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



American Geophysical Union – cheat, deceive, steal, “It’s OK”.

The American Geophysical Union – can it be saved?

Seriously: the 2012 Convention included Mann, Gleick, Lewandowsky, Oreskes and Cook.

If you are one of the 58,000 members, you could ask yourself if you want to be aligned to an organization that thinks “science” means sometimes you need to impersonate someone else, steal their documents, and hide your own data. Is it AGU science if you use algorithms so badly that you could replace your data with a phone book and produce the same result? What if your data is used upside down? The AGU thinks you should speak twice.

Is it the AGU’s idea of “rigorous” if you make headlines out of irreproducible results that use flawed samples, fake data, and issue a press release months before your paper is even ready to be published? Is a sample size of ten in a self-selecting internet poll enough to publish a paper? Do you find out the opinions of one group by interviewing the people who hate them, but then present the results as if you surveyed the first group? Is it OK to call people who disagree with you insulting names? John Cook does, and he was invited to speak as well. Does it bother the AGU that neither Cook nor Lewandowsky can provide a scientific definition for their terms, or even an English one? How about a career built on making ad hominem attacks against senior scientists? Naomi Oreskes fits that bill. She is the Merchant of Doubt, seeding doubt about whistleblowing scientists who are doing their damnedest to keep standards of science alive.

Steve McIntyre was there: see “AGU Honors Gleick”

“Gleick’s welcome back to AGU prominence – without serving even the equivalent of a game’s suspension – was pretty startling, given his admitted identity fraud and distribution (and probable fabrication) of a forged document. Last year, then AGU President Mike McPhadren, a colleague of Eric Steig’s at the University of Washington, had stated on behalf of AGU that Gleick had “compromised AGU’s credibility as a scientific society” and that his “transgression cannot be condoned”. McPhadren stated that AGU‘s “guiding core value” was “excellence and integrity in everything we do” – values that would seem to be inconsistent with identity fraud and distribution and/or fabrication of forged documents, even by the relaxed standards of academic institutions.

Although McPhadren had stated that Gleick’s “transgression” would not be “condoned”, AGU’s warm welcome to Gleick shows that McPhadren’s words meant nothing, because AGU has in fact condoned Gleick’s actions.”

Steve McIntyre

To all the members of the AGU who think the AGU is worth saving, that it has higher standards than this, tell the world, and especially tell the AGU Executive Committee, its Board of Directors, and the President.

To all the members who think this canoe is already over the waterfall, you know what to do. Don’t forget to send a message to the AGU on your way out.

When the AGU or one of its members makes a public statement, the public assumes that the 58,000 members of the AGU vouch for its value. The organizers of the AGU convention are using the reputation amassed by thousands of good scientists to promote  witchcraft and runes and potions with magic fairy spells. It’s worse than junk. You may think your voice means nothing, but if 300 emails arrive in AGU committee in-boxes this week, they will surely notice. There will be committee members who are deeply uneasy at the way the AGU is being exploited for political means. Knowing they have your support will help them speak up and stop the slide. The more people who write, the more power the spokesman has.

Lest it be thought that I want to silence anyone, let it be known that if the AGU organized open debates with the aforementioned, and their scientific critics, I would think that would be a very useful forum. On past form though, all of the above would run a mile from answering their critics face to face. It’s not that I want to silence anyone, it’s the idea that ad hominem attacks, poor research, tragic statistics, and dismal reasoning have any place at the AGU.

 

It ain’t science.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (118 votes cast)
American Geophysical Union - cheat, deceive, steal, "It's OK"., 8.9 out of 10 based on 118 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ato9tkq

253 comments to American Geophysical Union – cheat, deceive, steal, “It’s OK”.

  • #
    Jaymez

    AGU are not really a very diverse group of people despite the spiel on their website. It indicates that almost 23% of their members are students members, no doubt following in their mentors footsteps. Academics make up 65.5% of the total membership, (which I assume includes the students); ‘governmental’ 15.2%, and after taking out ‘retired’, ‘unemployed’ and ‘other’ that only leaves 10.53% of AGU members in Industry or Self Employed.

    So basically 10.53% of the membership living in the real world and not enjoying the avalanche of taxpayer money going towards the climate change industry or being infected by the left wing biased post modern sciences at Universities where they apparently think it is OK to commit fraud.


    Report this

    421

    • #

      More money goes to people, “think tanks” promoting the silly idea the world is not warming.


      Report this

      084

      • #
        Allen Ford

        Come off it, Maxine! Pray tell, just who is providing all of those funds in excess of the 100 billion dollars that have gone to the AGW gravy train over the last 10 years, and who is recieving it?

        I won’t hold my breath waiting for an answer from you or your buddies.


        Report this

        410

      • #
        Ian

        You got any evidence at all for that Maxine? Had a look at the ARC grants for 2013? You won’t find (m)any sceptics listed there. Who is providing all this cash to the sceptics? Certainly none get government funding whatever country they are in. Your comment is pretty shabby really and does you no credit. Are you a member of the AGU? If not why not apply? They’d have you like a shot as you’d fit in so beautifully seamlessly with all the other likeminded members


        Report this

        330

      • #
        Peter Miller

        An extraordinarily deep, meaningful and insightfulful statement, the CAGW faithful will be proud of you.

        On behalf of geologists everywhere, I wish to point out there is a huge difference between geophysicists and geologists.

        The former live in a world of their own trying to create models out of imperfect data and using imperfect science – occasionally, they get lucky. The latter have to constantly test the geophysicists’ findings in order to determine what is real and what is not; this is done by observation and drilling etc. – Kind of like the difference between CAGW cult members and sceptics, where the former lives in a world of scary imperfect models and the latter determines the actual truth.


        Report this

        220

      • #
        Lars P.

        Conspiracy theories anyone? Watch out Big Oil-Coal-Gas monster is watching you!


        Report this

        00

      • #
        Sonny

        “think tanks”

        This would make a good cartoon.

        In reality the “think tanks” are just another illusion and deception by the CAGW faithful.

        Maxine, we are an amalgamation of independent individuals volunteering our time and resources to oppose the CAGW scam.

        Who has funded me writing this comment?


        Report this

        10

      • #
  • #

    Mann, Gleick, Lewandowsky, Oreskes and Cook. Four of the five of them were finalists in the Climate Prat of the Year Award, with Gleick stealing with the prize. Someone needs to run a Laughing Stock Organisation award …

    Pointman
    ———-
    REPLY: That link for people wanting to see how the Climate Prat Awards panned out. – jo


    Report this

    370

  • #

    Organisations can be led astray by their leadership.

    The UK’s Royal Society for example – see Nullius in Verba by Andrew Montford (http://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/montford-royal_society.pdf).

    The UK’s RSPCA for another – see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/countryside/9780817/Our-once-great-RSPCA-is-being-destroyed-by-a-militant-tendency.html#.

    The USA’s AGU for a third – see http://motls.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/new-director-of-american-geophysical.html#more

    Sic transit and all that.


    Report this

    270

    • #
      Ian H

      Organisations can also be led astray by evolution of their membership. This happens when people are attracted to join for the wrong reasons. For example the Catholic priesthood often attracts people who are scared of their own sexuality for good reason, which leads to a church infested with paedophile priests.

      The AGU has the problem that students today often choose to study geophysical subjects because of a preexisting commitment to environmental activism. These students have drunk the coolaide before they start their studies. It is very hard for students coming from that mental space to end up as objective scientists. They become ecotists like Gleick


      Report this

      230

    • #
      Boadicea

      http://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/top-british-science-body-in-revolt-over-global-warming-censorship/

      You can add the Institute of Physics (IoP) UK to your list as well, as documented by Andrew Montford in, “Institutional Bias”.

      So that makes 5, that we know of ..I wonder how many more there are.

      So much for the alarmists claim that all the learned societies have agreed that we are doomed to fry in hell because of co2. etc

      …but they themselves have been captured by the usual cabal of manipulative agenda driven clunkers.

      …and the general memberships are too collectively stupid to realise that they are being led by the nose.

      Not a good look


      Report this

      171

      • #

        Wow, another crank website!


        Report this

        156

        • #
          Heywood

          Speaking of crank websites, take a look at this crap.

          http://www.polanimal.com.au/

          Run by an angry ALP propagandist who wouldn’t know their head from their ar$ehole.

          Feel free to have a look and gain an insight into the thinking of an alarmist loser.

          Do you know who runs it Maxine?

          Just had a look at Boadicea’s link. Looks like John O’Sullivan’s blog gets a little more patronage than yours. Bwahahahahaha


          Report this

          280

          • #
            AndyG55

            “Feel free to have a look and gain an insight into the thinking of an alarmist loser.’

            No thanks, It portrays more than enough of its idiocy in the desparately moronic posts it does here..

            I wouldn’t bother giving a web site run by that particular piece of obnoxious slime a second thought.

            ——————————————

            John O’Sullivan, on the other hand, is an accredited academic and teacher, someone that Max-out could learn a lot from. (if it actually had the capacity to learn)


            Report this

            120

          • #

            Aww! Fair suck of the sav Heywood.

            Maxine needs to come here to drum up visits to his site.

            Scroll down the right side of this Blog to the site counter indicating current people visiting this site. (47 at the moment)

            In his wildest dreams Maxine would wish for that sort of traffic.

            Maxine usually has two, sometimes three people at his site at any one time, and, umm, one of them is a Google Bot.

