JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

Australian Environment Conference Oct 20 2012


micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Elizabeth Muller (Director of BEST) ran a “Green government” consultancy. Just how impartial was BEST?

How independent is this project?

Would BEST have ever seriously published a study showing anything other than a scary warming trend?

This is emblematic of how fans of Climate Change Scares present their efforts with half-truths — lines that are technically “correct” but leave an impression that may be the opposite of the real situation.

Elizabeth Muller is listed as “Founder and Executive Director” of the Berkeley Earth Team along with her father Richard Muller. But since 2008 it appears she’s been earning money as a consultant telling governments how to implement green policies, how to reduce their carbon footprint and how to pick “the right technologies” – presumably meaning the right “Green” technologies.

Mullers Daughter Elizabeth registered “GreenGov” in 2008

Richard and Elizabeth Muller.  Image: Paul Sakuma/AP

She registered their website and tried to register the trademark herself.

“GreenGov™ is a service offered by Muller & Associates for Governments, International Organizations, non profits, and other organizations that work with Government. The aim is to provide politically-neutral counsel that is broad in scope while rooted in the hard facts of state-of-the-art science and engineering. The key is to make the right patch between the best technologies and the strengths of the government. We know that to be effective the political dimension must be integrated into the technical plan from the start.”

Muller and Associates helps investors profit from investments in alternative energy.

From her “speakers profile”:

“GreenGov provides interdisciplinary knowledge that helps clients determine the best technology for their specific need.
Elizabeth has designed and implemented projects for public sector clients in the developed and in the developing world, helping them to build new policies and strategies for government reform and modernization, collaboration across government ministries and agencies, and strategies for the information society. She has developed numerous techniques for bringing government actors together to build consensus and implement action plans, and has a proven ability to deliver sustainable change in government.”

“Green can be profitable”

“Making Green ICT a Government priority”

“It’s not just about reducing the Carbon footprint for information and communication technologies – though this is also important. But the real breakthrough for Green ICT will be in helping build consensus among stakeholders, and to bring clarity and transparency to “Green” projects.”

Strangely, Elizabeth forgot to mention this on her Berkeley Biography. She said she has advised governments, but not that the aim of that advice was to reduce their carbon footprint, and to select the right green technology. The current organization she lists on her Bio is called CSTransform which is neutrally vague about its aims, except that it’s obviously feeding off Big-Government, so scientific results that suggested that Governments don’t need to save the world by taxing and charging people would not seem to be her first priority. In her bio on the CSTransform site, it does mention her green desires: Elizabeth Muller is a ” leading expert in how governments can use ICT to develop a more sustainable, lower-carbon future. Evidently she has not had a skeptical conversion anytime in the last four years, but was happy to work with her Dad, which presumably would have been a very non-obvious thing to do if he was a “skeptic” as he claims he was.

Naturally Elizabeth would be delighted to discover that there was little evidence that a low carbon future was beneficial, necessary or even worth promoting and we are sure she would have overseen BEST in an utterly impartial light. /sarc

Muller and Associates repeat that they are “politically neutral” and “non-partisan”, but it’s obvious that they benefit from big-government policies, and the bigger the better. It would be hard to imagine them welcoming political policies aiming for a smaller government. That would rather turn off the tap, eh?

Perhaps most damning of all (in terms of their judgement) is that Richard Muller and Elizabeth Muller thought they could get away with it. Did it really not occur to them that skeptics would not find their alarmist comments and green companies on the world wide web? Did they really think they would escape with their credibility intact?

 

Bottom line: Of course, none of this personal information tells us anything about the accuracy of the BEST results, or about the global climate, but it does tell us about the accuracy of the message and PR announcements. BEST stress that they are independent and transparent and non-profit, but don’t mention that Elizabeth’s career has profited from findings that support the “climate change scare”. The BEST team are happy for the media to rave about how Richard Muller was “converted” (even though he was never really skeptical) but not too keen to say that Elizabeth has confirmed her strongly held position in spades.

From the BEST FAQ (my bolding)

“Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature aims to contribute to a clearer understanding of global warming based on a more extensive and rigorous analysis of available historical data.”

We believe that science is nonpartisan and our interest is in getting a clear view of the pace of climate change in order to help policy makers to evaluate and implement an effective response. In choosing team members, we engage people whose primary interests are finding answers to the current issues and addressing the legitimate concerns of the critics on all sides. None of the scientists involved has taken a public political stand on global warming. “

 It also tells us something about people who write off skeptical results because they are supposedly “funded by big oil”, but rave about the BEST project. If they are so concerned about “vested interests” why do they only protest about one sort of “interest”?

Thanks to the person who sent the tip. I can’t find your email to thank you! Sorry :-(

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (93 votes cast)
Elizabeth Muller (Director of BEST) ran a "Green government" consultancy. Just how impartial was BEST?, 9.3 out of 10 based on 93 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/blv4snr

128 comments to Elizabeth Muller (Director of BEST) ran a “Green government” consultancy. Just how impartial was BEST?

  • #
    Fred

    He must have been a skeptic that look’s awfully like a sign saying THE COMING ICE AGE in the corner of the photo.(sark off)


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Joe V.

      Well spotted there Fred.
      Now did that sign just happen to be there, in shot but unnoticed at the time or was it deliberately included in the angle to create such an impression ?
      We shall probably never know but it’s so much more fun to speculate anyway.

      I’d tend to think what was the picture published to promote.

      Let’s not forget that Prof Muller may well be genuine in his conviction in global warming, but is it as new found as he suggests or he remembers.

      I think that knowing stare says it all, but then again that’s just what I’m reading into it whereas it could mean anything – like eg. the apparent CO2 vs Temp. correlation could also.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Mattb

      why would such a sign not be a treasured piece of skeptical memorabilia?

      “Ha, scientists used to think an ice age was coming in the 1970s…. logic gap… scientists must be wrong now too.” is not that uncommon.


      Report this

      10

      • #
        BobC

        Mattb
        August 1, 2012 at 7:18 pm · Reply
        why would such a sign not be a treasured piece of skeptical memorabilia?

