ABOUT the beginning of 2007, maintaining a sceptical stance on human-induced global warming became a lonely, uphill battle in Australia.
The notion that the science was settled had gathered broad popular support and was making inroads in unexpected quarters. Industrialists and financiers with no science qualifications to speak of began to pose as prophets. Otherwise quite rational people decided there were so many true believers that somehow they must be right. Even Paddy McGuinness conceded, in a Quadrant editorial, that on balance the anthropogenic greenhouse gas hypothesis seemed likelier than not.
What a difference the intervening 15 months has made. In recent weeks, articles by NASA’s Roy Spencer and Bjorn Lomborg and an interview with the Institute of Public Affairs’ Jennifer Marohasy have undermined that confident Anglosphere consensus. On Amazon.com’s bestseller list this week, the three top books on climate are by sceptics: Spencer, Lomborg and Fred Singer.
Read more here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23597729-7583,00.html
————-
from The Australian, by Christopher Pearson, ‘A Cool Idea to Warm To’, April 26, 2008.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“The notion that the science was settled had gathered broad popular support and was making inroads in unexpected quarters.”
Humbug! Popular support means nothing in science!
Why let it get you down? When the science speaks, sentiments shift.
I’m still waiting for my copy of Roy Spencer’s book to arrive – Amazon are quoting a delivery time somewhere between the middle and the end of May.
That is interesting, sceptical tomes as the three best sellers!
Now let’s watch the global warmers start to morph into their next metamorphosis – though I wonder how emitting CO2 might be spin-doctored into causing cooling.
I can see it now – we have to stop emmitting CO2 because it changes climate (to colder) so I suspect not much will change at all.
Neatest shift ever switching it from global warming to climate change. Heat or cool, we still have to put up with them.
Louis,
I wonder. Are there any historical precedents for religous zealots abandoning one true religion for another diametrically opposed one? I fear this will be a “to the death” crusade — huddled together, freezing in the dark, ranting: “Just you wait! Just you wait!”.
Personally, the Islamic Fundamentalists worry me less than these guys.
Ivan,
Interestingly John Ray on his dissecting leftism blog notes that Adolph Hitler had no problems with incorporating communists into the National Socialist Workers Party, as both were really after the same objectives.
Religious zealots are not to concerned with which dogma they wish to burden us with, it’s the urge to proselytise that is the driving force and I suspect they can change belief as easily as changing a coat.
The irritation is that our usual suspects will probably create new pseudonyms and start carping on about CO2 resulting in a cooling climate, since quite obviously accelerating CO2 and cooling must be causally related.
Thank heavens for the internet and blogs.
Louis,
You’re probably right — and since they are basically lazy, a lot of their work has been done for them 30 years ago, if they know where to look:
http://www.junkscience.com/apr05/coolingworld.pdf
In the meantime, the new pseudonym is a good idea. I think I’ll reinvent myself as well.
Ivan,
” Personally, the Islamic Fundamentalists worry me less than these guys.”
I bet you dont.
If the fundamentalists had their way there would be no science to debate, and we would be further back in the dark ages.
There would be several saving graces however –I leave for you to hazard a guess.
ROTFL – you couldn’t script this drivel.
Malcolm,
Which fundamentalists are you referring to – Islamic or AGW?
“and we would be further back in the dark ages”
What would ‘further back in the dark ages’ look like, do you think? No electricity? No cars? No heating? Having to chant the mantra every day?
Well it’s not necessary given you’re so ridiculous. Reds under the beds boys …. ooooo …. ooooo ROTFL
No reds under the bed – just compare ‘green’ solutions with Marxist solutions – go on, try it. It’s uncanny.
“If the fundamentalists had their way there would be no science to debate, and we would be further back in the dark ages.”
But at least we wouldn’t be paying carbon taxes. I mean, beyond having to stick our butts in the air five times a day and pretend to pray to Allah, the fundamentalists may actually allow for more freedom than we would get from the AGWs/greens/reds/socialists. Islamic societies of the past have not been without some scientists. It’s true that most of those scientists disdained the religion, but at least some of them were able to work.
Choosing between AGWs/greens/reds/socialists and Islamic fundamentalists isn’t as easy a choice as it would seem. I mean look at some of the extremes that the left is marching towards. Some of the political groups in Sweden have been pushing for a “man tax”. The theory being that men are such pigs and rapists that they should carry the burden of their guilt in the form of taxes that apply to them alone. In many if not most of the Universities of the US, questioning the left wing orthodoxy will get you expelled. For the left, there is no such place as too far left. So when it comes to a choice between them and Islamic fundamentalists, the left’s trajectory will soon have them being a more obnoxious, intolerant, fundamentalist, and fascist ideaology than Islam.