            He does however get a reasonable number of Comments there at his site though, around 40 to 45 a day, and compare that to here where they get that many Comments in less than an hour usually.

            As to Commenting at Maxine’s site, almost 60% of those Comments are from, umm, ….. Maxine himself, under just one of the three names he uses at his own site.

            He even claimed Joanne was a liar, and a ‘paid propagandiser‘ and was working for The Heartland Institute.

            At the moment, he’s over at his site, logged on, rubbing his hands together with glee that he’s getting visits linked in from this site, bumping up his numbers.

            Tony.


            Report this

            340

        • #
          Ian

          I just had a look at your site after reading your comment “Another crank site”. Kettle, pot and black spring to mind. I must say judging from Polanimal , if that indded is your site, no matter whether you are male or female you are particularly odious.


          Report this

          120

    • #
      Ace

      The UKs Royal Society, isnt that the outfit that stonewalled Baroness Greenfield as most plausible candidate for their president because she wears mini-skirts.

      Yeah, the same outfit whose members back in the Forties “proved” that spaceflight was impossible.

      Yeah, that bunch of dimmocks.


      Report this

      80

  • #

    Jo says,

    Does it bother the AGU that neither Cook nor Lewandowsky can provide a scientific definition for their terms, or even an English one?

    I can find an example where Cook does have an English definition of one of terms.

    Genuine skeptics consider all the evidence in their search for the truth. Deniers, on the other hand, refuse to accept any evidence that conflicts with their pre-determined views.

    Problem is that his definition of “skeptic” disagrees with that of a consensus of the world’s leading experts. In Lewandowsky’s eyes he must therefore by an English language “denier“. But then the “d” word is not in Oxford English Dictionary.
    Conclusion – both Cook and Lewandowsky make up words to support their dogma.


    Report this

    160

    • #
      junkpsychology

      Then Cook and Lewandowsky are both “deniers,” as per Cook’s definition.

      Do they seriously consider any evidence that doesn’t fit their preconceptions?


      Report this

      160

      • #

        Furthermore, anyone is not a denier who accepts that
        (a) Mean global temperatures are higher now than in the 18th century.
        AND
        (b) Human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures
        That is they agree with the 97% of climate scientists whom Skeptical Science blog is so fond of quoting. This is Lewandowsky’s and Cooks definition of who they admit into the clan. I will be corrected if am wrong in saying this, but from what I have read on this blog, both Jo Nova and David Evans are not climate deniers on this definition. That is, they accept that the mean surface temperatures have risen and that – even with strong negative feed backs – CO2 will have contributed more than 10% of that warming. If Lewandowsky can claim on the basis of 2 scam responses out of 1145, that climate skeptics have a “conspiracist orientation”, then he cannot, (using the same standards) claim the major skeptics are in denial of climate.


        Report this

        120

        • #
          Winston

          Manic,
          Even if CO2 has no significant bearing on climate, and even in the event that GHG theory is debunked or disproved at some future point (I’m not saying I agree with the latter, btw), your answer to both questions would still likely be yes, since particulate pollution, UHI and altered patterns of land use by humans do “significantly” affect climate, depending upon your definition of significance.

          Those two questions are painted with such a broad brush that it’s astonishing that they found 3% to disagree with them. I suspect they were there merely to flesh out the numbers so the data didn’t look too overly cooked.

          As an aside, your last sentence suggests that Lewandowsky’s “conspiracy theory” theory is in fact a conspiracy theory in and unto itself!


          Report this

          50

          • #

            Winston says

            As an aside, your last sentence suggests that Lewandowsky’s “conspiracy theory” theory is in fact a conspiracy theory in and unto itself!

            I am always very careful as ascribing as set of ideas as being a conspiracy theory, but Lewandowsky seems himself to promote elements that I would ascribe to a conspiracy theory or conspiracy theorists. For instance imputing sinister motives to those he disagrees with; weighting of evidence as to confirm it confirms/challanges his prejudices; failure to appreciate that another point of view might be possible; or (like dear Maxine) quickly changing the subject with trivialities.
            However, due to a lack of any funding for blogging whatsoever, and with having to earn a living, I have to cease enlarging further on the subject.


            Report this

            20

  • #
    junkpsychology

    I don’t know what business psychologists have with the American Geophysical Union.

    But, at a minimum, shouldn’t such guests from other disciplines know how to conduct and report their own empirical research?


    Report this

    110

  • #
    pat

    if only Abbott would present the CAGW sceptic evidence which is piling up by the day! he’s been such a disappointment in this regard since becoming leader of the Coalition:

    8 Jan: Guardian: George Monbiot: Heatwave: Australia’s new weather demands a new politics
    I wonder what Tony Abbott will say about the record heatwave now ravaging his country. The Australian opposition leader has repeatedly questioned the science and impacts of climate change. He has insisted that “the science is highly contentious, to say the least” and asked – demonstrating what looks like a wilful ignorance – “If man-made CO2 was quite the villain that many of these people say it is, why hasn’t there just been a steady increase starting in 1750, and moving in a linear way up the graph?” He has argued against Australian participation in serious attempts to cut emissions.
    Climate change denial is almost a national pastime in Australia. People such as Andrew Bolt and Ian Plimer have made a career out of it. The Australian – owned by Rupert Murdoch – takes such extreme anti-science positions that it sometimes makes the Sunday Telegraph look like the voice of reason.
    Perhaps this is unsurprising. Australia is the world’s largest exporter of coal – the most carbon intensive fossil fuel. It’s also a profligate consumer. Australians now burn, on average, slightly more carbon per capita than the citizens of the United States, and more than twice as much as the people of the United Kingdom…
    Events have not been kind to the likes of Abbott, Bolt and Plimer. The current heatwave – so severe that the Bureau of Meteorology has been forced to add a new colour to its temperature maps – is just the latest event in a decade of extraordinary weather: weather of the kind that scientists have long warned is a likely consequence of man-made global warming…
    He (Tony Abbott) says he’s currently on standby with his local fire brigade, but as his opposition to effective action on climate change is likely to contribute to even more extreme events in the future, this looks like the most cynical kind of stunt politics.
    To ask him and others to change their view of the problem could be to demand the impossible. It requires that they confront some of the most powerful interests in Australia: from Rupert Murdoch to Gina Rinehart…
    This, I think, is too much for Abbott to take on: as a result he has nothing to offer a nation for which this terrible weather is a warning of much worse to come. Australia’s new weather demands a new politics; a politics capable of responding to an existential threat…
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/08/australia-heatwave-weather

    Monbiot keeps up the Murdoch anti-CAGW meme, while Murdoch media – as always – publishes every bit of CAGW propaganda daily, much of it from AAP, which is run by former Murdoch man:

    9 Jan: Australian: AAP: Garry Shilson-Josling: ‘Extremes more common’ with climate change
    “Warming in the mean (average) over Tasmania is consistent with global warming,” said climate scientist Professor Andy Pitman, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at the University of New South Wales…
    Something which has become a once-in-a-decade event rather than a once-in-century event might still be rare.
    But it is now 10 times more likely than it was.
    Prof Pitman said this effect is a “classic property” of any variable, like temperature, which can be described using the bell curve.
    “It is why climate scientists have been saying for over a decade that a small increase in mean temperature is not remotely something to be complacent about,” he said…
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/extremes-more-common-with-climate-change/story-fn3dxiwe-1226550628267


    Report this

    82

    • #
      manalive

      I wonder what Tony Abbott will say about the record heatwave now ravaging his country …

      Or as reported in today’s Australian Cut & Paste:

      Damian Carrington in the Guardian: “forecast temperatures are so extreme that the Bureau of Meteorology has had to add a new colour to its scale … the temperature forecast for next Monday by Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology is so unprecedented – over 52C – that it has had to add a new colour to the top of its scale, a suitably incandescent purple …”

      As with CAGW hysterics in general, they take model forecasts as established fact. Incidentally the current forecast for Leigh Creek for next Monday is 38 C — we will just have to wait and see.


      Report this

      110

      • #

        The Australia-wide heat wave extends a four-month run of scorching temperatures, according to the Bureau of Meteorology, with a record six consecutive days over 102 degrees. The previous record was four straight days, set in 1973.

        “This event is continuing with further significant records likely to be set,” the bureau said.

        http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323482504578228582488514370.html

        You can keep closing your eyes and keep your head in the sand but reality just marches on relentlessly


        Report this

        453

        • #
          Ross

          So it’s climate change in the SH but just weather in the NH with their “record” cold snap !!


          Report this

          312

          • #

            No, there have been plenty of reports saying what happens in the Arctic due to the record melts each year. I also quoted a source talking about the Gulf Stream slowing down.

            Think back to your HS geography. The Gulf Stream of very hot, salty water originating in the Sargasso Sea and flowing north along the E coast of North America before flowing down the Irish/Scottish/English coasts giving up its warmth.

            Slower flow of Gulf Stream ==> less heat given up around the British Isles. Look up the latitude of Anchorage, Alaska and London, UK.

            The record cold have to do with the Arctic Ocean dipole, the circumpolar winds and big lobes of frigid Acrtic air that can now escape south until blocked by another big system. That is how the cold winter weather in England and the East coast of North America forms.

            At the same time Russia is having milder winters.


            Report this

            143

          • #
            Mattb

            Is it a record cold snap? Crackar reckons it is a 1 in 10 year event only.