        “Ha, scientists used to think an ice age was coming in the 1970s…. logic gap… scientists must be wrong now too.” is not that uncommon.

        Great piece of reasoning there, Mattb. I’m sure that trumps everything Muller actually said and did.

        But then, you are an expert on “logic gaps”.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        ghl

        He just changed gravy trains when necessary.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Pat Kelly

      Whatever about the sign, take a look at the general run of the office. How could anything useful come out of that mayhem?


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Joe V.

        My office used to be a lot worse than that.
        Since moving to a tidy new office with a ‘clean desk’ policy, I keep everything on the floor, but never spend any time there because I can no longer think.
        .
        Administrators like to arrange, to see order, neatness and simplicity while the brilliant creative types need the inspiration that comes from piles of chaos.
        .
        A tidy desk is a sign of a disturbed mind .


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Allen Ford

      a sign saying THE COMING ICE AGE in the corner of the photo.

      It’s in the top centre, not a corner. Had me puzzled for a bit until I did a detailed look, all over.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    AndyG55

    Isn’t running a “Green” business and also being a major “climate change” (lol) advisor to government a Massive conflict of interest?
    (plenty of it going about, though)

    This BEST report is looking more and more like a major con, engineered from the outset.

    I hope they get nailed for it.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Yes, it is a bit like being a thief and, at the same time, advising the police on how to reduce the level of crime.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        Careful there Rereke, that is starting to sound an awful lot like one of those conspiracy theories that you don’t believe in.

        Haha, I jest of course. It’s a conspiracy fact, which started well before 1992.

        A choice quote from that first link:

        It was not a month before the New York Times article appeared about David de Rothschild’s travels, the PR Newswire announced that “Rothschild Australia and E3 International are set to become key players in the international carbon credit trading market, an emerging commodity market that analysts estimate could be worth up to US$150 billion by 2012.”

        At the risk of Link Overload… the Rothschilds own your weather, in a roundabout way. They don’t want to take over the entire world, just 30% of the world will be fine thanks. (archived page) And we’ll pay them to do it! Very clever people those Rothschilds.


        Report this

        00

      • #

        Thieves often give very good advice on breaking and entering, because they are experts in their field. The police will go to the most successful, with a proven track record. When has a green policy consultant given good advice? Have any got a proven track record of significantly reducing carbon emissions? Or have promoted policies that don’t enrich the bankers, and “alternatives to cheap and reliable” energy firms at the expense of the rest of the population?


        Report this

        00

    • #
      crakar24

      AndyG,

      And the biggest con of all (engineered from the outset)………….the carbon tax


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Speedy

        Crakar

        And the exquisite irony is that the government – who promoted the con – were conned themselves. Or were they???

        Surely they wouldn’t be willing accomplices – they’re on our side – right?

        Cheers,

        Speedy.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    llew Jones

    Is there one single alarmist climate scientist who is not first and foremost a climate activist of some sort and whose activism produces the very obvious bias in their research results?


    Report this

    01

  • #

    Definitely a conflict of interest. I wonder how much she is kicking back to Daddy?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    J.H.

    Sheesh…. the interconnectedness of the Greenies, socialist bureaucracy and troughs of handy Government money. Somebody ought to write a paper on it one day…..;-)

    It always surprises me, and I know it shouldn’t, is the way that the Socialists and the ecofascists lie, deceive and cheat, completely secure in the knowledge that the mainstream media will cover for them and deflect any scrutiny.

    Imagine if a coal mining magnate had associations with government and taxpayer funding the same as the Green energy industry has….. The media would be a baying, slobbering mass of “journalistic” energy, with headlines running for weeks.

    But when there is green, union or Labor scandals or malpractice…… The silence is deafening.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    .
    And I’ll bet Elizabeth would dearly love to erase the following from her father’s record:

    In most fields of science, researchers who express the most self-doubt and who understate their conclusions are the ones that are most respected. Scientists regard with disdain those who play their conclusions to the press. [emphasis added -hro]

    Richard Muller, December 17, 2003

    Physicist, heal thyself!

    Source of the above and more Mullerisms™ she might wish he’d never uttered at Will the real Richard Muller please stand up


    Report this

    00

    • #
      crakar24

      A bit quick with the gold star dont you think Oggi?


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        The trend, unless I am very much mistaken, is that Oggi loves a short sharp shock, especially if the target’s own words are used against them.

        For mass communication purposes, hypocrisy is a lot easier to digest than being told of the statistical (eyes glaze over) and quality control shenanigans that added 0.15°C/decade to the USA land temperature trend. Most people would hear that number and think “Is that all? is that worth worrying about??” without realising it doubled the Scary Global Warming trend.
        It’s not a PhD thesis but it’s not without topical merit either when you consider it in the context of Jo’s article.


        Report this

        00

        • #

          Andrew,

          …a short sharp shock…

          Nothing like a touch of Floyd.

          Oddly, the whole phrase is quite apt here.

          “You know they’re gonna kill ya. So, like… if you give ‘em a quick short, sharp shock, they don’t do it again. Dig it? I mean he got off light, ‘cos I could’ve given him a thrashing – I only hit him once! It’s only a difference of right and wrong, isn’t it? I mean, good manners don’t cost nothin’, do they? Hey!”

          Quietly spoken voice over by their road manager from Us And Them off The Dark Side Of The Moon.

          Tony.


          Report this

          00

      • #
        crakar24

        The comment was a bit tongue in cheek and i get 4 thumbs down? this is a tough crowd.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    “Green can be profitable”

    If that’s your message and you want to burn it into brains, you do it the following agnostic way. (Because I don’t use this method, I fail. Really, I don’t approve of it but it’s another view).

    CAUTION: RATHER ADULT MATERIAL. SNIP AS YOU FEEL. “Abortion is Green”, he says.

    The message is right at the end, ready for several pollies to contemplate.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkgDhDa4HHo


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    I dont see why we are all surprised, its not like she is the first person to profit handsomely from her own lies.

