The fact that the developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean temperature anomaly of a few tenths of a degree will astound future generations. Such hysteria simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public … Read more here… from Richard Lindzen at Quadrant Online.
Footer
About Me
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Read morePayPal
He is either an idiot or a liar, becuase any climatologist would know why he is wrong on every single one of his claims.
For example
“The fact that the developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean temperature anomaly of a few tenths of a degree will astound future generations.”
He knows perfectly well the mean temperature is a very simple summarisation of the state of the climate, and contains such events as the 47 degree heat in Victoria that caused extreme stress.
Notice how our AGW true belivers are unable to do more than deny any merit or honesty in the opinion and argument of a world class climatolgist, simply because he disagrees with the alarmism at the basis of AGW.
In the Orwellian processes that pass for thought in AGW hysterics, ‘not believing in the catastrophe’ = ‘bad person’.
The AGW community has painted itself into a tiny corner, where immature, thoughtless reaction is confused for understanding.
Note especially how, despite all claims to the contrary, AGW hysteria depends on cherry picking weather events.
The only interesting question left is whether or not the AGW political movement will fall apart sufficiently by Copenhagen to prevent the worthless policies being pushed by the social movement to be derailed. The question of ‘is AGW meaningful science?’ has been answered for awhile- it is not.
SJT “He is either an idiot or a liar, becuase any climatologist would know why he is wrong on every single one of his claims”.
This is your problem, SJT, and you really need to deal with it. Lindzen is one of the world’s authorities on atmospheric physics. He has 40 years experience in the field and he teaches at MIT. I don’t think you even begin to understand the immensity of that. MIT is ‘THE’ engineering school in the world. Most people don’t have the intelligence to qualify for MIT let alone teach there.
You and your AGW cronies are always on about peer reviewed literature. Why don’t you check how many peer reviewed papers Lindzen has in supposedly reputable journals? There must be over 200 papers. Suddenly this climate hysteria rears its ugly head and he has trouble getting a paper published. When one is accepted, they go over it with a fine-toothed comb, a practice he wonders about. I don’t. It’s obvious there is collusion to push this stupid and hysterical disaster theory based on climate models, and keeping people like Lindzen, Spencer and Christy out of print is part of their suppression of real science.
The statement you make at the end of your post regarding mean temperature leads me to the assumption that you have no idea what it means. What Lindzen is claiming is exactly what is happening. The IPCC put out that mean globally-averages temperature of a few tenths of a degree and you are revealing that you don’t have a clue what even they are on about.
You acknowledge that mean temperature is a simple summarization yet you complain at Lindzen’s association between that and the hysterics taking place. Which one don’t you understand? Global warming ‘IS’ that simple summarization…it’s a stupid, simple, mathematically-averaged generalization of world temperatures that have both warmed and cooled. There is absolutely nothing to it yet people are going into hysterics over it.
What Lindzen says about the manipulation of the record is also true. He claims people like Santer, who is a bigwig in AGW circles, wants to rewrite temperature records to bring them in line with the models. Santer was one of those responsible for discrediting satellite data.
When are you going to clue in, or is that too much to ask? You have been royally jobbed by charlatans and outright stupid people, yet you think the voice of reason, in Lindzen, is the culprit.
“It is not just a Sydney story. The most telling detail lost amid all that was written and broadcast about the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria, which killed 173 people, was that more people died from heat stress in Melbourne than in the fires. During the oven-like temperature peak (three consecutive days above 43 degrees) Melbourne saw a spike of 1400 emergencies requiring an ambulance.
An extra 374 people died in Victoria that week compared to the average week. Most were heat stress related.”
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/global-warming/we-are-stewing-in-our-own-oven-20090726-dxew.html
Lindzen knows this is what contributes to that average rise, he’s not stupid.
SJT,
So now the AGW true believer falls back on weather picking.
The pattern is so predictable and so sleazy.
Cool is weather, hot is climate.
“SJT,
So now the AGW true believer falls back on weather picking.
The pattern is so predictable and so sleazy.
Cool is weather, hot is climate.”
It is periods of extreme heat like that which will become more common. They constitute the package of rising temperature.
SJT,
What a load of circular non-falsifiable rubbish you believe in.