For those of you who are interested, looks like a young Aussie named Trent Lowe has just won the Tour of Georgia. Not exactly the Tour de France, but a very competitive race nevertheless. The race has one more day, but it won’t effect the outcome unless something very unusual happens. The fact that Lowe is very young, and that he beat Levi Leipheimer up the mountain, means that he probably has a very good future in cycling in front of him.
At least with Islamic fundies the left is merely trying to excuse their actions instead of wholeheartedly endorsing them as they do with the watermelons.
Halls Creek and temperatures plummetted to 12 degrees Celsius overnight, and it’s only April! I wonder when it was this cold before.
Was it because I failed to make an animal sacrifice to the great God Carbonite?
When large amounts of money and scientific experitise is directed at a problem that remains controversial for a long period to time and subject to continued disputation, then it is entirely likely that the ideas used to explain thje problem are wrong.
Climate Change alarmism fits this description.
And..
Deduced theories, once settled, become increasingly difficult to reject in light of conflicting evidence, and the theories are often modified and made more complicated. But what teh deductionists have forgotten is that their inititial assumption was never an empirical fact, but a simple “what-if”.
In this case the “what-if” is climate sensitivity. Never demonstrated correct by experiment but forms the basis of each and every global warming computer model.
Pseudoscience at its best.
Tilo,
More than a few I would suggest. The Islamic world was the the centre of enlightment and progress for a lot of the middle ages – until their extremists took charge. When El Cid drove the ‘heathen’ out of Spain, they ‘discovered’ libraries, medicine, astronomy, architecture, and so on. The Islamic world was smart enough to let their engineers and scientists develop and flourish – you only have to travel through the middle east and see the architecture to appreciate that – including the Taj Mahal (which was a product of the Islamic Mughals).
The AGW extremists would take us back to the world of El Cid without a moment’s hesitation.
Here’s something you don’t see every day:
Greenpeace founder now backs nuclear power
http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/360625.html
Imagine that – an Environmentalist with some balls. Instead of just telling everyone how they should run their lives, he’s actually putting forward some solutions.
And what do his critics say? Could anyone have guessed this one, I wonder?:
‘His critics, like Andrea Shipley, executive director of the Snake River Alliance, say he has simply sold out. “The only reason Patrick Moore is backing something as unsafe and risky as nuclear power is he is being paid by the nuclear industry to do so,” Shipley said.
Groan!
If the muslims are today numbering some 2bn then their contribution to human kind is trivial.
The Jews/Israelis who number less than 30m have produced about 170 Nobel prizes, but 2bn Islamists can only manage about 9.
There are no patents emanating from arab/islamists countries, and the translation rate of books is near zero as a rate.
When there was some enlightenment it was only by conquest and forcing people to pay the Jizya tax, and walk on the other side of the street, and before long all the intellectuals and farm workers left. So the Islamists went into decline.
All the arab/islamist countries rank near the bottom in terms of freedoms. They do this by forcing their dogma on people,in an environment where scepticism is death.
Griffiths University and the idiot Vice Chancellor would be good place to undertake more AGW prosletysing- the Saudis will give them the money, all they have to do is ask.
Islamist fundamentalists are infinitely more damaging than AGW- but the methods are the same.
The silencing of dissent by any means.
Are you guys for real. You’re scary as ! If you think mainstream AGW concern anyway = radical Islamic fundamentalism you’re all cuckoo. Time for your medication dudes.
Read your tripe back when you’re clear headed.
How old are you guys – let me guess….
There is one point of similarity though.
The muslim religion allows for a concept of lying when it benefits the cause–ie the religion.Its called Taqiyya.
Now how many times have the alarmists been caught out telling porkies, meaning, there are grounds that we know of, that they knew what they were saying at the time, was untrue.
Now who would that apply to I wonder.?
Ahh —I see that Sheikh Al Luke has responded in his usual manner.
Uh oh. Looks like it’s not an act after all…
It’s the real deal.
We have digressed off topic.
The main thrust of Pearson’s article appears a negotiated settlement for Labor, long drawn out scientific analytical against the empiral process which should from a skeptics point of view be seen as realist, hasn’t the position been hold and watch the universe play it’s games. Isn’t this what we have had to do for years.
On the rational debate front, science it’s called fo Luke SJT and the various warming trolls that inhabit this space, here ia s a link about scientific methode,
Day 1
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/23/road-trip-update-day-1-at-ncdc/
Taking the proven skepticism to the source and being thanked and the real culprit being identified Goverment and lack of funding or perhaps and this is very conspiracy theory, Government hindrance to the AGW mantra disproval.