    They produce a (questionable) dataset showing warming then offer a fix

    Flannery talks of fire and brimestone then offers a fix, hence the name “The King of Geothermia” plus 90 million of your money from his partner in crime KRudd.

    The railroad engineer cum romance novelist talks the talk via the IPCC then offers a fix and watches his personal fortune quadruple through TERI.

    We have Hansen scaring the shit out of little children with booga booga getting a generous pay packet from NASA whilst he freelances on their dime.

    Al Gore who kicked it all then produce a market to fix the problem which of course he was in control off.

    And this is the fraud WE KNOW ABOUT, but still Gates et al still follow by defending this fraud ans castif=gating Watts and the like, here in Oz we have a saying about people like him “So dumb they would not know if you where up em”.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      crakar24

      ans castif=gating

      I need to get a keyboard with bigger keys, either that or i admit to my failings as a typist and slow down a bit as the old “hunt and peck method” is not all that reliable. LOL


      Report this

      00

    • #
      gai

      I dont see why we are all surprised, its not like she is the first person to profit handsomely from her own lies.

      They produce a (questionable) dataset showing warming then offer a fix….

      Actually they did not even do that. They CONNED Anthony Watts out of his Surface Station Data, did a bogus quick statistical analysis, thereby stealing Anthony’s work and thunder and with Koch’s Brother funding produced the biggest piece of propaganda going.

      “Climate Skeptic” repents and sees the light!

      If you do not think the Mullers made $$$$ out of this scam I have a bridge I want to sell.

      A Private “Consulting Company” is the best Money Laundering mechanism I can think of. Democrat, Rosa DeLauro uses her hubby’s consulting firm to launder the money from Monsanto she received for selling out US Farmers. (Stan Greenberg is Hubby) link DeLauro went from working class to one of the richest people in Congress. You do not do that without “Connections”


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Bulldust

    Two points:

    “We believe that science is nonpartisan and our interest is in getting a clear view of the pace of climate change in order to help policy makers to evaluate and implement an effective response…”

    If CAGW is a non-event then nothing needs to be implemented. The fact that they suggest a response needs implementing almost pre-supposes the findings.

    None of the scientists involved has taken a public political stand on global warming.

    None of the trendies have called it global warming in ages… it is entirely possible they alll supported action on “climate change” which is obviously entirely different…

    Do I even need sarc tags?


    Report this

    00

  • #

    It’s a big trough folks. Plenty of room for a pair of rent seeking carpet bagging porcine father daughter team.
    A pox on both their houses. I curse them and all that’s theirs for generations to come.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    “Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature aims to contribute to a clearer understanding of global warming based on a more extensive and rigorous analysis of available historical data.” (My bold)

    Didn’t the alarmists alter the message from global warming to climate change some time ago because the spin merchants said “climate change” sounded “less biased”?

    Perhaps BEST was not on the mailing list for the memo?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    MangoChutney

    I curse them and all that’s theirs for generations to come.

    Not sure this is what the climate scientologists mean by “think about the children”

    ;)


    Report this

    00

  • #

    The “once I was lost but now am found” trickaroonie is oh so evident. Just like the faith healers’ ring ins to encourage people to the faith.

    In this age of the Internet frauds are easily exposed.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Aren’t these claims of :

    ” I used to be a skeptic”

    ‘consistent’ with the revisionist behaviour that has been demonstrated time & time again, in ‘adjusting’ the past temperature record, to accord with todays preferred view of reality,
    with the ‘benefit’ of hindsight. Don’t let’s forget that a lot of the detail & reasons for things can easily be lost sight of, in the ‘benefit’ of hindsight and through the fog of government funding etc.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Phil Ford

    Investigative journalism at work, folks. This is how it’s done. Go after the facts and the story will write itself. Well done, Jo – certainly opened my eyes over the Muller affair. After so much hyperbole and shameless spin from Richard Muller across the world’s obsequious lame stream media (really, what else did I expect?), at least we have the well-researched background details now and can properly contextualize his wildly alarmist comments regarding CAGW.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    That photo…surely it’s crying out for a caption competition!


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Popeye

      OK = I’ll start

      Father to daughter (pointing to globe):

      “Here’s where we’re going to have to hide honey, once they find out we’re full of lies & BS!!”

      Cheers,


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Mark D.

        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the numbers and statistics in His hands
        He’s got the numbers and statistics in His hands
        He’s got the numbers and statistics in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the warmists and the taxers in His hands
        He’s got the warmists and the taxers in His hands
        He’s got the warmists and the taxers in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the Leftists and the Greenies in His hands
        He’s got the Leftists and the Greenies in His hands
        He’s got the Leftists and the Greenies in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the MSM duped and in His hands
        He’s got the MSM duped and in His hands
        He’s got the MSM duped and in his hands
        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        He’s got the whole Gaia in His hands
        He’s got the whole Gaia in His hands
        He’s got the whole Gaia in His hands
        He’s got the whole Gaia in His hands

        He’s got the whole world in His hands

        (old gospel tune)


        Report this

        00

    • #

      Okay, I’ll start with a caption.

      “Sorry, dad, be a skeptic again. I blinked.”


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Truthseeker

      By the look on their faces, the caption should read …

      “What planet is this again?”


      Report this

      00

      • #

        Actually, by the looks on their faces (He amazed, she thinking “you lost the plot dad”)…

        He: “It really is round”

        (The photo supposedly captures the moment Muller changed from being a sceptic)


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Joe V.

        “Is a tidy desk really the sign of a disturbed mind ? ”

        That globe seems more at risk of getting lost on his desk, than from any effects of global warming.


        Report this

        00

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      “Uh… Daddy… did you just create a little…local warming?”

      :D

      Sorry I took the low road this time.

      Actually my vote is for Popeye’s comment. Looks like he’s pointing to Costa Rica. Not a bad choice for a hideaway if you can avoid the dinosaurs, except Liz will have to shack up with one…
      No I’m not being nasty about his age. A notable characteristic of dinosaurs is that their careers all ended suddenly with a global cooling… ;)


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Mark Hladik

      “We have but one choice, Frodo; we must destroy the Pacific Ring of Fire in Mount Climate-Change-Doom, or Sauron-Dioxide will surely use it against us!”