            Report this

            72

          • #
            Crakar24

            What is your role on your council MattB? I hope it is not the secretary as you lack the fundamental capacity to comprehend the written word.

            Just to clear things up for you again, the USA is part of the Northern Hemisphere, a very small part in fact.

            The 1 in 10 year event you are referring to is the amount of snow in the USA, that is to say the snowfall cover in the USA at the moment is at its greatest in the past ten years.

            In regards to the Northern Hemisphere it has been the snowiest decade on record remember this is the Northern Hemisphere we are referring to now.

            Note in the comment by Ross he uses the abbreviations “SH” and “NH”, when Ross says “SH” he means Southern Hemisphere and when he says “NH” he means Northern Hemisphere, therefore you snide remark directed towards me bears no relevance to the comment made by Ross.

            If you are too stupid to comprehend what i have just written let me know and i will try and dumb it down even further for you, i will keep dumbing it down for you until you can understand what teh rest of us are talking about OK.

            Regards Crakar (note only one “C”) thats OK its just another example of your stupidity, remember i am here to help you.


            Report this

            141

          • #
            Mattb

            Crakar:
            Ross said “just weather in the NH with their “record” cold snap ”
            so where does my “snide remark directed towards me bears no relevance to the comment made by Ross.” ???

            “In regards to the Northern Hemisphere it has been the snowiest decade on record remember this is the Northern Hemisphere we are referring to now.”

            Did you ever front up with evidence to counter my 30 year graph of NH snow coverage showing basically no change in 30 years?


            Report this

            212

          • #
            Crakar24

            Jesus F……g Wept

            Ross was referring to the cold snap in the Northern Hemisphere and you are talking about the USA if you cannot discern the difference then i cannot help you.

            Regarding snow in NH, you can either accept or reject the fact that it has been the snowiest in a decade however by your own admission there has been no reduction in 30 years (your calibrated eyeball might be in need of servicing) which flies in the face of “a warmer world”. You have produced the evidence yourself to show you are wrong but still you cannot accept it.


            Report this

            120

          • #
            Ross

            MattB — I wrote it as “record’ for a reason. I did not want you to take the word literally but to indicate the weather in the NH is particularly bad this winter. Take a look at the second article in this link which explains what is happening in China , Russia and India as examples

            http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate


            Report this

            70

          • #
            Mattb

            Ross – thanks for clarifying that it is not a record. Crakar seems to take things fairly literally though I’m afraid.

            “you can either accept or reject the fact that it has been the snowiest in a decade”
            I’ve never argued that it is not the snowiest for a decade. My argument is that a 1 in 10 year event is a non-event in terms of AGW.

            “however by your own admission there has been no reduction in 30 years (your calibrated eyeball might be in need of servicing) which flies in the face of “a warmer world”. ”

            We’ve been through this… it does not fly in the face of “a warmer world”…

            UNLESS YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!!


            Report this

            112

        • #
          Greg Cavanagh

          Odd for you to quote the Wall Street Journal. Australia has hot summers EVERY year, wild fires EVERY year, a drought over part or parts of the country EVERY year.

          I see nothing unusual about this summer at all.


          Report this

          411

          • #
            Dennis

            This time last year I drove through Victoria, South Australia and Western New South Wales via Broken Hill, heatwave conditions the whole trip. That is summer in Australia.


            Report this

            251

          • #

            Last two summer we had floods on the East coast, not fires.

            If you can’t remember basic facts like that, very well reported at the time then I would sit back and study up a bit, and not just from crank websites either.


            Report this

            240

          • #
            AndyG55

            omg max-out, you are soooooooo incredibly stupid.

            READ THE POST YOU ARE ANSWERING, FFS !!

            Do some research, there have been plenty of fires in Australia over the last 2 years.


            Report this

            181

        • #
          Crakar24

          Max et al,

          http://www.thenewstribe.com/2013/01/08/mercury-in-skardu-other-areas-drops-to-record-breaking-level/

          http://www.urduwire.com/en/news/country-remains-in-grip-of-severe-cold-wave_nid818761.aspx

          http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Patna/All-schools-closed-as-severe-cold-wave-grips-state/Article1-986609.aspx

          http://www.businessinsider.com/historic-cold-snap-in-china-is-causing-dizzying-inflation-in-the-price-of-vegetables-2013-1

          and for the last we require a drum roll……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..http://www.dw.de/record-chill-across-china-disrupts-transport/a-16500917

          Headline reads

          A record chill across China has stranded passenger flights, trapped ships in ice and caught truck drivers unawares. Meteorologists blamed cold fronts caused, they say, by melting polar ice from global warming.

          I believe Steven Goddard said it best

          Climate Science Arrives At The Pinnacle Of Stupidity

          It doesn’t get any stupider than this. Climate scientists say that warm air in the Arctic is melting the ice and bringing record cold air to China – causing ice to form there.

          You really can’t get any stupider than these people are. Do they turn their heater on to cool down the room? They have invoked the fourth law of climate morondynamics, which allows cold air to generate spontaneously from warm air.


          Report this

          341

        • #
          Bob Malloy

          Maxine Post;

          The Australia-wide heat wave extends a four-month run of scorching temperatures, according to the Bureau of Meteorology, with a record six consecutive days over 102 degrees. The previous record was four straight days, set in 1973.

          “This event is continuing with further significant records likely to be set,” the bureau said.

          Then says we keep closing our eyes.

          Maxine, if you took the time to look outside your comfort zone you might not have missed the following, taken from newspaper reports of 1896. You know before the Industrial age realy took off.

          It is as if history is being erased. For all that we hear about recent record-breaking climate extremes, records that are equally extreme, and sometimes even more so, are ignored.

          In January 1896 a savage blast “like a furnace” stretched across Australia from east to west and lasted for weeks. The death toll reached 437 people in the eastern states. Newspaper reports showed that in Bourke the heat approached 120°F (48.9°C) on three days (1)(2)(3). It stayed above 100 degrees F (38.8°C) for 24 days straight.

          By Tuesday Jan 14, people were reported falling dead in the streets. Unable to sleep, people in Brewarrina walked the streets at night for hours, the thermometer recording 109F at midnight. Overnight, the temperature did not fall below 103°F. On Jan 18 in Wilcannia, five deaths were recorded in one day, the hospitals were overcrowded and reports said that “more deaths are hourly expected”. By January 24, in Bourke, many businesses had shut down (almost everything bar the hotels). Panic stricken Australians were fleeing to the hills in climate refugee trains.

          Now what was that about 4 straight days being a record.


          Report this

          360

          • #
            AndyG55

            For max-out, climate has only existed for the last 15 or so years, and even in that time there is NO SIGNIFICANT WARMING !!

            Mind you there has been significant warming since the late 1600′s thank goodness.

            Records, most of the max temp records in Australia are STILL either from the mid-late 1800′s and the late 1930′s

            Even with a few degrees of urban heat effect, and airport warming, and BOM data manipulation, we STILL have not reached the maximum temperatures of 70 – 100 years ago.


            Report this

            230

          • #

            Very good. I did see that brought up earlier. But have you done more than had that brought to your attention? Considering we have no El Nino in place right now the record high temperatures are of concern.

            1896 was in the Federation drought which was probably due to strong El Ninos. Todays isn’t.

            But I will read up the original source of that and see what I can find.


            Report this

            137

          • #
            handjive

            Maxine says @ January 10, 2013 at 10:54 am:

            1896 was in the Federation drought which was probably due to strong El Ninos. Todays isn’t.

            Today’s drought?

            Yet straight below, you acknowledge we are drought free, and La Nina is to blame!

            You be a busy Maxine, moving all those goalposts all over the place!


            Report this

            221

          • #
          • #
            Streetcred

            NOAA has inflated the 2012 record maximum number by adding new stations which didn’t exist during the hot years of the 1930s. That is a completely illegitimate approach, suitable only for government workers.

            and …

            Marble Bar heatwave, 1923-24

            The world record for the longest sequence of days above 100°Fahrenheit (or 37.8° on the Celsius scale) is held by Marble Bar in the inland Pilbara district of Western Australia. The temperature, measured under standard exposure conditions, reached or exceeded the century mark every day from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924, a total of 160 days.

            Brisbane heatwave … what heatwave? Beautiful January weather … BoM forecast +3C over yesterday’s actual and +2C over today’s actual !

            Did anybody see Leahy’s cartoon in the Courier Mail this morning linking the ‘wildfires’ to ‘climate change [global warming] denial’? Absolutely appalling and reflects poorly on the editorial staff of the Courier Mail … they suffer acute SCIENCE DENIAL.


            Report this

            171

        • #
        • #
          PeterB in Indianapolis

          Hey Maxine,

          How do you like the record cold in China, India, Pakistan, Jordan, Israel, and Northeastern Russia?

          Why don’t you mention that at all? Selective Amnesia much?

          Don’t bother answering, your answers aren’t worth the time you take to write them anyway, so save yourself the time.


          Report this

          61

        • #
          sophocles

          At the same time Russia is having milder winters.

          Wrong. The winter of 2011-2012 was very cold. The winter of 2012-2013 was reported in a local paper a week ago at -52 degrees in places.
          Nobody can imagine that as mild.


          Report this

          20

        • #
    • #
      handjive

      File this under “we knew that”
      .