Day 2.
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/24/road-trip-update-day-2-at-ncdc-and-press-release/
My point is we have to move around the Gore’s the Flannery’s and the Robyn Williams because all they give is the dead air of the denialists, because they are the ones now denying, they are denying evidence and they wont debate they only want to emo.
I was talking to my old mate Bruce Die Hard and he said he wouldn’t crank Williams becasue he has no creds.
Never take a hill that can’t be won and held, reckons Bill.
Yes and good stuff John. Surprised a good news story would surface here.
You might think we’re trolls but does frothing on about celebrities, Islamic fundamentalism and giving one off weather reports, progress any science discussion.
Your supposed “non-troll” mates seem to have a major aversion to any serious science discussions as does this blog. It’s drive by shooting style … irresponsible spraying of venom and rhetoric … see the water vapour scam as a class example. No context … no discussion – just a cherry pick.
As for “never take a hill that can’t be held” – are you at war or open for a science discussion. Doesn’t sound like it to me.
My god – thank goodness we do not burn witches any more – you guys would be first with the torches.
I have never read such red necked, racist, ill educated comments in all my life. No wonder you are denialists. With the level of ignorance and bigotry shown here climate science denial is but a short step.
Que the theme from Deliverance ……
The looney trees appear somewhat empty, what?
louis: “though I wonder how emitting CO2 might be spin-doctored into causing cooling.”
easy CO2 radiates more easily than the other atmospheric species so more CO2 mor radiation to space the cooler it gets. You can take the IPCC foruma F=\alpha log(c/co) and watch a smudge in front of the \alpha morph into a clear ‘-‘.
“I have never read such red necked, racist, ill educated comments in all my life.”
Well … isn’t that a typical alarmist exaggeration. Nothing useful to contribute – just rant and hurl insults. Are you reading the same thing as the rest of us? Maybe if you had a decent lighting system, you’d be able to read the print a bit better.
“Now let’s watch the global warmers start to morph into their next metamorphosis – though I wonder how emitting CO2 might be spin-doctored into causing cooling.”
It won’t happen. The earth warms and cools due to various forcings. CO2 can only make it warmer. However, your twisted way of thinking is very instructive.
Louis,
“Now let’s watch the global warmers start to morph into their next metamorphosis.”
I’m still not convinced about this. I’ve been doing a bit of research, and the only behavioural model with any historical significance that lines up with the AGW alarmist behaviour is the cargo cults.
Consider this definition of cargo cults:
“The inception of cargo cults often is defined as being based on a flawed model of causation, being the confusion between the logical concepts of necessary condition and sufficient condition when aiming to obtain a certain result. Based on this definition, the term “cargo cult” also is used in business and science to refer to a particular type of fallacy whereby ill-considered effort and ceremony take place but go unrewarded due to flawed models of causation as described above.” (Wikipedia).
You have to admit – this definition is so close that it is scary!
The problem is this: at the end of WW2 the influence of cargo cultism in the Pacific islands grew, rather than diminished, in a failed attempt to make the ‘cargo’ reappear.
So it will be with the AGW alarmists – they will never admit they were wrong. My bet is that they will adopt tribal behaviours which resemble those of the islanders, i.e. whatever the 21st century equivalent is of building airstrips and control towers in an attempt to bring the cargo planes back.
“If the muslims are today numbering some 2bn then their contribution to human kind is trivial.”
Malcolm, what you say about Islam is all true. But I still don’t think the choice is as easy as you do. AGW alarmism is simply a part of a much larger agenda. The use of guilt to gain power is an age old trick of the left. Many of us now spend half of the labor of our lives so that we can give it to the government. In some European countries the number is even larger. And there is no sign that we have reached a peak. No Muslim Imam, nor any monarch of old ever took so much from their subjects. And while we see the limiting factors on freedom that Islam imposes, we have simply become used to the limits on our freedom that the state imposes. And again, there is no end in sight. Every year your life will be more restricted by the state. It never goes in the other direction.
Your take on Islam’s contribution to science – at least in the last 500 years – is exactly correct. But there are a few signs of change. Places like Dubai and some of it’s neighbors are experiencing explosive infastructure growth. And not all of it is due to oil money. These states are offering business extremely low or no taxes. And beauracratic red tape is minimal. As a result, buisnesses from all over the world are locating in these gulf states, and their economic growth rate is phenomenal. With these economic changes will come higher eduaction levels for the local populations, and at some point, maybe even more scientific contributions.
I’ve spent some time studying Islam, and the idea that it may one day become a dominant religion in the west is repulsive. But really, when I see where the left is taking us, little by little, I’m almost as repulsed. If you are going to place bets on the winner, the fact that the left is so destructive to the family and the fact that Europeans are no longer reproducing themselves could mean that the left looses to the Islamists based upon demographics alone.