      Report this

      00

    • #

      “No, Liz, it has to be Brazil. What part of ‘extradition’ don’t you understand?”


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Joe V.

      Or : “Do you think we should keep it in the fridge ? “


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Twodogs

      The world is round?? Since when?!


      Report this

      00

    • #

      “Okay, Liz, I did try skepticism once. But I didn’t inhale.”


      Report this

      00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Go guys – play the man!


    Report this

    00

    • #
      KeithH

      If that’s so John, we join illustrious company. This Facebook comment on Muller from the Prince of Self-Aggrandisement himself, Michael Mann. “this is all really about Richard Muller’s self-aggrandizement”. You can access the links through http://www.climatedepot.com/


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Popeye

      AND his daughter – geez you can’t even get that right!!!

      Cheers,


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Joe V.

      Really I have the greatest respect for Professor Muller. He’s just confused, at best and wouldn’t you be with a desk like that ?

      Absent mindedness is my greatest scientific qualification.


      Report this

      00

    • #

      John,

      In most areas conflicts of interest have to be declared and where there known conflicts, a work around is made. In auditing, for instance, there is a separation of duties, and clearly laid down rules. In democratic parliaments, members interests have to be declared and known conflicts are not allowed to occur. In international sport, the umpires/referees have codes of conduct to insure independence and/or have to be from a third country. In compiling complex data analysis (such as establishing the efficacy of a new pharmaceutical drug) laid down standards and independent verification are insisted upon. A judge in a criminal trial will ensure that they have no interest in the outcome.
      In none of these cases is the integrity of the individuals called into question, just the possibility that someone could take advantage.
      Yet when it comes to “advisers” on “green” public policy, vested interests, and blinkered viewpoints are seen as an asset. It is now acceptable to spend the greatest effort (and public money on blocking independent evaluation of the science, and even declaring dissenters nutjobs.
      It is time climatology was subjected to the standards of the real world.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      AndyG55

      Why not, he is OBVIOUSLY trying to play us, and the moronic media.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Otter

      How do you manage to stop swinging the beaing stick long enough to type?


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Ross James

    [Comment snipped - Ross if you are going to make wild smears like that then you should provide some substantiation. That is, actually point out a factual error in the post perhaps? - Mod]


    Report this

    00

  • #

    I’ve intimated this before and I’ll do so again. We can see the chicanery of this but we too few to make the slightest impression. I love this website because it represents the best of what we could be, but the truth is we have little impact on the debate. We are like concentration camp inmates wandering around and reassuring each other at the injustice of it all. These people are beyond redemption and have the ear of a willing and complicit media. We need a united and international front. People who join what I would call fringe movements like Greenpeace are basically at the very least naive and eccentric and at worst fascists, and yet people like them are at the forefront of the debate!! Where is our fourth estate? Isn’t it their job to find the hidden turds?. By the way, to Mr John Brookes, we will play the man because he is playing all of us. I don’t know how you and “Adam Smith” (whatever that entity is, are you an off the bench reserve replacement?) can look at yourselves in a mirror. Do you not have a single jot of doubt in your mind, and if you did, would you dismiss it out of hand for fear of threat to your tribal mentality.


    Report this

    00

    • #
    • #
      Andrew McRae

      The Carbon Liberation Front??
      All we need now is the secret financial backing of people who stand to make a lot of money out of petrol and coal-fired electricity. Hmmmm, let me think… oh I know… how about EVERYBODY.

      The revolution will not be televised, but it will be on YouTube.


      Report this

      00

    • #
      John Brookes

      Ceetee, I have my doubts, but you don’t seem to have any. You seem entirely convinced that its all a scam. And no doubt you can justify this to yourself.

      So relax, put your feet up. Don’t bother keeping up with climate research, because you already know the truth.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        KeithH

        John. In relation to climate research, may I suggest you read the excellent testimony of John Christy at the second link provided by Markus Fitzhenry @ 19.4.1. There are valuable lessons in there from which proponents of both sides of this debate could learn, especially in the tendency to attribute any extreme natural event as “proof” or otherwise of their particular view of either global warming or cooling and the causes thereof.

        IMO he also nails the reason for legitimate scepticism of AGW.
        Quote: “The non-falsifiable hypotheses can be stated this way ‘whatever happens is consistent with my hypothesis’! In other words there is no event that would ‘falsify’ the hypothesis. As such, these assertions cannot be considered science or in any way informative since the hypothesis’ fundamental prediction is ‘anything may happen’”. Unquote.

        John, please read it as I’ll be very interested in your opinion of it after doing so.


        Report this

        00

    • #

      ceetee, I know it seems like that but the big changes sweep through quietly. With climategate we didn’t know until a year later that environmental journalists were treated differently in the newsroom afterwards. We heard silence, but a year later they admitted other editors and journos’ started looking at them sideways. We don’t know which financial advisor reads here, emails a friend who tells another friend, and investments are pulled from EU carbon markets. They won’t issue a press release. From feedback I get I’m becoming more and more convinced that a few key influential people are getting our message, and this class of thinkers who are smart and upstanding have earned their reputation the hard way. They are not fooled, and never paid attention. We are getting their attention. The phase shift is coming. :-) But yes, sometimes it does seem like a wall of stupid, a mountain of money, and a vast abyss of apathy out there.

      Something is going on at the SMH. This week for the first time they rang me to ask my opinion. And there are two other events… I’ll mention soon. Something is going on…


      Report this

      00

    • #
      Twodogs

      I’ve long abandoned debating AGW without making a determination of the agenda and/or political affiliation of its proponents. The entire scam is simply part of the socialist agenda, so therefore its proponents are either tyrants-in-waiting or useful idiots. The links between the green movement and nazism is profound (http://www.martindurkin.com/blogs/nazi-greens-inconvenient-history). The incredulity of green supporters at such history is testament to their ignorance. John Brooks and Adam Smith will no doubt dismiss it as some sort of neocon plot, but the history is clear and the case compelling.