      George Monbiot is an incredibly lazy person who doesn’t fact check, or deliberately sets out to mis-inform:

      Monbiot:

      “The Australian opposition leader has repeatedly questioned the science and impacts of climate change.”

      The Truth:

      The Coalition welcomes the review and update of the climate science contained in the *Climate Commission’s report issued today, “The Critical Decade”.

      *The Climate Commission endorses, uses & quotes UN-IPCC/CSIRO junk climate science.
      .

      Monbiot:

      “– is just the latest event in a decade of extraordinary weather: weather of the kind that scientists have long warned is a likely consequence of man-made global warming…”

      The Truth:

      Australia- officially drought-free for the first time in more than a decade

      NOT ONE “scientist” or computer model warned Australia of that GOOD NEWS (drought free) as a consequence of “man-made global warming.”

      It WAS NOT “extra ordinary” weather.

      Drought in Australia a natural phenomenon
      .

      The climate fraud continues unchecked…


      Report this

      220

      • #

        I think the drought free might be the result of 2 consecutive La Ninas.

        If we had back to back El Ninos drought would be back alright.


        Report this

        231

      • #

        Abbott: Climate Change is crap.


        Report this

        226

        • #
          AndyG55

          And he was correct.

          Will be great to see him gradually dismantle ALL the climate CRAP after this year’s elction. :-)


          Report this

          252

          • #

            You will be in for a disappointment in the unlikely event Mr 63% disapproval won.

            Prime Ministers and all Ministers rely on the advice of their Departments and statutory bodies like BuMet and CSIRO.

            “Climate crap” will continue—ahahahaha or is Tone going to do a King Canute and forbid the climate from warming LOL!


            Report this

            132

          • #
            AndyG55

            “or is Tone going to do a King Canute and forbid the climate from warming LOL!”

            He doesn’t need to.. Sol is already on his side, NATURALLY

            As are well over 60% of voting Australians.

            Only the idiots will still vote Labor,….. that means you, of course… or are you rabid looney Green ?


            Report this

            141

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Maxine,

            Prime Ministers and all Ministers rely on the advice of their Departments and statutory bodies …

            That is not strictly true. Prime Ministers and all Ministers will consider the advice from their Departments and statutory bodies, in the light of their current policy position.

            It is not the Bureaucrats who set the policy (in spite of what they might think), it is the party strategists who devise the policy, which is then amended or accepted by the politicians. This forms the manifesto which is what the parties supposedly go to the poles on.

            After being elected, the Ministers inform their Senior Public Servants of the policy detail, and it is then the Public Servants job to devise programmes of work to implement that policy. Bureaucrats hate that. But it is a cost of living in a Democracy.

            It doesn’t always work though. Prime Minister Gillard was forced to do her about face on the Climate Tax policy (by calling it something else) in order to cut a coalition deal with the Greens, who’s policy was finally the one adopted.


            Report this

            120

    • #
      Mic of Toll

      Pat does have a point, the long term temperature has been increasing for the last 10,000 years as we come out of the last ice age. In theory only, we are still in an ice age with ~ 70% of the Earths fresh water still tied up in ice. Although scientists and skeptics know this, the average person still believes in consensus and some still believe that we can actually do something about it. What has been done to address the misconception that 97% of scientists believe in catastrophic man made global warming, other than show that the basis for this calculation was flawed. I have only seen one survey of any note where 31,000 americans signed some petition, but this is only 1 of 200 countries. I understand that consensus for scientists is absolute garbage but for at least 30% of the population (the sheep), it matters. Warmists are always able to quote NASA, geophysical associtions, CSIRO and hundreds more as being on board. It doesn’t matter that they hold these positions to attract public funding through our political structures. The science of Global Warming has been fully tested since 1979 therefore >95% of scientists must at worst be skeptical of AGW. Time for a global survey or maybe I’m dreaming.
      I believe the Earth is warming and that man has contributed but I also believe this contribution to be about 0.003 degrees Celsius over the last 30 years. Therefore, what is the point of doing anything, all oil on Earth will be exhausted in 200 years, coal in about 2,000 years. Lets adapt to increasing temperatures and move forward.


      Report this

      80

      • #

        That crap is debunked by the temperature and CO2 records. Sorry, otherwise a nice way of sticking your hand in the sand, sticking your fingers in your ears and going “Lalalalal can’t hear you lalalalalala”


        Report this

        037

        • #
          AndyG55

          Over the past 16 years CO2 has gone up by 58%,

          Temperatures.. nada, zip, nothing.

          THERE IS NO CORRELLATION !!!!!


          Report this

          230

          • #
            John Brookes

            Over the past 16 years CO2 has gone up by 58%,

            This has me confused. This means that in 1996, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was 246 ppm – since an increase of 58% on 246 gives today’s level of 390 ppm.

            But this is wrong, because the actual level of CO2 in 1996 was around 360 ppm.

            But Andy, you get 19 thumbs up, for saying something that is obviously wrong. Hmm. Maybe I’m starting to get the hang of this “skeptical” way of thinking…


            Report this

            15

          • #

            Oh John,

            do some reading man.

            AUSTRALIA’S emissions have risen 58% on Australia’s 1996 levels.

            That’s old news. Even the Government admits it in their own papers on the levels.

            Tony.


            Report this

            50

          • #
            AndyG55

            Since it is a GLOBAL issue, I think you will find that China’s and India’s emmissions have caused a huge increase in CO2.

            I was going from memory from data I was reading about a week ago, so if its a 56% global increase rather than 58%, I apologise.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            AndyG55

            Ah.. I see.. I did mean that EMMISSIONS have gone up 58%.. not the actual atmospheric concentration.

            So , my bad wording, sorry.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            AndyG55

            And John, the knowledgable people here would have recognised that 58% applied to CO2 emmission increase, and would have taken it as such, despite my bad wording.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            AndyG55

            Tony,

            I thought it was the global emmissions that had gone up 58%..

            I thought that Australia’s emmissions had only gone up by 10-15%

            memory… where are you ??? ;-)


            Report this

            00

        • #
          Streetcred

          More appropriate for you, maxine, is sticking your fingers in your rectum and whistling Dixy.


          Report this

          100

          • #
            PeterB in Indianapolis

            Being from America from quite near what is considered “the South”, I assure you that you meant “whistling Dixie”.

            “Dixie” technically being anything South of the Mason-Dixon Line. Of course, since Australia is WELL SOUTH of that Mason-Dixon Line, I guess y’all might be able to claim to be from Dixie after all :)

            Come on down for some scrapple and grits any time y’all, and we can have a Peach Nehi to drink!


            Report this

            50

          • #
            Streetcred

            Thanks for the correction, PeterB and I’m sure that you also grasped the metaphor ;)


            Report this

            00

        • #
          Ian

          What temperature and CO2 records? Do you ever respond truthfully? And by the way Mr 63% personally has done a lot more for the community than any other current politician. Since 1995 there hasn’t been a statistically significant increase in the global temperature. Sure the graph is still rising but not to an extent where even those as biased as yourself can say “Ah-ha we told you so”. Think on this if the temperature had dropped but not statistically significantly and sceptics said the temperature is dropping what would you say about the lack of statistical significance? Oh and how long has the current heat wave in Australia lasted? A day I think


          Report this

          70

        • #
          Sonny

          Sticking your hand in the sand?

          How old are you Maxine?


          Report this

          00

    • #
      Ian

      Abbott has been a member of his local fire brigade since 2000 and has actively fought fires during that time. For Monbiot to call it “a standby stunt” is untruthful, despicable, shabby and a comment of unprincipled bastardry.


      Report this

      191

      • #
        Mattb

        I note there was a federal election in 2001.


        Report this

        115

        • #
          Sean McHugh

          So, Matt, you ARE saying that his being a firefighter for 12 years, is a stunt! The Left’s capacity for willful delusion never ceases to amaze me. For many years Abbott has given up free time for either lifesaving, firefight or working in aboriginal communities. One can’t pretend that long and that much. One couldn’t keep doing it if it was uncharacteristic. Surely that is obvious to anyone with a brain that hasn’t been destroyed by PC.

          Now of course, you would see Gillard handing out bottles of water, as a noble contribution in dealing with the disaster, right?

          There is really no hope for your kind, Matt. Your will always be justifying the Labor/Greens for whatever and condemning the Conservatives for whatever. You and your ilk live in a fantasy world where you are only credible to each other.

          It is going to be tough for you when this filthy government is excised.


          Report this

          111

          • #
            Mattb

            Look he’s a calculated determined politician. 95% of most of what they do is calculated for maximum impact.

            Joined fire fighter vollies 1 year out from a federal election.
            Did the aboriginal community thing only reasonably recently.
            But look that is what pollies do. I actually think Monbiot’s article is pretty average btw.


            Report this

            112

          • #
            AndyG55

            The trouble is, Sean, that they judge other people by their standards.

            They expect everyone to be slimy, despicable liars, like themselves.


            Report this

            41

          • #
            John Brookes

            I quite like Tony Abbott, and I wish he’d be patron of our cycling club (but certain individuals have said that his membership would contravene our “no dickheads” policy). However I was listening to Tony Windsor talking on the radio, and he said that the reason he and the other independents went with the ALP rather than the Libs was that the ALP outlined their policies, and what they were prepared to do for rural Australia. Tony Abbott, in contrast, basically pleaded for them to help him be PM. Not a good look.