Tilo,
Thank you for your thoughtful and well written post. I have a few comments to add, and a few baits.
1. I was only responding to Ivan’s comments that the AGW alarmists were more worrying that Islamic fundamentalism, which I do not agree with. I do agree that there are some encouraging signs that the Islamic fundamentalism may be softening, but that wont occur until the Saudi funded Wahhabi cult is stopped in its tracks.
2. The funds available to the Wahhabis alone from oil revenues is probably on a par with the total of AGW research. In addition the fundamentalist have a common guiding book that is geared to winning wars against the infidels, that has the status of being immutable, ie handed down in perfect form, and not to be argued about. Hmmmm.
3. I dont have the same fear as you and others do about this mystical left that is guiding us to some place else.I do think that here in Australia we have a vibrant democracy that will correct the errors of judgement by both Howard, and now Krudd, and that the extremism of the AGW guard will be reined in,eventually.
4. The responses by the alarmist brigade on this blog has been surprising, but then again I hadnt expected much else from people, who consistently display such poor general knowledge anyway. Thats what you would expect from single issue fanatics, whether AGW alarmists or Islamic fundamenatlists.
Says Mal fanatically.
–and Sheikh AlLuke comes in again- right on cue.
“Nothing useful to contribute – just rant and hurl insults.”
Because how can you possibly have anything approaching a sensible discussion with people with so much fear.
Behind the red necked bravado is an overwhelming fear of the different and unknown. There is nothing rational about fear responses and no discussion will have any meaning until you stop being so frightened. With so many things to scare you like Muslims and Communist environmentalists there is little chance of this happening.
With all due respect Ender, Islamic Fundamentalists are not nice, this is not a red neck statement, indeed the opposite is the case they are the religious equivalents of red necks. Their laws are abhorrent and their recent behaviours as promised are barbarism.
As for communists this is a capitalist democracy with a good mix of socialism but again based in democratic principals. Communism appears a dead end, because it is totalitarian. No democracy is perfect, but democracy’s one true great strength is skepticism, not follow the totalistic know alls, all the way to hell.
Leaders are judged and listened to, if what they say and what they do or have promised to do dont marry up, then they get the heave ho. This is the great leap forward in democracy at the end of the last century, politcal skepticism instead of political loyalty, which must really shit little left wing at all cost hard wired brains.
The only red neck intolerant bastards around the place are the abusers and the deniers and unfortunately they all believe in CO2 forced warming at all costs and doom and everyone else must pay for their belief.
grow a set and stop hurling meaningless diatribes.
John Van Krimpen – “The only red neck intolerant bastards around the place are the abusers and the deniers and unfortunately they all believe in CO2 forced warming at all costs and doom and everyone else must pay for their belief.
grow a set and stop hurling meaningless diatribes.”
Tell you what I will stop hurling meaningless diatribes when you guys stop.
BTW completely agree that fundamentalists are a problem. It really does not matter what sort of fundamentalist you are – either extreme libertarians, extreme religious (christian included) or anything based on extreme fear of others you will be a problem to somebody sometime. Whether you fly planes into buildings or destroy Federal buildings with truck bombs you are a problem.
We do not ‘believe’ in AGW at all. There is no need for belief any more than I need to believe in gravity or the sun is powered by fusing hydrogen. AGW like these is just a scientific fact with the best knowledge that we have at this time.
I don’t want to doom you to anything. The changing Earth’s climate that we are probably causing at the moment might do that.
What I would like you to do is use a lot less energy while still maintaining most if not all of your present lifestyle. Apparently because most people only understand money, taxes seem to be the best way to make this happen. In this way we might be able to keep the warming to a manageable level where not too many people die.
I would also like to source a lot more of this energy from technology that releases a lot less carbon dioxide.
The inventions of socialist takeovers etc are entirely products of your own fears and prejudices.
Ender,
“I have never read such red necked, racist, ill educated comments in all my life.”
Assuming for a moment that you are not referring to Luke’s endless stream of ill educated comments, where in any of the above are the ‘red necked or racist’ comments that you are dropping off your twig about?
Did you actually read any of these – beyond the first sentence?
The only thing anyone is ‘frightened’ about is the personal cost that everyone is going to have to bear as a result of the policies implemented to address “the changing Earth’s climate that we are probably causing” (your words).
It’s the word ‘probably’ that causes the alarm – in case you have been missing the thread of all these comments.
Denialist Scum – “where in any of the above are the ‘red necked or racist’ comments that you are dropping off your twig about?”