      I am in search of the truth and will gladly become a warmist when their case is compelling, but the undeniable links with Marxism and repression are massive stumbling blocks. We are busy fighting a battle largely already won, while ignoring the war going on behind us. They have systematically infiltrated all levels of government, and in true fascist style, appealed to the hip pockets of big business (in this case banks) to the detriment of the man in the street, whose remaining liberty is at stake.

      The tyrants-in-waiting are not interested in the truth, so there is no point in arguing them on the merits of their arguments (which constantly lose but they never give up) as these are mere sideshows while they undermine us elsewhere. The only question is – which proponents are fair dinkum and which are the would-be tyrants?


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Geoffrey Cousens

    A”prominent” Swiss”skeptic”turned “warmer” a couple of years ago.Research on the guy[by "Climate Realists"]quickly showed he had been a “warmer all along.It makes headlines.Oh so sleazy!This is more of the same.All I know is in ’94 there were[about] 6,500 worldwide temp. recording stations and within about ten years that became 1,500.The data for areas not monitored is extrapolated.And massaged.It stinks.I hope they still teach how photosynthesis acts in third form science at our schools.The blatant brainwashing of our children is insufferable.[I do go on!]
    Well done Joanne Nova!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Fred

    Mattb
    August 1, 2012 at 7:18 pm · Reply

    why would such a sign not be a treasured piece of skeptical memorabilia?
    “Ha, scientists used to think an ice age was coming in the 1970s…. logic gap… scientists must be wrong now too.” is not that uncommon.

    If you work on that premise then you would think that most scientist’s would look at the memorabilia use a modicum of intelligence and think maybe we should do the science right this time, instead what do they do use dumba## political green agenda instead of good science which in the end may kill us all as you can only cry wolf so many times.So Mattb maybe the logic gap is between your ears when you have filled the gap with some logic come back and talk some sense and i will listen.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Sonny

    I’m always amazed at how minor and petty the warmist case is opposing Jo Nova.
    In a free (relatively) forum, in which everybody can have a voice, there is really no substantive opposition to the case Jo makes week in, week out in her numerous well researched, and well argued posts. If only every Australian could see Jo’s site they could came to terms with sheer magnitude of deception, corruption and propaganda which charachterises this era of “global warming” and “climate change”.
    If there was still a Nobel Peace Prize (which was not already made meaningless through the same deception, corruption and propaganda I would have it jointly awarded to Jo Nova, Anthony Watts, Steve Mckintyte and all the countless other scientists who have resisted this evil movement.)


    Report this

    00

    • #
      John Brookes

      Lets see, this post casts doubt on the honesty of someone on the “other side” by questioning their motives. Whoopee doo. Not a lot to respond to is there Sonny?

      resisted this evil movement

      Oh well, if you think scientists doing genuine research is an “evil movement”, there is no point trying to change your views.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        BobC

        John Brookes
        August 1, 2012 at 11:12 pm · Reply

        Lets see, this post casts doubt on the honesty of someone on the “other side” by questioning their motives. Whoopee doo. Not a lot to respond to is there Sonny?

        resisted this evil movement

        Oh well, if you think scientists doing genuine research is an “evil movement”, there is no point trying to change your views.

        One thing about you, John — you never run out of straw to make your strawman arguments with.

        If you think that Sonny was referring to “scientists doing genuine research”, then you are seriously challenged in terms of reading comprehension.

        If you think the rest of us won’t notice your re-definition of Sonny’s argument (to something you think you can respond to), then you are seriously challenged, intelligence-wise.

        The problem you have, John, is that the only arguments you can bring are deliberately mis-interpreting other’s statements (strawman) and uncritically accepting the word of whomever you decide (for whatever reason) is an ‘authority’. You’re bringing as much to this discussion as a gnat to a picnic.

        Meanwhile, many of Jo’s commentors are quite familiar with science and logic and can use same to construct arguments and engage in discussion. For example, many commentors have made cogent criticisms of BEST — I’ve been saying it’s bogus ever since I read their own literature describing the methodology — and now, the reviewers have done a slapdown on it, like I’ve never seen before.

        So up your game, John — read the reviewer’s comments and give us your ‘best’ defense of BEST. Show us you’re capable of logical argument.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Sonny

        Indeed John, not a lot to respond to.
        And yes, global warming and climate change is indeed an evil movement because it has been shown to disregard the standards of scientific ethics. Moreover it promotes a worldview that is not even remotely grounded in reality but instead creates a non existent problem, blames all of humanity for it, then promotes poverty and death for the masses and economic enrichment for the liars and cheats. It is pure evil.


        Report this

        00

      • #
        gai

        HONEST SCIENTISTS????
        Which century are you living in?

        We will start out easy.

        Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

        Abstract Top
        Summary

        There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true….

        Then on to the meat:

        How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data

        …Survey questions on plagiarism and other forms of professional misconduct were excluded. The final sample consisted of 21 surveys that were included in the systematic review, and 18 in the meta-analysis.

        A pooled weighted average of 1.97%… of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once –a serious form of misconduct by any standard– and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, admission rates were 14.12%… for falsification, and up to 72% for other questionable research practices. Meta-regression showed that self reports surveys, surveys using the words “falsification” or “fabrication”, and mailed surveys yielded lower percentages of misconduct. When these factors were controlled for, misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others.

        Considering that these surveys ask sensitive questions and have other limitations, it appears likely that this is a conservative estimate of the true prevalence of scientific misconduct.

        72% of scientists use “questionable research practices.” Sure sounds like “Scientists” are an honest bunch with lots of integrity…. ~ NOT!

        So how about Scientists from the USA like Muller?

        US Scientists Significantly More Likely to Publish Fake Research, Study Finds

        US scientists are significantly more likely to publish fake research than scientists from elsewhere, finds a trawl of officially withdrawn (retracted) studies, published online in the Journal of Medical Ethics….

        - between 2000 and 2010.

        A total of 788 papers had been retracted during this period. Around three quarters of these papers had been withdrawn because of a serious error (545); the rest of the retractions were attributed to fraud (data fabrication or falsification).