            Report this

            24

          • #
            Winston

            Matt and John,
            If you don’t judge a politician by his or her actions, then what on earth do you judge them on?

            It would appear that no matter what sort of a man Abbott is or how he acts, you would second guess his motives or decry his actions as some calculated manipulation on his part. Yet, by contrast, the incumbent PM may stoop to any corruption or act of manipulation or deceit and you would say nothing, or worse actually strive to defend her against indefensible behaviour or even a lack of competence.

            However, OTOH Abbott has consistently shown he is a family oriented man, who has a strong minded wife who is no wallflower or brow beaten trophy, he has 3 polite and well spoken and well educated daughters who are a credit to him, he has worked outside of politics in journalism and other fields of endeavour with credit, and he is well educated Rhode Scholar himself and broadly knowledgeable across a range of subjects. He is physically fit and determined and has a pragmatic attitude and a good work ethic. And he is very supportive toward his staff who are extremely loyal to him. What more does one need to do? I feel one cannot complain about the standard of our politicians if their good actions count for nothing.

            Abbott may well, if given the opportunity to be PM, prove to be of poor character or of low level competence. If he does so, I will criticise him just as ferociously and ask for him to be run out of town on a rail or strung from the nearest yardarm, whichever is easiest. Why is such an even handed approach impossible for you two to practice, when dealing with those on the Labor side of politics?


            Report this

            50

          • #
            AndyG55

            “However I was listening to Tony Windsor talking on the radio”

            Seriously John!!!

            Tony Windsor has a base hatred of Mr Abbott.

            NOTHING Windsor says in that regard can be taken at his word.

            The guy is a [deleted], [deleted]…


            Report this

            10

          • #
            Streetcred

            Bloody cyclists … they’re a bugger picking out of the Beemer’s front grille. Cycle group … now that’s a collection in dick-togs. TA would be the only MAN amongst them.


            Report this

            10

          • #
            Sean McHugh

            Look he’s a calculated determined politician. 95% of most of what they do is calculated for maximum impact.

            This is what the left do when they are cornered. They then apply the criticism generally. But their example will always be against the coalition members, even those doing commendable thing, while they ignore the outrages of their beloved Left politicians.

            Joined fire fighter vollies 1 year out from a federal election.

            So what? It isn’t as if a year separation, with three-yearly elections, represents significant simultaneity.

            Did the aboriginal community thing only reasonably recently.
            But look that is what pollies do.

            Pollies (and council members) go on junkets to vacation spots. When they have any involvement in disasters (in boring Australia) it is at opportune times. That is not what Tony Abbott has been doing. Just imagine if if it had been Gillard who had long been a volunteer firefighter and Tony Abbott had just came along a big news time, handing out bottles of water. One can almost hear the endless derisive contempt from the Left.


            Report this

            10

      • #
        Joe V.

        Does Tony really roll his sleeves up to fight fires and take orders from a fire chief ?
        I can see how that would make a lot of blogg dwelling armchair warriors envious.


        Report this

        70

  • #
    Jaymez

    My letter to the AGU emailed tonight:

    Christine W McEntee
    Executive Director and CEO
    America Geophysical Union
    2000 Florida Avenue N.W.
    Washington, DC 20009-1277 USA

    Dear Ms McEntee,

    I would appreciate it if this brief letter could be passed on to the President and the Board of Directors and AGU Council for consideration and response.

    I am not writing to you as a scientist or someone who is qualified to be a member of the AGU. I am writing as a member of the public with post graduate qualifications in Finance and Economics and having held a number of senior executive positions and directorships. I am a past member of a number of professional associations, a Life Member of a peak Australian professional body with thousands of individual members. I served a number of years on the Board of Directors, and held a number of offices over the years including Chairman of the Practitioners Committee, the Professional Standards Committee and the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee. So I know something about ethics and professional conduct, in particular within a professional membership association.

    I note your website states:

    “AGU is built on a foundation of shared values that include valuing the scientific method, the generation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, free exchange of ideas and information, respect for a diversity of ideas and approaches, accountability to the public, and excellence and integrity in everything we do. Our science is accurate, peer reviewed, and well respected.”

    One would consider then that any member or associate who publicly conflicted with the values stated above would be held accountable in some way by the AGU. I am not privy to the workings of the AGU and whether your Union has a code of ethics or rules of professional conduct for members; but one would think that an organisation as old as yours would have something along those lines. At the very least it would be considered an offence by a member to bring the AGU into disrepute by acting in a way which is in conflict with the values as expressed above.

    I was therefore greatly surprised and dismayed to read a review of your recent convention where I note:

    1. Michael Mann was honoured as a new Fellow of the AGU. This is the same Michael Mann who clearly breached the AGU’s stated foundation values consistently and deliberately over a long period by acting in a less than scientific manner withholding adverse statistical results and important data, and who actively discourage publication of criticism of his work. I am of course referring to his infamous ‘hockey stick’ paper which he published with others. While the IPCC used the graph as a centrepiece of it’s 2001 Assessment report, Mann refused to release data for independent verification by Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick and conspired among others to ensure they couldn’t gain access. This unscientific shenanigans meant that it took until July 2005 for leading US statistician Edward Wegman of George Mason University to assemble an independent group of statisticians to assess the Mann data. Their report supported McKitrick and McIntyre’s criticism’s of the Hockey Stick finding that Mann’s statistical work was flawed.

    Specifically their report found:

    “It is important to note the isolation of the paleoclimate community; even though they rely heavily on statistical methods they do not seem to be interacting with the statistical community. Additionally, we judge that the sharing of research materials, data and results was haphazardly and grudgingly done. In this case we judge that there was too much reliance on peer review, which was not necessarily independent. Moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that this community can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility. Overall, our committee believes that Dr. Mann’s assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade of the millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium cannot be supported by his analysis.”

    Michael Mann continually refers to those who disagree with or criticise his work as ‘climate deniers’ and has often implied they have some vested interest in opposing his work. The instances of this are so many, you must be aware of them.

    Michael Mann’s behaviour is clearly in direct conflict with the foundation values of the AGU including: “valuing the scientific method, the generation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, free exchange of ideas and information, respect for a diversity of ideas and approaches, accountability to the public, and excellence and integrity in everything we do. Our science is accurate, peer reviewed, and well respected.”

    I was therefore incredulous to learn the AGU had honoured Michael Mann at the recent Convention and would strongly suggest that the Board review the award of Fellow given his clear lack of respect for the principles which the AGU espouse.

    2. Peter Gleick was invited as a guest presenter to speak twice at your recent convention. I understand that in 2011 Gleick was a member of the AGU’s Scientific Ethics and Integrity Task Force. In fact Gleick co-authored a paper on Ethics and Integrity for the AGU.

    Gleick and his co-author Randy Townsend of the AGU wrote that advancing scientific work to create a sustainable future would only be possible if scientists had the trust of the public and policy-makers And that trust, they added, “is earned by maintaining the highest standards of scientific integrity in all that we do.” http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2107364,00.html#ixzz2HVDSvRFl

    So he is someone we should expect the highest of standards from when it comes to the benchmark as set by the AGU’s own foundation statement. If he were to trash those ideals, it would have to be considered a very serious matter and a clear message would need to be sent to AGU members surely?

    You can’t not be aware that in February 2012 Gleick admitted that he fraudulently obtained confidential information from the Heartland Institute by impersonating an officer of the institute. At the time a number of journalists pointed out that such an action would be a sacking offence for a journalist. In addition Gleick released those documents to the public along with another entirely fabricated document which was deliberately designed to cast the Heartland Institute in a very bad light. Gleick claims he was sent this document by an anonymous person separately but the generally accepted opinion is that Gleick manufactured it. But whether he did or not he had no business releasing it to the public along with his admittedly fraudulently obtained documents.

    These actions are not a mere indiscretion. This goes to the very character of the person. Especially one who has written that scientists must have the trust of the public and policy makers. What does it take to sit down, think up this plan and act upon it? It is not a mere sleight against the fundamental foundations of the AGU it is a full frontal rejection. Yet it appears the AGU are totally comfortable with such behaviour from it’s members. Not only has there been no censure, but the villain was feted at the next national convention! What message do you think this sends to your members? What message do you think this sends to the public?

    Unless the AGU are prepared to make a statement to members condemning the actions of Peter Gleick in the Heartland affair and admitting that it was injudicious to have him speak at the Convention, myself and others will know the AGU only pay lip service to the claimed foundations values of “excellence and integrity in everything we do”.

    3. Stephan Lewandowsky who holds no qualifications in the physical sciences was invited to the AGU convention as co-convenor of two sessions. I must say I was surprised to see that he was centre stage at the AGU convention and I have to agree with the assessment that; “Lewandowsky’s own recent work can perhaps be best described as a unique combination of Mannian statistics and Gleickian ethics”. It is possible you haven’t been following his work in the field of social psychology, but his latest work which was ‘in press’ last September and as far as I know is yet to be published in the ‘Psychological Science’ but was distributed widely on the Internet had the title “NASA faked the moon landing—therefore (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science”.

    The reason the reference to Mann and Gleick above is appropriate is his behaviour is similar both in the past and after the release of this paper. Lewandowsky prefers to call anyone who doesn’t agree with his belief that humans are causing catastrophic climate change, ‘climate deniers’. This hardly represents a ” respect for a diversity of ideas and approaches”.