How about:
“Islamic societies of the past have not been without some scientists. It’s true that most of those scientists disdained the religion, but at least some of them were able to work.”
“The Jews/Israelis who number less than 30m have produced about 170 Nobel prizes, but 2bn Islamists can only manage about 9.
There are no patents emanating from arab/islamists countries, and the translation rate of books is near zero as a rate.
When there was some enlightenment it was only by conquest and forcing people to pay the Jizya tax, and walk on the other side of the street, and before long all the intellectuals and farm workers left. So the Islamists went into decline.
All the arab/islamist countries rank near the bottom in terms of freedoms. They do this by forcing their dogma on people,in an environment where scepticism is death.”
That will do I think
What you are attempting to do is straight out of the Political Correctness Handbook — namely, whenever someone brings up an issue which is unpalatable or offends ‘conventional wisdom’ or dogma, then holler them down as ‘racists’ or ‘red necks’. In ‘alarmist-speak’, these people are now called ‘deniers’ or ‘sceptics’.
Let’s look through the examples you quote:
“Islamic societies of the past have not been without some scientists.
– Fact.
“It’s true that most of those scientists disdained the religion,”
– At worst, a value judgement.
“but at least some of them were able to work.”
– Demonstrable fact.
“The Jews/Israelis who number less than 30m have produced about 170 Nobel prizes,”
– Haven’t counted, but clearly a statement of factual record.
“but 2bn Islamists can only manage about 9.”
– Ditto.
“There are no patents emanating from arab/islamists countries,”
– Also probably a demonstrable fact.
“and the translation rate of books is near zero as a rate.”
– Also probably a demonstrable fact.
“When there was some enlightenment it was only by conquest and forcing people to pay the Jizya tax,”
– Historical fact.
“and walk on the other side of the street,”
– Historical fact.
“and before long all the intellectuals and farm workers left. So the Islamists went into decline.”
– Partial historical fact.
“All the arab/islamist countries rank near the bottom in terms of freedoms.”
– Absolute fact. Anyone want to challenge this?
“They do this by forcing their dogma on people,in an environment where scepticism is death.”
– Absolute provable fact.
Dear Denialist Scum – do we care. Is it relevant to the thread – and what was the thread about anyway – in all the confusion I forgotten whether it was five shots or six ? Thought we were discussing something about AGW. And so it’s a question of whether you feel lucky. We do ya – punk. If you want to get into Islamic fundamentalism go over to Tim Blair’s for a venom spray and let off a few rounds.
Ender,
“We do not ‘believe’ in AGW at all.”
Really ?
Let’s look for a moment at your ‘belief’ statements in your recent post:
“Earth’s climate that we are probably causing” (statement of belief, not fact)
“What I would like you to do is use a lot less energy” (statement of dogma – “let’s tax everyone and run their lives for them”)
“In this way we might be able to keep the warming to a manageable level” (statement of belief, not fact)
“where not too many people die” (statement of belief, not fact)
… and your biggest belief / dogma statement of them all – complete with its own contradiction in terms:
“AGW .. is just a scientific fact with the best knowledge that we have at this time.”
Let’s examine this “best knowledge that we have at this time”:
1) WMO (grudgingly):
“sea surface temperatures dropped by 1.5 to 2 degrees C over large parts of the central and
eastern Equatorial Pacific”
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/info_notes/info_44_en.html
2) Countless news articles over the last 6 months detailing exceptionally cold (or coldest) winters in Canada:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080305/national/wea_hellish_winter_2
China (worst in half a century):
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-02/26/content_7669324.htm
Greece:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=a_lhofKfSUZ8
Lebanon:
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/storms/winter/2008-02-19-snow-lebanon_N.htm
Most of the middle east:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/news/19022008news.shtml
Iran:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7178192.stm
Afghanistan:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/news/16022008news.shtml
India & Kashmir:
http://www.newkerala.com/one.php?action=fullnews&id=20039
UK:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/news/23032008news.shtml
Baghdad (first snow in memory):
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL1146182220080111
Romania and Bulgaria:
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL0352087920080103
Spain:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/news/19122007news.shtml
.. amongst many, many others.
3) In spite of all the hysteria about the melting polar ice cap a few months ago, today there is more snow and ice at the top of the globe than there was 20 years ago:
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=04&fd=26&fy=1988&sm=04&sd=26&sy=2008
..and the sea ice in the southern ocean is growing faster this year than last year:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.south.jpg
4) More people and animals have been killed by cold than heat this year in:
China:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-02/26/content_7669324.htm
Vietnam:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/global_warming_or_cooling/2008/02/19/73798.html?s=al&am%20p;promo_code=457E-1
Iran:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7178192.stm
Afghanistan:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/world/news/16022008news.shtml
Tajikistan:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7157118.stm
…amongst others.