        The highest number of retracted papers were written by US first authors (260), accounting for a third of the total. One in three of these was attributed to fraud….

        So much for trusting American Doctors. How about University Proffs? United States Attorney’s Office: Former Penn State Professor Charged in $3 Million Federal Research Grant Fraud

        NETHERLANDS: Dean may face data fraud charges

        A Tilburg University inquiry has recommended that details of forgery of documents and fraud committed by Diederik Stapel, a leading social psychologist, should be passed to the Dutch public prosecution service…

        Some 35 co-authors are implicated in the publications, dating from 2000 to 2006 when he worked at the University of Groningen. In 14 out of 21 PhD theses where Stapel was a supervisor, the theses were written using data that was allegedly fabricated by him…

        The interim report, delivered on 31 October, said that at least 30 of the 150 papers Stapel had published were based on fictitious data….

        Or FDA Drug testing…

        FDA says CRO Cetero faked trial data

        the U.S. Food and Drug Administration describes the falsification as “extensive,” calling into question all bioanalytical data collected by Cetero’s Houston bioanalytical laboratory from April 1, 2005 to June 15, 2010. The FDA said Cetero manipulated test samples so the tests would yield desired results….

        Data falsification is even making the main stream news these days.

        Red wine researcher flagged for fake data

        A University of Connecticut researcher known for his work on the benefits of red wine to heart health falsified his data in more than 100 instances, and nearly a dozen scientific journals are being warned of the potential problems after publishing his studies in recent years, officials said Wednesday.

        UConn officials said their internal review found 145 instances over seven years in which Dr. Dipak Das fabricated and falsified data, and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity has launched an independent investigation of his work.

        Das, a tenured surgery professor and director of UConn Health Center’s Cardiovascular Research Center, has gained national attention

        There are even blogs on Science fraud

        Top Science Scandals of 2011: A list of this year’s most high-profile retractions and controversies in science

        The real biggy in watching Science Fraud is Retraction Watch


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Philip Bradley

          An even bigger problem is methodological and other flaws, which result in the study not supporting the conclusions. Someone I know very well, tells me that in his field, 90% of published papers don’t support their stated conclusions.


          Report this

          00

        • #
          inedible hyperbowl

          Data falsification is even making the main stream news these days.

          Methinks falsifying data should be a hanging offence.


          Report this

          00

  • #

    I found all of Elizabeth’s references to ICT alarming and confirming of her transnational orientation. In the US, the common term is IT. It is UNESCO that uses ICT and they use it constantly as part of their overall transformative social and economic goals around Sustainability and the pilfering from the West Millenium Devt Goals. It comes up in education, the broadband initiative, the Happy Planet Index, and the new World Happiness Report.

    She might as well have worn a T-shirt that said “Seeking to Profit from Global Change Engineered by the Politically Connected Class.”

    And for those wondering why this keeps happening, there was literature back in the 70s on how to use research grants to corrupt the incentives of research universities in the West. When I did the research recently on the Interagency Climate Group in the US, that vision was certainly in high gear.

    And the money is being borrowed from the Chinese to boot. How ironic.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Robin,

      The “C” in “ICT” just stands for “Communication”. It doesn’t stand for “Communism”, or even “Capitalism”, just “Communication”

      And it is that “Communication” that lets an American, read a comment by a New Zealander, on a blog run by an Australian. I think that is kind of cool, and a good way of getting to know what people think in other parts of the world.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Robin, we all live in the one world. The US is just part of it.


    Report this

    00

    • #

      What a disingenuous response.

      I have no problem with the US being part of the world. Few have done a better job in history of making the world a freer place from political tyranny. I reject the idea that the world can be remade around a utopian vision that human nature can or should be changed. I most certainly do not want the UN kleptocratic class designing and running the planning because through Agenda 21 and school accreditation they have their tentacles thoroughly into local and state govts. Plus they are intl. So they are compaigning to be in charge of the mythical Spaceship Earth “emergency.”

      The kind of one world nonsense that requires an ignorance of history as I wrote about here http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/is-accreditation-the-enforcer-for-unescos-vision-of-solidarity/

      The Quality Assurance process and Accreditation are also the enforcers for the UN’s political vision of global Education for Sustainability in the UK and Australia.

      That’s a world of tragedy and servitude for the politically unconnected that awaits down that road.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Beth cooper

    It’s sooo easy being green,
    and lucrative too,
    if yr know whatI mean…


    Report this

    00

  • #

    That’s an interesting picture of Muller and Minimuller. It’s not often you see a Dad looking that scared of his daughter. Perhaps we should go for an appropriate caption. How’s about -

    “That’s right Dad. I never blink.”

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/05/18/climate-alarmism-and-the-prat-principle/

    Pointman


    Report this

    00

  • #
    David Ross

    On the Rachel Maddow show Muller also talked about the benefits of “clean fracking”.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#48409332

    Muller and Associates
    http://mullerandassociates.com/projects/
    “Major projects done by the principals of the company include:
    Participant in workshops on geoengineering, new methods for enhanced oil recovery …”

    Now it makes sense.

    Company Overview of Glori Energy, Inc.
    http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=27919769
    Glori Energy, Inc. engages in the recovery of barrels of oil trapped in reservoirs using existing oil wells. It offers Activated Environment for Recovery of Oil System, which enhances production from waterflooded wells by stimulating the reservoirs naturally occurring microbes to improve water sweep and oil mobility. The company was formerly known as Glori Oil Limited and changed its name to Glori Energy Inc. in May 2011. Glori Energy, Inc. was founded in 2005 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas.

    Dr. Rajendra Kumar Pachauri
    Founder

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri
    Rajendra Kumar Pachauri (born 20 August 1940) has served as the chairperson of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 2002 …


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Prof Muller indeed appears completely blissful and earnestly unaware.
    The mainstream of skeptics already knew it was warming and of the historic correlation of CO2 with Temperature. Somebody tell him please, that Al Gore’s famous graph was upside down. He really doesn’t seem to get it, poor chap.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    But seriously, I like this one, where they try demonstrating evolution by correlation, for Hello magazine.

