (currently:1 but even I can think of a handful more) of debunks is quite obviously the exception rather than the rule. Hanging your hopes on a repeat of (your interpretation of your) “h. pylori example” rather than the Newtonian physics example may be unwise.”
You wrote, “Yes, debunked by SCIENCE.” True, the AGW theory has been falsified and has more holes than the Titanic.
You wrote, “Not by anti-science masquerading as skepticism.” Since you have offered no evidence to show that skepticism is anti science you have used a non sequitur and a hypothesis contrary to fact .
You wrote, “Your list (currently:1 but even I can think of a handful more) of debunks is quite obviously the exception rather than the rule.)’ One is all it takes. You said you can think of more than one therefore it is not the exception to the rule and you have contradicted yourself. I am glad you have a handful of reasons to debunk the consensus argument. Consensus is not how science is done. Consensus is also known as a fallacy, argumentum ad populum.
You wrote, ” Hanging your hopes on a repeat of (your interpretation of your) “h. pylori example” rather than the Newtonian physics example may be unwise.” You failed to say why the analogy is wrong. Just because you ignore an argument does not make it wrong. You say “unwise” but offer no reason to support your contention. Did you go to the same school of rhetoric and logic as Ed Darrell?
00
Iceberg dead ahead, abandon ship!
UN climate change leader steps down to take up KPMG role
UNITED NATIONS climate chief Yvo de Boer is to step down on July 1st to join the KPMG consultancy group as “global adviser on climate and sustainability” as well as working with a number of universities, it was announced yesterday.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0219/1224264800155.html
00
From my little knowledge of the history of science when the phlogiston paradigm collapsed still there was a hard core of die hards who never changed their minds. They eventually died off. Moreover it seems from my attempted read of Kuhn’s unreadable and atrociously written book on the nature of scientific revolutions that this is the standard for scientific revolutions. But his prose was so impenetrably prolix (even worse than mine) that I may have misunderstood his point
But assuming I am right here, I am not convinced that the green activists will have the integrity to face the facts.
Instead we have to hope that those whores in residence, the politicians, will decide it is not in their political interest to continue to push the AGW tin wagon, because their advisors have now invested a lifetime of ego in this and they are not going to change for anyone or anything.
But to hope in politicians??
It aint over till the lady in the Brunhilda outfit sings
00
The Roman Empire lasted about 800 years as a recognizable entity (hope I have that number right, memory plays tricks on old guys like me). How long will we last?
Steve:
How long wil we last? not long, I think. I just hope to be dead before it happens. at 51 my demise wont be long off anyway
The Italian peninsula was finally united (south of the Rubicon, the then italian border) in about 200 BC, the punic wars were some time after this. The western Roman Empire only lasted about 600 years at the very most, if you want to stretch a point. Africa was taken after the punic wars (some time in the 2nd century BC). France was conquered by Julius Caesar in about 60 BC and Egypt was annexed under Augustus, the first emperor. Pompey took Judea in 63 BC
It, Rome, fell in 476 AD when the barbarian commander of Rome decided the empire was a joke and the boy emperor was sent into retirement.
Constantinople, the Byzantines, were legally the Roman Empire also, for East and West separated in 395 AD with the death of Theodosius, and lasted till 1453, but was a shadow of itself after 1204 when the 4th crusade decided to pick on the Byzantines rather than plunder the infidel in the Holy Land.
I am not as young as i was either, but i read more history than i do science. that probably shows here 🙂
00
Steve @293,
Thanks for the better number and the better history too. My world history was a long time ago.
Like you I don’t think we’ll last a whole lot longer. At 70 I’ll not be around to see the worst of it but my son may well see some very terrible upheaval. Hell, we may see it before we die. Taking good farm land out of food production to grow corn for ethanol or worse, to let it go back to nature is proceeding apace. We’ll become net food importers in order to feed ourselves. We depend more and more on China (a very good friend of the U.S., no?). And they are dumping our bonds which has to lead to loss of confidence in the dollar and inflation even if Obama doesn’t increase our debt even a dollar more.
Well I’m rambling on. No one knows for sure how things will work out. But it scares me a lot.
00
My knowledge of the Roman Empire is better than that of the Roman Republic, so I thought I had better check. The punic wars, against Carthage, were 264 to 146 BC after which Rome seized Carthage’s possessions: namely the province of Africa, and Italty ( not the entire area we call Italy, for northern italy was part of Gaul at the time) was unified earlier than I thought, around 280 BC.
As for AGW my position came from my reading of history also. I knew before any science was referred to that the medieval warm period was real. They grew grapes in the British Isles, Greenland was green, hence its name, and Vikings settled there. So to me the eye witness accounts of contemoiraries in the middle ages trump all the ice bores etc that scientists insist on making. SO if 800 to 1300 AD were warmer (which likely helped Charlemagne’s mini renaissance around 800) than today then it was not human emitted CO2 that did it. after all the heir of Pepin the Short, mayor of the palace ( they were majordomos to the Merovingian dynasty of Clovis the Frank) did not drive gas driven war machines while fighting off the saxons.