5) Closer to home – Sydney’s coldest summer in 50 years:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=email_en&refer=home&sid=ae6GlcvBtldY
According to the IPCC religious dogma, none of this is even possible. I quote from AR4 Synthesis Report:
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.”
In spite of overwhelming ‘observations’ to the contrary, the The Church of Global Warming still clings to this unbelievable religious dogma, and attacks anyone who questions this dogma with increasing hysteria and vitriol.
Who are the denialists and religious fanatics in this scenario?
“Denialist Scum”
That last post of yours is brilliant. I have had little to say on the blog for ages, I am reading it, but find it hard to motivate myself to type anything because it so often feels like nobody is listening beyond their own bias….me included I am sure…..
But the way u have used Enders words so succinctly to sum up the difference between fact and subjectivity was not only clever but funny. Ender many of your ideals/ goals are admirable and will no doubt be forced on us naturally as fossil fuels run out ( I beleieve the govt should be providing Research and Development incentives to find alternative energy sources to help us as this situation approaches). BUT I shudder with fear for my childrens future not becuase of AGW potential destructive outcomes, but rather for the huge taxes that will be imposed on them in an attempt to force us to do something that in all probability will not have a noticeable impact.
….. or some radical eco fundamentalist will create some virus/ mechanism for wiping out humans and thereby save the planet! ( Lets be honest the only way we are really likely to cut humans co2 is if a large portion of us are wiped out. The latest estimates for global population in 2050 that I know of are just over 9 billion)
If this is not about climate change
“Everyone always thinks Australia is the best place for perfect weather, but I’m not sure I’ll believe it any more,” says Minsoo Seo, a 28-year-old marketing executive from Korea’s Jeju Island, as he gazes at the waves crashing toward Bondi Beach on Australia’s last day of summer. “The wind’s too strong,” he says after deciding against surfing on a grey, gusty morning
see bloomberg above
more energy = more wind hey
Really? Youse lot ought to be more grateful!
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/saudi-blogger-jailed-without-charge-for-four-months/2008/04/27/1209234655622.html
Who would like to swap places?
gavin: “more energy = more wind hey”
Not necessarily to much heat decrease in one place -> lower pressure -> more wind. It’s the difference that drives it. Since the variations are greatest at the poles if it cools faster then expect stormy weather. BTW I hear there is a bit of snow about I can believe it there is a chilly wind blowing here in Sydney.
Toby is easily sucked in by denialist scum.
DS says “According to the IPCC religious dogma, none of this is even possible. I quote from AR4 Synthesis Report:” – errr NOPE It doesn’t say it’s impossible at all. Utter crap by DS.
In fact:
http://ams.confex.com/ams/87ANNUAL/techprogram/paper_117372.htm watch the video
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/001802.html
One swallow doesn’t make a summer and one cold year doesn’t make a time series.
And indeed Arctic sea ice isn’t even near “average” – http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
And then there is this thing called La Nina …
DS try to get acquainted with the basics.
Dear alarmist creep, did you read what i said?
Probably but you read into it what you wanted! My point was because of Ender’s deeply held beliefs he makes statements of fact, when they are infact subjective statements that are debatable.
Does anybody really believe that humans and our activities will be able to become carbon negative (how else can we stabilize/ reduce co2?) Does anybody really think that carbon can be controlled in any way but via punitive taxes? Does anybody really believe that these taxes we will pay (if any politicians start to really try to reduce co2…rather than play politics)will have any real impact on temperature….(how many new coal power stations are due in the next 5 years in china and india? 800 i heard this morning)_
On the other side of the coin we can equally ask
does anybody think that being able to source our energy needs from alternatives such as solar is a bad thing?
To me ( yes subjective) the answer to all these is NO. So lets be realistic and give R and D assistance to firms working on solar, and remove subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.
Karoly had the final word on Pearson in Australian today for those who can juggle two contexts simultaneously. Quote “we are experiencing the warmest global temperature of any strong La Nina episode in the past 100 years.”
Ender: “I don’t want to doom you to anything. The changing Earth’s climate that we are probably causing at the moment might do that.”
Ender’s supposed position is that fearing anything is irrational. But it seems that what he really means is that we should only fear those things that Ender wants us to fear.
Yet it also seems that it is much easier to establish the truth about the threat of Islamists than it is to establish that CO2 will have a dramatic impact on our lives. Emperical evidence about Islamist objectives can be had nearly every day. No proof exists to support the doomsday scenarios for CO2.