    After the publication of the above paper Lewandowsky was asked by a number of people to justify certain conclusions, release his data and to reveal the blog sites he claims to have surveyed. In a most unscientific manner, he refused to make the information available which made it impossible for others to properly check or replicate his work. Worse still when he was accused of hiding the data, he presented that as ‘another’ example of ‘conspiracy theorists’.

    There are multiple references which roundly criticise the quality and form of Lewandowsky’s latest work and unscientific and unethical approach including here and http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/12/lewandowsky-study-useless-unless-authors-demonstrate-data-integrity/ and http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/10/lewandowsky-censors-discussion-of-fake-data/ and http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/08/lewandowsky-scam/

    If Lewandowsky is not a member of the AGU, then there should be nothing further for the AGU to do other than ensure in future you invite more suitable co-conveners who live up to and respect your foundation principles. If Lewandowsky is a member of the AGU, then I suggest you review that membership because you devalue membership for all your other thousands of members if you don’t.

    Yours Sincerely


    Report this

    680

    • #
      FijiDave

      Jaymez.

      Excellent!


      Report this

      100

      • #
        Joe V.

        That is so succinct & to the point.
        Can we look forward to an Austr(al)ian Professor of some recent repute being co-opted to the ranks of the AGU’s honorary performers I wonder ?


        Report this

        60

    • #

      Short letter? LOL!

      A truly short letter with quotes clearly demonstrating fault might have done the trick. You would have had to have written it from a 100% neutral stance. Your letter might make you feel good but is headed straight for the round file like all the other crank letters.


      Report this

      261

      • #
        Ross

        Maxine ,
        You don’t know how DC , Canberra and other bureaucracies work. Jaymez will get a response ( even if it effectively says very little ) because Ms McEntee should be smart enough to note she has been asked to pass the letter on. If she doesn’t respond then Jaymez will send it directly to the President and Board of Directors , who will then start to ask questions.


        Report this

        240

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Hi Max

        I’ll have a Pina Cola thanks.

        And for once I agree with you; it is headed for the bin.

        The damage to the AGU however is done when the people whom read this post and who work in Universities disseminate the letter to other parties.

        Think of the possibilities.

        Then there are those of us who may just send a copy to our local MP with a query as to whether Australian Universities have any association with this unethical body.

        Small cheese I know but the constant reminder that all is not well or sane in the AGW camp will eventually lead to change.

        KK :)


        Report this

        180

      • #
        AndyG55

        A neat succinct, FACTUAL, well balanced letter.. Well done Jaymez.


        Report this

        100

      • #
        Jaymez

        It is a ‘brief’ letter Maxine because if I had listed ever transgression of the AGU foundation values by the three stooges named it would have been a book!


        Report this

        130

    • #
      Boadicea

      What an excellent letter that is


      Report this

      150

    • #
      John Brookes

      Sad that such an excellent letter will be filed in that circular filing cabinet on the floor…


      Report this

      14

  • #
  • #
    michael hammer

    A few weeks ago 2 radio presenters rang a London hospital and impersonated the Queen and Prince Phillip in order to try and obtain information on Kate. They have been crucified by the media and the public around the world, are off the air( ie: lost their jobs), are threatened with legal action and have received numerous death threats. The action was intended as a light hearted prank and the data they were after was only of passing public interest and had no political or financial implications. In fact little more than gossip.

    Gleick did the same thing but with far more serious intent. He sought and got detailed confidential information which he wanted to use to influence a political process. As far as I am concerned, the actions in both cases were the same, the underlying intent was far far worse in Glieck’s case yet look at the difference in how the two cases are treated.

    By inviting Gleick to speak, the AGU is in effect exonerating him and by so doing they are stating that actions the wider public finds utterly unacceptable and abhorrent are ethically acceptable by them. They have made the term “AGU ethics” an oxymoron and by so doing the committee of the AGU becomes a party to Gleick’s guilt.


    Report this

    363

    • #
      John Brookes

      And good on him. Heartland are an organisation dedicated to undermining climate science. The public should know the identity of the people funding such work.


      Report this

      16

      • #

        Yes, such as the God of climate change, Al Gore, who sold out to the petroleum monsters in the middle east. I know he’s not a “real scientist”, but he is their hero (he’s why wind turbines are white–they are alters to his godhood) and spokesperson. I am so happy to know he is pure in motive and never touched by oil money. The real problem with Heartland is the David/Goliath thing. Heartland has a tiny budget compared to Greenpeace, etc yet are making huge inroads. Maybe truth is cheaper to hand out–all those cover-up charges for AGW, etc and the money spent on lobbying, lies are just sooooo expensive to maintain.


        Report this

        10

      • #

        Did I mention the evil oil barons from the middle east also funded at percentage of “Promised Land”, Matt Damon’s anti-fracking movie. No conflict of interest or bad intentions there. It could not possible be true that fracking is cutting into middle east oil sales. Funny, though, you would have thought Matt Save-the-Planet Damon would have objected. He claimed on one interview he didn’t know. Really, maybe Heartland doesn’t know either and it’s really okay after all. I am sure Matt gave all the money back when he found out he had been tainted by oil. It would be the only answer.


        Report this

        10

      • #
        Jaymez

        It is very subjective to say Heartland are dedicated to ‘undermining’ climate science. I think they would say they are dedicated to getting the climate science right!

        Take for instance the fact that the so called climate science consensus has supposedly been telling us that the climate is extremely sensitive to atmospheric CO2, and that human GHG emissions are the primary climate driver in terms of ‘climate change’. That is what the IPCC reports have been telling the world. That is what our Government has been telling us and that is the basis of the carbon tax and eventual carbon trading rising from a current $23 per ton to a projected $254 per ton by 2050. Right?

        Meanwhile so called Climate sceptics have been saying the correlation between global average temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is poor. There is ample historical evidence that there are other natural climate variabiles which are much stronger drivers of climate all you have to do is look beyond the selective period immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age. But even looking at the period after the LIA, there are periods of temperature stability and temperature declines which are not explained by the so called consensus on climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2. And we keep pointing out how poorly the climate models have been in making projections. There has been no statistically significant rise in global average temperature since 1998. Virtually every climate alarmist prediction has come wrong too so people like the Heartland Institute of course point out the fact that Arctic Sea Ice cover has increased since 2007, That Antarctic Sea and Land Ice has increased against predictions to record highs, that the ocean warming and sea levels predicted aren’t happening and so on and so on. Yet they and other Climate sceptics get pilloried and lambasted by the left wing main stream media.

        So on Christmas Eve a few days ago the UK Met office sneak out a little announcement which essentially admits that their climate models were wrong all along. That their assumption that the climate was overwhelmingly sensitive to atmospheric CO2 content was wrong too. That the global average temperature hasn’t risen since 1998 and isn’t expected to rise further until at least 2017, which would make the total warming anomaly for 1950 – 2017 just 0.43C above the 1970 – 2000 global average temperature. They say the reason for this is that there has been a decline in the suns activity and that is not expected to pick up until 2017 and this has masked the impact of man made global warming. That is a weasel way out of admitting that natural variables (the sun) are actually stronger than man made ones! Which is what sceptics have been saying all along! Of course if and when solar activity increases, it would be natural to expect some warming!

        Not that they admit it or say it in any way, but this announcement essentially confirms what us sceptics have been saying was correct a along. That Climate Scientists had tried and convicted the wrong suspect without doing a proper investigation. That the models didn’t adequately take account of natural climate variables. Do we get a note of apology? I won’t hold my breath!

        Of course these climate alarmists still think that we should believe them even though when they said they were dead certain before, they were wrong. And they still want us to spend billions of dollars doing stuff which could be totally unnecessary.

        Well here is what even the usually conservative Daily Mail editor thought of the UK Met. But I don’t expect to see any coverage of this in the Australian Media any time soon! . http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2259934/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-Global-warming-inconvenient-truth.html


        Report this

        20

        • #
          Mark D.

          Jaymez says:

          It is very subjective to say Heartland are dedicated to ‘undermining’ climate science.

          What restraint you are demonstrating! I’m not sure if I should be inspired follow by example or disappointed and offer a few suggestions……


          Report this

          10

    • #
      PeterB in Indianapolis

      John,

      “Climate Science” cannot be said to be science at all, because “climate scientists” refuse to acknowledge or accept the scientific method in any meaningful way, shape or form whatsoever.

      As such, undermining of climate science is SUPPORTING REAL SCIENCE WHICH ACCEPTS AND FOLLOWS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

      If you understood what science actually IS at all, you would be far more supportive of places like The Heartland Institute and far less supportive of purveyors of “junk science” like the AGU.


      Report this

      10

  • #
    Ross

    Slightly off topic but it is worth reading the abstract of this paper. The results of the simple experiment explains quite abit of what we see in the MSM and comments by so called “experts” etc.

    http://journal.sjdm.org/12/12810/jdm12810.pdf


    Report this

    40

  • #
    Bethjl

    Maxine give us an example of how to write such a letter.

    Well done Jaymez. Let’s all get off our rear end and write to the AGU.


    Report this

    110

  • #
    old44

    Has anyone worked out what would happen with Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick chart if Yamal 06 was replaced with Yamal 09 or Yamal 27?


