IN the documentary, ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, Al Gore used the tale of a frog in a warming container not jumping out, but rather boiling to death, as a caution against inaction, against letting small changes, small increases in temperature, go unaddressed.
But what if, since the movie was released in 2006, there has been a small drop in temperature?
****************
Notes and Links
According to Victor Hutchinson, University of Oklahoma, Department of Zoology, the story about the frog boiling is incorrect, the ‘critical thermal maxima’ for many species of frog have been determined. Unless there is a lid on the pot, the frog will jump out. http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.asp
Each month GORE LIED documents the temperature change since Al Gore released his science fiction movie An Inconvenient Truth at the Sundance Film Festival on January 24, 2006, which we call the Al Gore / AIT Index. http://algorelied.com/?p=1502
More Blunt cartoon by Knutz can be found here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/tag/humour/ . Scroll down, click on the titles for the cartoon.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
the “boiled frog” scenario has been used over and over – so has the world is heading for a climatic “tipping point”.
Both are wrong yet they continue to exist, what’s that saying about continuing a lie?
A scientist neighbour of mine said yesterday, “this is the warmest June we’ve ever had” and after I reminded him that we’d had a couple of big frosts early, along with a very wet month and though our minima were a bit high with the rain, our maxima were quite low, he reluctantly agreed.
Whether the frog stays in the pot or not, I’m sure some people’s minds just wanna be there.
And anyway, we don’t want any facts today thanks.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5664069/Polar-bear-expert-barred-by-global-warmists.html
i can t verify the “boiling frog” parable. but i hope that most of you understood the meaning.
but i have serious doubts about what Hutchinston says.
“‘critical thermal maxima’” is defined, as the temperature at which 50% of the species survive. (biology of amphibians, page 212)
http://books.google.de/books?id=CzxVvKmrtIgC&pg=PA211&lpg=PA211&dq=%E2%80%98critical+thermal+maxima%E2%80%99++frog&source=bl&ots=AWK7gbowjU&sig=AEieoittY8RK7-alWYBJRus5Stk&hl=en&ei=vR1HSu-UJ9OvsAbvxbDXCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8
an experiment based on when the frog jumps out of the pot doesn t make any sense at all.
ps: for most frogs, the Tmax seems to be about 40°C. pretty far from boiling….
Well, we’re all in this pot together, frogs AND us so if you could all get rid of your mycoses, the poor bloody frogs might have a chance.
On the other hand if you put a cat in boiling water,with the lid on, it breeds like crazy. Wot gives?
http://whitehorse-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/warming-s-swarming-whitehorse/
Sorry, I meant to leave this link.
http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2007/10/nz-scientists-find-cure-for-frog-killer-fungus/
Holy Cats!!
So it IS AGW that’s killing our wildlife!
So warmists have to assume AGW helps mammals but not reptiles! Sounds like a good thing to me hope it also kills big ones. I note sod comments about it being a parable. Ahem what more can a true believer say, praise to the Goracle.
Just saw something on the news an expert claiming it’s not GW because cats breed according to the length of the day. Bugger obviously humans are changing the length of the day with emmision. Wonder if we should tell her or ask Wong for a research grant.
speaking of small changes, I ran into a long time nemisis of mine the other day, Neil J. King.
Don’t worry about it if you don’t recognize the name. He’s an obstinate old alarmist who likes to argue and he sort of got me started on it too (someone had to stop him).
Anyhow I hadn’t seen Neil make a comment on a blog for a year or so, then there he is on the SF Examiner directing the neophyte alarmists to check out an Aussie site called skepticalscience.com , “to get the real story on bogus skeptical arguments” (<a ref=”http://www.skepticalscience.com/”link).
Two things are notable about this. First, about a month before I started reading Jen I went over to skeptical science and trashed the dude. He literally doesn’t know “come here” from “sicc’um”.
The only advantage he has, not too many people know about his site.
Second, and this is the key point, Neil J. King is pointing neophytes to an obscure Aussie crank.
Why not RealClimate?
Why not Eli?
Why not terrible Tim Lambert?
Something happened to those sites. I think their credit card has been revolked, or maybe our side has discredited them so much the average alarmist doesn’t want to get the funky finger by pointing their way.
“Something happened to those sites. I think their credit card has been revolked, or maybe our side has discredited them so much the average alarmist doesn’t want to get the funky finger by pointing their way.”
I must have missed it.
“an obscure Aussie crank.” is an ex physicist majoring at in Solar Physics Queensland Uni. When he was told to read something by Inhofe, he instantly realised the rubbish that denialists serve up needs to debunked.
James “I ran into a long time nemisis of mine the other day, Neil J. King.”
He’s OK then. I haven’t seen him since he grumbled about getting non-zero air pressure where there is no air in one of his calculations. I tried to warn him that something like that would happen.
Why an ex physicist? Could it be because he’s a dip? A cumquat head? Has snicker doodle for brains?
I’m tell’in ya the dude is all wet.
Jan – That’s the same reaction I had. It was like “Neil, old boy. Long time no see. Though you might have fallen off a curb and broke a hip or somethin.”
The frog parable is technically called gradualism: it is a mean used (in politics and other fields) to make you accept, slight by slight (small steps) what you would have not accepted if presented as a whole. I find it ironic that the parable has been used by All Gone in its movie to support the ideological green agenda.
Bye,
TMTisFree
Well James,
“Two things are notable about this. First, about a month before I started reading Jen I went over to skeptical science and trashed the dude. He literally doesn’t know “come here” from “sicc’um”. The only advantage he has, not too many people know about his site.”