Concerning the trajectory of the left, simply look at the new laws that are passed each year and look at the taxation level and it’s growth each year. The erosion of personal freedom is also much more apparent that the effect of CO2 on the climate. The fact that the left is growing in a democracy is of very little help. It’s apparent that government and the media are able to manufacture the consent that is necessary for us to throw away our freedom in the supposed service of some mythical higher cause. AGW is a perfect example of this. But it is by no means the only example.
“And indeed Arctic sea ice isn’t even near “average””
Maybe you didn’t notice, but the earth has two poles. And the global sea ice is above average.
“”It’s true that most of those scientists disdained the religion,”
– At worst, a value judgement.”
Maybe! But a well researched value judgement. I got the information from Ibn Warraq’s book, “Why I Am Not A Muslim” I would recommend the book. It is very well documented.
“Karoly had the final word on Pearson in Australian today for those who can juggle two contexts simultaneously. Quote “we are experiencing the warmest global temperature of any strong La Nina episode in the past 100 years.””
It would be nice if the AGW crowd actually ever had a final word that was also truth. This is not a strong La Nina episode. It is only 8 month long. In 1998 – 2000 we had a 24 month La Nina that was then followed by another 5 month of La Nina after only a 3 month break.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
I forgot to mention that in 1954 to 1957 we had a 34 month La Nina and in 1973 to 1976 we had a 37 month La Nina. So, again, by comparison, todays 8 month La Nina doesn’t qualify as strong.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
Reverting back to the subthread, on which is more radical climate alarmist, or Islamic fundamentalists, the article by Mervyn Bendle of JCU in todays Australian p14, should put this matter to rest.
What does this say about Ender’s et al comments above.
Never mind the quality, feel the width, eh, Tilo? He is obviously referring to strong as in temperature drop it caused. A strong man may only live a short life.
I was going to say that “James Hansen has been reading Ender’s material”, until I remebered that Ender doesn’t have any material. However, it would appear that Hansen does share Ender’s maniacal determination to re-educate and ‘straighten’ people:
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080423182208.aspx
“NASA’s Hansen Rails Against Coal At Fringe Left-Wing Event
‘Climate Super Rally’ strays from global warming into leftist anti-Bush, anti-Iraq war and anti-corporation event.
Hansen used the event to attack the use of fossil fuels, specifically the coal industry, advocating government action to force the complete phase out of coal CO2 emission by 2030.”
By now Ender will be going off like a frog in a sock at his hero using the word “force”…
Tilo, recheck your superlatives. ‘I forgot to mention that in 1954 to 1957 we had a 34 month La Nina and in 1973 to 1976 we had a 37 month La Nina. So, again, by comparison, todays 8 month La Nina doesn’t qualify as strong.’ But wait on, these were mother of all La Ninas- the wettest periods in Australia in the last century. So like a lot of other multi dimensional joys, a strong La Nina does not have to mean the longest or the widest ( in Australia it is about how wet, how cool etc ), or any other extreme you want to pull out of your cap. Just because you can google a bit to support your blind faith, does not mean you actually have understanding at any higher level.
Bazza,
Remind me – how many angels was it that could dance on the head of a pin?
Denialistscum into their own, it seems. ( they are up themselves). How many angels relates ultimately to a bit of tolerance for ambiguity. There are two major immediate climate forcings at the annual scale, global warming and ENSO. How many angels is infinite digress/regress and relates to ‘the Pauli exclusion principle part of one of the most basic observations of nature: particles of half-integer spin must have antisymmetric wavefunctions, and particles of integer spin must have symmetric wavefunctions— implying that it is impossible for both electrons to occupy the same state. ‘ so two angels cant occupy the same spot.
Who’s up themselves here?
I ask a simple question, and I get a long, drawn-out jargon-laden answer to a totally different question (Global Warming 101).
No wonder no-one buys this garbage.
“He is obviously referring to strong as in temperature drop it caused.”
He doesn’t know how much of the temperature drop is caused by La Nina. So the only legitimate basis of comparison is how cold the pacific equatorial water got and how long it lasts. On those scales it is not a strong La Nina. To say that the temperature dropped so far because the La Nina is strong and the La Nina is strong because the temprature droped so far is simply the kind of circular argument that the AGW brain dead love to embrace.
“‘Climate Super Rally’ strays from global warming into leftist anti-Bush, anti-Iraq war and anti-corporation event.”
This once again reinforces the point that several of us here have made. AGW is simply one component of the agenda that the radical left use to aquire money and power.
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080423182208.aspx
“But wait on, these were mother of all La Ninas”
Three La Nina’s in only the last 50 years that were far stronger than this one would not qualify this one as strong – regardless of your mother.