    Report this

    30

  • #
    reformed warmist of logan

    At the risk of sounding patronising …
    Why is common sense less & less common??!!
    (As ‘good ol’Leyton would say: “COME ON”)
    Where are all the real scientists?
    Mann et al are in the final ‘death rolls’ of being proved as nothing more than ‘scientific charlatans’ of the lowest order.
    Its time that the real scientists dis-own the renewables-subsidized climate-change catastrophists who seem to only be able to get their jolly’s by eschewing that the whole planet turn collective clocks back 250 years & pretend that the industrial revolution never happened!!!!
    Again, at the risk of sounding patronising …
    All it takes for evil to prosper, is for good people to be silent!!!
    Good luck in 2013.
    kind regards, reformed warmist of logan


    Report this

    100

    • #

      What nonsense! No one is saying we should go back to pre-industrial life.

      Real edge of desperation in some of the posts here for the last few weeks.

      The BuMet has reported record high temperatures. Global warming is not on its last legs, it is real and happening now and soon will be irreversible. That is the truth you are less and less able to hide from.


      Report this

      227

      • #
        AndyG55

        “Real edge of desperation in some of the posts here for the last few weeks”

        Yep, since you arrived.. your desperation is very evident in all your posts, poor thing.!!

        You bring it on yourself, though. All you have to do is learn to think for yourself, and your problem will be solved…….. try it…….. just once !


        Report this

        120

      • #

        Maxine,

        you say here:

        What nonsense! No one is saying we should go back to pre-industrial life.

        Oh dear, Maxine, that is exactly what you are advocating, you mindless fool.

        You keep telling us the cause of your precious Global Warming/Climate Change is emissions from the power plants that give us what we have now as our way of life, and that’s 40% of all emissions, and without access to electrical power those major industries that contribute most of the rest of CO2 emissions cannot operate either.

        Take those away, and in fact we do go back to a pre industrial life, and you Maxine, you’re the one advocating that.

        Without that power that is now a staple of life, you condemn the Developing World to remaining in the dark ages, and Maxine, you’re advocating that we go back and join them.

        Without that power, almost two thirds of it going to the non residential sector (Industrial and commerce sectors, where everyone works) so that means no jobs to go to, so no income, and it doesn’t matter, because there’s no power at home anyway, so Maxine, how does it feel to be advocating that you couldn’t care less that we go back to live like that.

        Your ignorance is astounding, and that’s putting it politely.

        Don’t waffle Maxine, lobby your ALP Puppet Masters to actually do something, instead of making money out of it with a useless huge new tax that does not lower emissions.

        Tony.


        Report this

        260

        • #
          Winston

          This is why alarmists like the phrase- “take action on climate change”- it is completely generic and doesn’t require even the semblence of detail or thought on their part as to how to achieve reductions in global CO2, nor how they can magically somehow alter our global climate in full King Canute fashion.

          In order to achieve what Maxine would like to achieve in CO2 reductions would require not only deindustrialising the West, closing down most of our industry and the loss of employment directly or indirectly dependent upon them (and massive social upheaval and suffering and loss of life that would entail), but would also necessitate a war initiated by the West upon Russia, China, India, and possibly even Brazil simultaneously to prevent them from developing to their industrial potential, and in the case of the latter 3 to prevent them improving the quality of heretofor dire and marginal life of much of their citizenry to the level of that which is currently enjoyed by Australians, Europeans and Americans.

          Maxine is essentially asking us to achieve the unachievable, in a pointless symbolic exercise that cannot possibly succeed. The reason is that the Russians don’t believe in CAGW at all and will completely refuse to reduce their output and dependence on Oil and Coal, the Chinese don’t believe it either but will continue to pay lip service to it for profit from the renewable scam (while bewildered at the West’s economic suicidal tendencies, I’m sure), the Indians are at best agnostic and when it comes down to tin tacks only have their own local interests at heart. So with such a proportion of the world’s populace under this belief, failure is a fait accompli, especially when one considers the political games being played by the powers that be, who seem more interested in profiting either politically or financially from CAGW rather than doing anything “useful” about it.

          If CO2 levels are wholly dependent upon anthropogenic sources, then they will continue to rise at or above the present level- we need to face that fact Maxine. If CO2 does contribute to warming significantly (which I doubt), then that will happen regardless of any action we might take because we do not have the collective will or the structural ability to do so. Then the only option is to adapt technologically to it by utilising our current fossil fuel assets in the cleanest possible way but to their maximum extent in the interim, while abandoning so called renewables which cannot work in the way that is required for baseload requirements(a blind alley is just that- a dead end which delays a solution) at least until such time as a means of storage of large amounts of power is available. Then, one needs to remove the moratorium in this country to even discussing, let alone implementing thorium based nuclear power, at the very least on a small scale. So, I think it is time you faced reality Max, it ain’t gonna happen- give it up because no one really believes what you contend, and no one has any intention of doing anything about it on the scale required to be remotely effective.


          Report this

          200

        • #
          Mark D.

          Good post Tony, you saved me from typing something like it.

          Maxine is a fool in denial.


          Report this

          70

      • #
        connolly

        One of the first propagandists of the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming ideology was the the Thatcherite Sir Crispin Tickell. He later became an advisor to Thatcher who saw the utility in the theory after smashing the NUM and destroying the coal industry in Wales and Scotland. Tickell was President of the Royal Geographical Society from 1990 to 1993 and appointed the appalling George Monbiot as a Visiting Fellow at Oxford. Tickell’s view as a neo-Malthusian was that the then developing world had to be prevented at all costs from industrializing. He wrote this reactionary diatribe in the early eighties. Well that strategy went well didnt it? You Brooksey, Matt, Cat and the Inane Gelding are simply convenient idiots.


        Report this

        80

      • #
        Ian

        What record high temperatures? The record for the highest temperature was set in 1960.


        Report this

        60

      • #
        cohenite

        Global warming is not on its last legs, it is real and happening now and soon will be irreversible.

        How can AGW be irreversible?


        Report this

        132

      • #
        old44

        According to the “experts” in 2008 it would be irreversible if action wasn’t taken by 2009. Too late to do anything now.


        Report this

        110

        • #
          AndyG55

          The world pushed the CO2 concentration up by 58%, and the temperature now has a very near zero trend.

          The ONLY LOGICAL CONCLUSION is that high CO2 level STABILISE the climate. :-)

          With the massive benefits to plant life and food production, it seems that CO2 is basically THE gas that we must have more of in the atmosphere.


          Report this

          100

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        Maxine, I know your not form around here, but on our little island we call them BOM. Even they call themselves bom.

        http://www.bom.gov.au/


        Report this

        20

      • #
        PeterB in Indianapolis

        Record high temperatures in Australia, which makes up about 1.2% of the surface of the Earth, is not evidence of “global warming”, it is evidence that due to a dip in the jet stream, a @#!@%load of hot air got stranded over Australia and there is freaking hot WEATHER there.

        There are plenty of other places around the globe right now experiencing RECORD COLD, and if you added up the area of the places experiencing record cold, they would ABSOLUTELY DWARF Australia… sorry.

        Weather is not climate.

        Climate is what you expect, weather is what you GET. So stop spouting off as to how hot it is in Australia. I am sure that being an obvious hypocrite, you are probably indoors with the Central AC blasting and your bank of energy-consuming computers running full-speed so you can keep typing that irrelevant drivel that you so love to type.

        ALL self-professed “saviors of the planet” are just like Al Gore. They have tremendously huge carbon footprints themselves and waste ridiculous amounts of the world’s resources, all while telling us that we must alter our way of life in order to “save the planet”.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    stephen

    Has anyone called this a glieck tragedy yet!


    Report this

    100

  • #
    Bulldust

    O/T but you may wish to know that the EU emissions trading scheme is languishing with permits trading arounf $7.50:

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/no-end-in-sight-to-eu-carbon-permit-glut-20130110-2chf6.html

    There are even debates whether the EU kommissars should meddle in the market to contrive a higher price. Free market … not so much.


    Report this

    80

    • #
      John Brookes

      Clearly there are too many permits, or their carbon accounting methods are not robust. The fact that one implementation is not working well does not prove that it can’t, or shouldn’t, be done.


      Report this

      05

      • #
        AndyG55

        But you KNOW that if the ALP implement ANYTHING, the outcome will be a total farce.

        The most idiotic outcome and largest waste of money is BOUND to eventuate.

        That is what the ALP does, that’s how it operates, its all they know !!!


        Report this

        30

      • #

        The permits are working. They are a tax and license to pollute. Okay, maybe the tax isn’t enough and the cost has to go up. Maybe too many people are being passed over for the license to pollute and that’s unfair. Yet, I think overall, they are working precisely as designed.


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Dennis

    http://www.austpost.com.au
    NJ80010120

    British Met Office global temperature announcement


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Doug Proctor

    The current chapter in the Gleick Affair demonstrates that, today, the skeptics truly are the “enemy” and the warmists, the agents of Good.

    In an Then-Us, Black-White, Enemy-Friend, Evil-Good, Disaster-Hero event, the Us and Hero side is always allowed to step over the moral, ethical and legal boundaries. Unconsciously if not consciously, we believe in the Greater Good having more discretion in its actions, and more allowance for forgiveness. Gleick is the recipient of these benefits because he is St. George while the skeptics are the Dragon.

    Consider Al Gore: is there anyone more flagrantly hypocritical than him in the environmental movement, and yet has he been castigated by the MSM, the WWF or Greenpeace? By Romm, by McKibben? Gleick is small potatoes, a geeky, ostrich-like figure who looks likely to have been bullied all his high school years. The tolerance for indulgences is far, far greater in the CAGW debacle than just for the likes of Gleick.