I am used to denialists trashing science. But I am interested seeing the evidence of your effort at ‘trashing’ so could you help me by posting which thread on skeptical science you carried out your successful ‘trashing’. it wold be good to read so, please, don’t be shy on my account.
Even my 11 year son KNOWS that if a frog is too hot or too cold (in a sun heated pond or in a cold stream), it jumps away. Not Al Gore and his bunch of gullible followers!
But the boiling frog metaphorizes well the absurdity of the AGW dogma : it is junk science used to back the stupid and patronizing asumption that man will do nothing when facing problems, nothing until the elite tells them what’s best to do.
“But the boiling frog metaphorizes well the absurdity of the AGW dogma :”
Good point, Demesure.
When the whole world turns to junk science, what’s left to compare it with and complain about?
Will reality still exist?
Comment from: Jeremy C June 29th, 2009 at 1:34 am
Sure Jeremy, but first could you answer one question for me?
Is there a difference between the temperature on the Sun’s equator and the temperature on the Sun’s pole?
I’m talking about the photosphere, not the corona or the chromosphere.
Yes or no.
It’s not a trick question.
I just want to get you on record before we all see the trash.
Righto…. Just running an experiment…. I am going to test Gores other assertion, that if you chuck a frog in boiling water it will “jump out”.
I have 8 large Green tree frogs outside me bathroom window(I leave th’ light on for em so they get plenty of bugs). One of which I have captured and placed in a bucket.
I have a pot of water boiling furiously on the gas burner……
I am now reaching into the bucket containing our experimental subject….. attempting to get hold of th’ darn thing… oops… nggg…. Gotcha!
I am now approaching the pot of boiling water….. reaching out…. Stop struggling fer crying out loud…. You’ll be fine frog. Gore said.
Righto, Frog awayyyy……….
……Er?
Umm… Thirty seconds in the boiling water….. No apparent attempt by aforementioned frog to escape….
3 mins….. Frog is now white.
10 mins… Back leg has detached from body….. That’s gonna make it more difficult.
12 hours……. gas has run out…. pot has melted…. Frog does appear to have gone.
Conclusion: If you heat a frog long enough…. It will disappear;-)
Disclaimer: (no frogs were harmed in this experiment…… Cross my heart.)
Mr Hansford I really feel must admonish you to remember to place a warning that children under age of 16 and SJT should not attempt that experiment without adult supervision, and to use only chocolate frogs.
We will get more mileage from abusing the spineless insect compromisers at this point. Its most important that no-one lets an alleged conservative of the hook for CO2-bedwetting appeasement.
Here is a typical example of this behavior.
“Oh fuck, we’re back to carrying around liquid coal again.
Bird, you bonehead, the idea is to have no emissions transport.
Nuke synthetic diesel wouldn’t exactly do that, would it, doofus?”
This was the idiot Joe Cambria. Who has never explained ever why anyone would be stupid enough to push for no emissions transport. Follow my example. I just rang his South Yarra number to give him an ear-blasting but the stupid prick wouldn’t pick up the phone.
Its the appeasing scum that are 90% of the problem right now.
Graeme, you should realise what you are doing may be bordering on illegal activity. It’s no wonder he’s not picking up.
To Spangled Drongo
When the whole world turns to junk science, what’s left to compare it with and complain about?
Will reality still exist?
Only according to computer modelling.
Now James,
All I asked for was a steer to the thread on skeptical science where you said you undertook some ‘trashing’. It doesn’t require you to provide a diversion. Don’t be shy, give us the thread and let us decide for ourselves………
Jeremy
I don’t want to give my secret identity away for free. You know the cost of admission. It’s a reasonable rate.
How curious are you?
I did the experiment in the other direction – the frog in the bowl went into the freezer.
Know what? It works that way. Just like Al Gore said, the frog never moved. Turned into a popsicle.
Yeah but what happens when you thaw him out?
Hops away happy. Just like in the movie.
Your results may vary. 😉
Al wouldn’t like that.
Here’s a little background.
“All of a sudden… well, not quite all of a sudden, but recently… I have noticed my liberal friends (except for the most extreme and knee-jerk) are not very interested in discussing man-made global warming. The subject rarely comes up and, when it does, it is passed over quickly, given only a nod. It’s as if that was last year’s – or last decade’s – fad…”
Excerpted from Roger L. Simon’s post My liberal friends don’t want to talk about global warming anymore.
Rodger is a mystery writer, screenwriter and CEO of Pajamas Media. He lives in Hollywood, the district of Henry Waxman.
“Graeme, you should realise what you are doing may be bordering on illegal activity. It’s no wonder he’s not picking up.”
I guess you are right. But notice that I telegraphed all over. So as not to cause him any unquantifiable mystery that would cause any real distress.
I’ve had phone-ringing campaigns launched against me that wound up involving my girls and setting up a real tense atmosphere. An unknown quantity and a situation of fear.
Its not pretty you know. Think about what your co-religionists might have done to the blog-owner?
Think about it?
You should think about it!
This sort of stuff is not funny you know. Cambria now knows who was trying to ring him. He can assure his family with great confidence that there is nothing to worry about. With people who I suspect may be on your side of the fence ………….. people on my side of the argument don’t necessarily get that peace of mind.
Your view of the science is wrong. And you maybe want to dissassociate yourself from the movement. They are not just hotheads like me. I calm down. But these people are malign.
You may be judged by the company you keep.