    Richard & Elizabeth Muller , in their home.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    kramer

    I could have sworn I read somewhere a while ago that Richard Muller was high up in some green company.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Well indeed Green is company, three’s a crowd.
    - and he is the tallest. Courtesy of ABC


    Report this

    00

  • #

    It is interesting to see the chaotic state of their office and possibly their minds also. However as usual we can follow the money trail to pick up the real motivations exactly. There is not much chance of skepticism there. Muller has his finger on Mexico. Perhaps that is where the money trail ends, in a bank account, south of the border, down Mexico way.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    while we’re connecting dots, Greg Picker – who has been working for us (the Govt) from at least as far back as 2003 – is described in the interview as one of those “mysterious men” who negotiated on CAGW at the UN.

    Picker says aussies are more comfortable with the CO2 tax now that the world didn’t end on july 1.

    talk of emissions trading kicking in in 2015, but Picker has a throwawy line about a little bit of trading is happening already, but it’s not worth explaining now:

    31 July: ABC Brisbane: Mornings with Steve Austin: Is the carbon price achieving anything yet?
    It’s been a month since Australia introduced a price on carbon – what has it done?
    Guest: Dr Greg Picker is Associate Director of Sustainability and Climate Change at AECOM
    http://blogs.abc.net.au/queensland/2012/07/is-the-carbon-price-achieving-anything-yet.html

    April 2010: SMH: Fergus Green and Greg Picker: Long-term fortune favours the brave on climate change
    What we need is not a few more rounds on the political merry-go-round – some more cash sprinkled to this or that group, or some incremental policy tinkering here or there – but a fundamental rethink about our role in the world and the future direction of our society and economy in the context of the overwhelming risks we face from climate change…
    Fergus Green is a climate change lawyer and policy analyst. Greg Picker is a consultant who has worked for the United Nations and the Australian government and has 12 years’ experience in climate change policy.
    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/longterm-fortune-favours-the-brave-on-climate-change-20100428-tsap.html

    2009: Lowy Institute: Comprehending Copenhagen
    Dr Greg Picker has over 12 years experience in climate change and environmental policy, including with the UNFCCC and in senior executive roles in the Federal Government, where he had extensive interaction with politicians and stakeholders. Greg was a senior negotiator for the Australian Government and has participated in many international negotiations. Greg is currently a consultant with AECOM. He is also an Honorary Research Consultant at the University of Queensland, Institute for Social Science Research.
    http://lowyinstitute.cachefly.net/files/pubfiles/Picker_and_Green,_Comprehending_Copenhagen_web.pdf

    Lowy Institute: Greg Picker articles
    http://www.lowyinstitute.com/search/site/%2522greg%2520picker%2522


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pat

    links re Picker and AECOM:

    Wikipedia: AECOM
    Richard G. Newman
    (Chairman Emeritus)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AECOM

    Wikipedia: Richard G. Newman
    Richard G. Newman is chairman emeritus for AECOM, an $8-billion global provider of professional technical and management support services…
    Newman is also a director of [[South West Water|Southwest Water Corporation], Sempra Energy Co. and 13 mutual funds under Capital Research and Management Co..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_G._Newman

    linking from Wikipedia “Capital Research and Management Co”:

    Wikipedia: Capital Group Companies
    The Capital Group Companies is one of the world’s largest investment management organizations with assets of around one trillion USD under management. It comprises a group of investment management companies, including Capital Research and Management, American Funds, Capital Bank and Trust, Capital Guardian, and Capital International. As measured by assets under management, Capital rivals Fidelity Investments, a figure the company will not confirm because it eschews publicity…
    A study published in September, 2009 in the scientific journal Physical Review E on the topic of new network analysis methodologies in economics concluded — in the course of presenting an example — that The Capital Group was the most powerful controlling shareholder in the global stock market, with major stakes in 36 of the 48 countries studied…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Group_Companies

    Picker back in 2003:

    2003: Ecolibrium May 2003: HFC Refrigerants
    Editor’s note: In last month’s edition of EcoLibrium. we interviewed Tamara Curll, Director of Ozone Protection for Environment Australia and Greg Picker, Manager of the Synthetic Gas Team for the Australian Greenhouse Office. They explained the development of the proposed Commonwealth amendments to the Ozone Protection Act. Given the importance of this proposed legislation, we have asked Dr. Picker to prepare an article for this edition sketching how the legislation will impact on the refrigeration and air conditioning industry
    http://mail.airah.org.au/downloads/2003-05-F01.pdf

    watch your Super funds.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    handjive

    Apologies if any previous comment/link to this have made it through.

    This appears to be very important.

    At a stroke this case may affirm that up to one quarter of our planet’s climate records have been fraudulently audited.

    New Zealand skeptics of man-made global warming score historic legal victory as discredited government climate scientists perform U-turn and refuse to allow a third party peer-review report of official temperature adjustments to be shown in court.

    New Zealand’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) are reeling after what may prove a fatally embarrassing admission that it is breaking a solemn undertaking given to parliament.

    Read on @ John O’Sullivan’s blog, Climate Realists. [replace (dot) with a real dot (.)]

    http://climaterealists(dot)com/index(dot)php?id=10030&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ClimaterealistsNewsBlog+%28ClimateRealists+News+Blog%29


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Ross

      Thanks handjive. If this is accurate it is BIG. Nothing in the MSM in NZ ,so far, as would be expected.

      Rekeke Whakaaro –have you heard anything from your sources ??


      Report this

      00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        I have no idea what you mean … and even if I did, I couldn’t possibly comment. ;-)

        But this might cheer everybody up:

        … alarmists in the UN’s IPCC have touted the NIWA record, known widely as the Seven Station Series (7SS), Eleven Station Series (11SS), and NZTR, as proof of antipodean man-made climate warming. These number sets, along with the discredited Australian (BOM) records, represent the cornerstone of Australasia/South Pacific (Oceania) warming. That’s an area that constitutes two of our planet’s eight terrestrial ecozones; or, one quarter of the world’s ‘official’ climate record. In effect, this is a monumental blow to the legal validity of 25 percent of all the world’s climate records. …

        Taken from ClimateRealists

        That is the magnitude if what is currently happening, in Auckland.