When AGW sceptics use the word strong they like to have some measure of meaning attached. For example, the one we are currently in is not particularly strong in either it’s duration or in how cold the water has been in it’s currents. Now for an AGW cultist, the only thing that counts is trying to explain why we had such a drastic temperature drop and why we haven’t had any increase in the global trend for the last 10 years. So of course, by definition, the La Nina must be called upon to explain away what cannot otherwise be explained. And of course it must be declared to be strong so that the AGW cultists can maintain their hoax for a little bit longer.
“So the only legitimate basis of comparison is how cold the pacific equatorial water got and how long it lasts.” – what crapola – that’s just because you choose that index. Only reason. And as usual for dopey denialist hypocrites – only ever pick one side of the data – lets rub out the 1998 El Nino year too then as well as this year.
As for “anti-Iraq” – well think how much these trillions of dollars pissed up against the wall for “mission not accomplished” and an unsafer world could have been used to improve those starving third worlders that you rednecks shed crocodile tears about. Or energy or agriculture research?
“that’s just because you choose that index.”
And what is your index?
“As for “anti-Iraq” – ”
Thanks for proving once again that AGW is a political football that the left wants to use for power and money.
“”mission not accomplished””
When you are in the middle of driving somewhere do you stop and give up because you are not there yet? Yeah, you probably do.
Tilo,
This is just more watermelon faulty logic, i.e.
Put up the price of petrol => People will use less or drive smaller cars => Imports of oil will decline => Troops can leave Iraq => Sweetness and light will return.
Bollocks. People who can afford Prados will pay the extra tax and the Govt. will use the extra tax dollars to finance yet more vote-buying middle class welfare. The Prados will stay on the road, the oil will continue to flow and the troops will stay in Iraq.
The same faulty logic that undeprins the AGW fraud:
Lower the CO2 emissions => Temperature will drop => Rain will return. They call this “Climate Science”. Older civilisations, of course, call this “superstition”.
Simple minds seem to like simple “solutions”, I guess.
David Karoly’s answer to Phil Chapman in the Australian demonstrated once again the “change the subject” or “demolish the strawman” defence.
Phil Chapman was clearly talking about Cycle 24 sunpots at high solar latitude so Karoly talks about total sunspots including the few low latitude spots of cycle 23 to say “it’s just wrong”.
Chapman also made it clear that a major ice age was a small probability in his view and his main worry was an immediate Dalton type minimum.
As Karoly surely cannot be that stupid (surely professors of Earth science cannot be that stupid can they?)I can only conclude Karoly set out to intentionally mislead by telling only part of the story which seems pretty standard for the parasites making a living from alarmism.
I see NASA JPL has just confirmed the PDO phase shift.
As we’re all going to be hurt by government actions taken for the AGW non problem, anyone want to get a class action going in a few years against those pushing for action on CO2?
“anyone want to get a class action going in a few years against those pushing for action on CO2?”
What an excellent idea.
Oxygen thieves like Karoly and Brook (and others) should be held to account. It would be interesting to see what their attitude was if they were faced with the prospect of losing their house – or being jailed for fraud.
oooo – oooo – as usual if you can’t win on the science threaten to sue. Dream on. Just watch the counter-suit against denialists.
Perhaps we should licence denialists and make them wear location bracelets. Especially after http://www.desmogblog.com/a-few-scientists-who-wont-deny-being-deniers
“I see NASA JPL has just confirmed the PDO phase shift.”
Which is very interesting. The shift has only just happened – well maybe 8 months ago – and the temperature trend line for the last 10 years is flat. If this shift is indeed decadal, give or take a few years, then we should see quite a few scurrying AGWers. Of course if they blame the coming downturn on the PDO, then they have to accept the fact that the favorite time period that they use as proof of AGW was also an outcome of PDO. Calling us denialists will become a great joke when we see the levels of denying reality that the AGWers are going to contort themselves through.
“Perhaps we should licence denialists and make them wear location bracelets.”
You know there’s not much point in having me call you people left wing fascists when you make it so apparent without my having to say anything.
“Phil Chapman was clearly talking about Cycle 24 sunpots at high solar latitude so Karoly talks about total sunspots including the few low latitude spots of cycle 23 to say “it’s just wrong”.”
Right. The fact that a few small cycle 23 sunspots continue to pop up once in a while simply means that it will take that much longer before the official switchover from 23 to 24 occurs. And the trend, although it’s not guaranteed, is that the longer a solar cycle is, the weaker the next solar cycle will be.
The few lonely 23 sunspots that have appeared, as well as the 2 tiny cycle 24 sunspots, have been hardly enough to move the TSI index at all. The sun is taking a nice nap at the moment, an it looks like it will continue a while longer.