IT did turn out convenient for me that proper science properly done confirmed my instinct but I am even so pleased that I discovered the truth concerning AGW without recourse to a science degree, indeed from the very start I never believed in AGW.
So historians and other assorted arts degree types have something to contribute after all 😉
(I was earmarked for science as a boy in school, but got sidetracked by the humanities and fine arts)
00
Steve,
Thanks again.
I became a skeptic a little differently. When I first began to hear about AGW it was all so cut-and-dried, all settled, we know it all and no debate is possible. That rang an alarm simply because I know the world isn’t like that. So I began to look for information. The first thing you find is that the authority on all this was the IPCC and they don’t release any data or debate the matter with anyone they just make pronouncements of horrible consequences if we don’t do as they say. By comparison the skeptical side didn’t hide their data, they were not even all in agreement on exactly the meaning of things but they were always anxious to debate the matter and were refused any opportunity to do so. It didn’t take long to figure out that one side had something to hide and the other didn’t. Openness is the hallmark of honesty and secretiveness is the hallmark of dishonesty. One is justified by that alone in not believing the AGW alarm.
I kept on looking for information and have learned quite a lot. My actual field is computer science; I’m a software engineer by profession. But before that I was an EE major so I’ve had the good luck to have enough physics, chemistry and math to understand much of what I read here and elsewhere.
00
Roy, it looks like Senator Inhofe won re-election Nov 2008 so 6 more years starting 2009-2015
00
Oops that was supposed to be in the “Hanson Barracking” thread. Too many open tabs…..
00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ3y7SEy9vo
Global warming question by Richard Lindzen… back in 1990!
00
To kill the enemy, all you have to do is cut off the head of the symbolic leader and burn its flag.
Where the hell is Gore? That’s the head that must roll.
The flag is that of the UN.
Gore has gone into hiding because he knows, HIS is the head that must roll.
What I really love about all this is that for the first time in my 61 years I am seeing people from all over the globe uniting. Doing their own due diligence. Studying science for goodness sake.lol, and winning. The Communists (Greenpeace) and socialists and propaganda-ists are no match for common sense and unity. No wonder they are trying to find ways to control the internet.
For Me, the crux was CO2 being ruled by The American Supreme Court as a pollutant and an enemy of mankind while they drank their Coke riddled with CO2 bubbles. lolololololol
00
The entire debate about GW is based on CO2. Nothing else.
Everything else is irrelevant.
All we ever had to do was prove CO2 is NOT a pollutant and is NOT causing any warming.
Well That Has Been Done.
But here is a link to the guy who proved it in 2004.
He discovered a mathematical “Constant” that proves beyond any doubt that CO2 is not a player in global warming.
That constant is being suppressed….let’s get scientific folks and spread this link about.
http://www.examiner.com/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2010m1d12-Hungarian-Physicist-Dr-Ferenc-Miskolczi-proves-CO2-emissions-irrelevant-in-Earths-Climate
AND Thanks Jo for your amazing effort to make this place possible. People like you are the salt of the Earth. I had the pleasure to say the same to Lord Monkton in Newcastle Australia last month….
What a day !
00
What is funny is the following;
The green agenda was run by people who were “Socialisticly Inclined”.
A socialist like the following approach;
There is only one Party. The Peoples Democratic Working Party.
Members to a Central Commitee is elected from the Party.
The Central Commitee debates what the concencus is on certain issues.
They set up a 5 year plan to implement the agenda.
After the concencus is decided, it is not allowed to debate it.
After all debating a concencus, is working against the will of the people.
Right?
So they tried the same setup within Science.
The Central Commitee was IPCC.
The Concencus was laid via “Peer Revied Papers” over a long period involving the HokeyTeam.
The Central Commitee picked only approved papers that suited the agenda to a “Report”,
“The Manifesto”.
Then they wanted to implement it. And thats when the problems started.
Joanne Nova, Anthony Watts and the rest of the Contra Revolutionarys sabotaged the
process.
And we, who are not members of “The Peoples Democratic Working Party” say
Thank You! But its not over yet. They will try again. This time with “Bio Diversity”
It must also be remembered that they succeded many places. May I mention Norway, Denmark, Sweden, England, Germany, Spain, France…….
00
I find in reading those sites that say that population problems are a myth that their evidence is very sparse and inconclusive. Recently I read Book 1 of the free e-book series “In Search of Utopia” (http://andgulliverreturns.info), it blasts their lack of evidence relative to their calling overpopulation a myth. The book, actually the last half of the book, takes on the skeptics in global warming, overpopulation, lack of fresh water, lack of food, and other areas where people deny the evidence. I strongly suggest that anyone wanting to see the whole picture read the book, at least the last half.
The outdated fertility replacement rate of 2.1 is also clarified.
00