        Of course, it is not what the NZ Sceptics wanted. It is a back-down by NIWA, certainly, but it is over a technicality, and not a decision based on the science, nor on the facts of the matter.

        In effect NIWA has fallen on its metaphorical sword to defend the rest of the climate science fraternity. Of course, even doing that, does send a message that the rest of the community needs defending, and is therefore probably doing something egregious. This is not over yet. The court must reach its decision.

        Also there is the small matter of NIWA, a Crown Entity, lying to Parliament, which in such cases take it upon itself to be the highest court in the land. This will probably result in the CEO having to resign, which is a pity, because all of the science shenanigans were firmly imbedded before he arrived on the job, and the climate scientists would have closed ranks to resist any change.


        Report this

        00

        • #
          Ross

          Rereke

          I take your point about the technicality but if it was all solid science and fully peer reviewd data ( and methods of data collection) as NIWA has told us then they should not worry about technicalities. So even the average guy in the street will see this for what is –a “cover up / back down”
          What is the saying ? — ” perception is everything in politics”
          So if the Climate Coalitian have the media savvy and right strategy they should be able to achieve their intial aims.


          Report this

          00

  • #
    PJP

    After pondering what was going on in that photo. I think I have it:

    “That’s REALLY where Australia is?”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    bob

    Muller reminds me of a used car salesman, and that office of his should say something about his mind. It is completely trashed.

    Love that ice age sign.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    The eyes say it all in this picture of the Mullers as the reality hits home: “Oh No! Jo Nova’s onto us already. How were we ever stupid enough to really think we could get away with it?”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Bulldust

    I see David Evans got up in the SMH this morning:

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/climate-change-science-is-a-load-of-hot-air-and-warmists-are-wrong-20120801-23fdv.html

    Needless to say the comments will be heavily polarised…


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    Time to go OT, yes i know KR is still trying to fly the Muller flag but even he/she knows it is a lost cause.

    Most athletes are pretty dumb so making them role models is fraught with danger……what dont beleive me? Well here is example number 1.

    Shane Gould on Q&A the other night

    SHANE GOULD: Yeah. Yes, look, I think people who have a public profile can use their profile to advance a cause and, you know, we’ve been through that era where there was cause-related marketing and what we’re finding now is sports organisations are acting as corporations so they really need to have some social and environmental responsibility. So, for example, Sydney 2000, when they got were awarded the Games, they got it on the basis mainly on the basis that they were going to run a green Games and so since then there’s been all these protocols – environmental protocols through the Games and so that’s one fantastic thing that the Olympic movement has added to its profile. It’s not just about youth, culture and sport, but it’s now also about the environment. So a lot of environmental programs happen and athletes are taking up some of those causes. Agenda 21 was taken up. It was an agreement made with the United Nations environment UN, you know, whatever. Some organisation within the UN. But anyhow Agenda 21 was the program that Jacques Rogge, the President of the IOC at the moment, he became champion of the earth because of his taking up that agenda and introducing it to all the Olympic sports. So, yes, I do believe that people in high profiles, whether they’re athletes or actors or politics, they can support a cause according to the values or their beliefs.

    http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3551534.htm.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    Rereke,

    Should i have said “ugly dumb”? Seriously i watched a part of that QANDA program and i listened to the Australian rugby union captain tell me that we (read i) should beleive in climate change and i should embrace same sex marriage etc but why should i be told how to behave by a sportsman? Yes they can have their own opinions but why should i be subjected to them?

    So here we have these “role models” saying dont do drugs, dont drive pissed, dont beat your wife/girlfriend, oh and by the way beleive in climate change. This is nothing more than another form of government propaganda and it should be stopped.

    If Lance Cairns told you AGW was real so stop using using electricity what would you do?

    Of course it is not limited to sportsmen this is no different than Carbon Cate, the last thing i heard her say as she walked through the door of her private jet was “go live in a cave”.

    So i will call Shane what i like whether it be pretty, ugly or whatever.


    Report this

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Sorry Crakar, I wasn’t having a go at the thrust of your post.

      It is just that where I live, the term “pretty” means “somewhat” or “partially”. So being “pretty broke” means having some money, but not much.

      So by implying that you get ride of the qualifier, I was actually making the statement stronger, if you get my drift. My bad.


      Report this

      00

      • #
        crakar24

        No worries Rereke i understood what you meant (pretty *dumb* means the same on this side of the ditch as well) when i re read my comment after i posted it and thought “gee that might be misconstrued a little”.

        The ugly instead of pretty was my poor attempt at humour.

        Cheers

        Crakar


        Report this

        00

  • #
    crakar24

    Been reading Christys speech (Environment and Public Works 12 John R. Christy 1 August 2012)
    here in section he talks about using extreme events as a metric to prove agw and just wanted to share some of it.

    I am not using these statistics to prove the weather in the US is becoming less extreme
    and/or colder. My point is that extreme events are poor metrics to use for detecting
    climate change. Indeed, because of their rarity (by definition) using extreme events to
    bolster a claim about any type of climate change (warming or cooling) runs the risk of
    setting up the classic “non-falsifiable hypothesis.” For example, we were told by the
    IPCC that “milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms” (TAR WG2,
    15.2.4.1.2.4). After the winters of 2009-10 and 2010-11, we are told the opposite by
    advocates of the IPCC position, “Climate Change Makes Major Snowstorms More
    Likely” (http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/climate-change-makes-snowstormsmore-
    likely-0506.html).

    The non-falsifiable hypotheses can be stated this way, “whatever happens is consistent
    with my hypothesis.” In other words, there is no event that would “falsify” the
    hypothesis. As such, these assertions cannot be considered science or in anyway
    informative since the hypothesis’ fundamental prediction is “anything may happen.” In
    the example above if winters become milder or they become snowier, the non-falsifiable
    hypothesis stands. This is not science.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Luke Warm

    These people know no shame.


    Report this

    00