    Report this

    100

    • #
      Kevin Lohse

      It’s called Noble (nobel?) Cause Corruption, and is a central tenet of Left-wing/ warmist practice. With the right romantic mind-set, until recently mostly associated with under-grad enthusiasm for fantastical causes, any action, however monstrous in itself, becomes justified by the purity of the cause. This is just one of the reasons why extreme Warmism is correctly identified as analogous with cargo-cult religions. Whereas for most graduates, this romanticism is put into perspective by association with the real world, warmists have built themselves an academic bubble insulated from real world experiences by large quantities of other people’s money where their teenage fantasies can continue unchecked. In fact, one has to acknowledge the tremendous amount of detailed activity, from corrupting the activities of august institutions such as the USAGU and the British Royal Society, to turning off the air conditioning in a US senate hearing room to maintain the CAGW lie. Open deception, falsification of data, “adjustment” of scientific records, publicly advocating the silencing or worse of those in opposition to the Great Cause. All these reprehensible actions can be justified by Noble Cause Corruption.


      Report this

      110

  • #

    The honoring of admitted fraudster, liar and thief Peter Gleick with a speaking slot at the fall conference of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in San Francisco last month unequivocally reveals an utter corruption of the scientific ethos in that organization. Every ethical member should feel morally obliged to resign in protest.


    Report this

    170

    • #
      Boadicea

      But then again Walter instead of resigning, the ethical and competent membership of the AGU should have the balls to seeze back the proper management and control of their union.

      .. in that way they may not look so much like the shonky NGO’s referred to in your excellent article in Quadrant last month …it was a doozy.

      http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2012/12/government-by-ngo

      Thank you


      Report this

      80

    • #
      FijiDave

      Thank you Boadicea, for pointing to Walter’s Opinion piece – it was indeed a doozy, and articulates exactly what I have known for quite some time, but had never had the mental dexterity to encapsulate it as clearly, and accurately as Walter has.

      When I am in the supermarket and see an endorsement from some environmental organisation stating ‘MSC’ approved, or “Friends of the Earth’ approved, I don’t buy it for the very reasons stated in Walter’s piece.

      The NGO’s mentioned have an income as great as a G8 nation, which is spent on agendas by an unknown and unelected clique of people, influencing how you and I live, how much we pay for energy, and what we eat.

      OT, I know, but all part of the Great Global Warming Swindle.


      Report this

      10

  • #
    Truthseeker

    On the subject of activist organisations and why the political green meme is so evil, I can find no better expression of that than this post. Some of the discussions in the comments get a little exestential, but the original post itself is wonderfully clear and unambiguous.


    Report this

    10

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Cut and paste error! Wrong link used! The one I meant to use is THIS ONE. The previous link was more a discussion about the nature of religion which is can be a touchy topic for a lot of people.


      Report this

      20

    • #

      That is just another blog of crap science denying that global warming is happening!

      Goodness sake, most of you have been salivating over the Met Office reducing expected temperature increases by 20%. That still means 80% of the predicted warming is happening! You lot want to eat your cake and have it too. That may, kinda, work here but not in the real world.

      Accept global warming is accelerating and work out what you can do to reduce, mitigate and adapt. Time for fairy stories is well and truly over.


      Report this

      026

      • #
        Louis Hissink

        No one is denying global warming Maxine, just anthropogenic global warming – big difference. I think the problem is confusing causes with effect.


        Report this

        150

      • #
        Jaymez

        In the real world Maxine there is no point in having a cake and not eating it!


        Report this

        80

      • #
        AndyG55

        “Time for fairy stories is well and truly over.”

        Then STFU !!! The fairy stories are coming from you.. fool !!!


        Report this

        80

      • #
        Ian

        Maxine you really are rather confused . How reducing the forecast temperatures by 20% means 80% of predicted global warming is still happening is a ludicrous statement with no scientific or mathematical logic. Let’s say the Bureau forecast an average temperature of 40C for Australia on a day for which the average temperature has never been more than 35C. Reducing this 40C temperature by 20% reduces it to 35C which is the long term average temperature. So where’s the 80% of global warming happening there? Ridiculous statements such as “that still means 80% of the predicted warming is happening!” not only makes you look rather silly but detracts from all the other statements you make which could well be as inane and misguided as this one


        Report this

        130

      • #
        Sonny

        Maxine you probably see a car stopped at the traffic lights and describe it as accelerating.

        Luckily we actually look at the data rather than rely on the prognostications of politicians or “scientists” funded by politicians though.

        Keep talking though. The public is getting very tired of your brand of shrill alarmism.


        Report this

        10

  • #
    Tim

    In my many years on this planet, I have watched with sadness the slow leaching away of things that were once held as a given, Like truth, decency, integrity, fairness and transparency.

    Many (once sovereign) states have abandoned their constituents’ opinions and are slowly force-feeding them with new laws and patterns of behavior dictated by an unelected global elite with unlimited finances.

    I believe this can be seen in areas involving science, medicine, law, finance, defense and agriculture for instance.

    You are looking at one small example here.


    Report this

    150

    • #

      I agree with you, Tim.

      For reasons that are not yet completely clear, a British author of science fiction (Eric Blair alias George Orwell, 1904-1950) realized by 1946 that society faced an impending disaster when a tyrannical government would manipulate information to control the public – a situation that is remarkably similar to the one which grips society today.

      From some strange reason, in 1946 George Orwell went from a writer of the history on the rise of communism under Stalin prior to WWII (Animal Farm), to a fortune-teller of the return of a tyrannical government by 1984. Why? I do not know, but I suspect another British author of science fiction, Fred Hoyle – perhaps compelled to write misinformation about the composition and operation of stars [1] in 1946 – contacted George Orwell.

      Although Orwell was dying from tuberculosis, he moved from London in 1946 “to the sodden, remote, windswept Scottish island of Jura” [2], was admitted to Hairmyres Hospital on Christmas Eve 1946, according to an unconfirmed report in Wikipedia [3], where the hospital staff “confiscated his typewriter” he was using to warn society about a tyrannical government that would appear by “Nineteen-Eighty Four” [4].

      You can help unravel this mystery if you have any information of communications between George Orwell and Fred Hoyle around 1946.

      Oliver K. Manuel
      Former NASA Principal
      Investigator for Apollo

      1. Fred Hoyle, “The chemical composition of the stars,” Monthly Notices Royal Astronomical Society 106, 255-259 (1946); “The synthesis of elements from hydrogen,” ibid., 343-383 (1946)

      2. John J. Ross, “Tuberculosis, bronchiectasis, and infertility: What Ailed George Orwell?” Clinical Infectious Diseases, Vol. 41, No. 11, 2005, pp. 1599-1603
      http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/11/1599.full.pdf

      3. Hairmyres Hospital, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hairmyres_Hospital

      4. George Owrell (Eric Arthur Blair), “Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984)” Secker and Warburg, 1949:
      http://www.amazon.com/Nineteen-Eighty-Four-Centennial-Edition-George/dp/0452284236 http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/


      Report this

      71

  • #

    AGU has long displayed lock-step, dictatorial decisions to try to obscure these empirical facts:

    1. Solar energy is triggered by neutron-repulsion and neutron-emission from the Sun’s pulsar core, just like
    2. Self-sustaining nuclear reactors that burned on Earth as recently as two billion years (2 Gyr) ago, and the
    3. Nuclear fission reactors and the atomic bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in early August 1945.

    The responses of world leaders and leaders of the scientific community to this 1945 discovery, including AGU,
    were much like those of ego-, geo-centric world leaders and their advisors to the 1543 discovery by Copernicus
    that the Sun is a fountain of energy at the center of the Solar System.

    That information would destroy the grandiose illusion that world leaders and their scientific advisors understand and can influence the source of energy that sustains life and guides Earth’s ever-changing climate.

    That information would reduce the status of today’s mighty world leaders, like those who ruled the world of Copernucus and Galileo in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, from rulers to mere public servants of other mortals who are “right-sized” and humbly accept their place in the universe.


    Report this

    31

  • #

    I meant to provide these references and this image of mankind’s proper place in the grand scheme of things:

    1. P. K. Kuroda, “On the nuclear physical stability of the uranium minerals,” J. Chem. Physics 25, 781 (1956); “On the infinite multiplication constant and the age of the uranium minerals,” J. Chem. Physics 25, 1256 (1956).

    2. Peter Toth, “Is the Sun a pulsar?” Nature 270, 159-160 (1977). http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v270/n5633/abs/270159a0.html

    3. P. K. Kuroda, ”The Oklo phenomenon,” Naturwissenschaften 70, 536-539 (1983). http://www.springerlink.com/content/n556224311414604/

    4. J. Marvin Herndon, “Nuclear fission reactors as energy sources for the giant outer planets,” Naturwissenschaften 79, 7-14 (1992). http://www.springerlink.com/content/jg6754317826882u/

    5. Oliver K. Manuel, “Neutron repulsion,” The APEIRON J. 19, 123-150 (2012). http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V19NO2pdf/V19N2MAN.pdf

    This image shows mankind’s proper place in the universe:

    http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=sun+worshippers&qpvt=sun+worshippers&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=317DC2F3826AAC01016C2B8B5E39A6898528C7ED&selectedIndex=7


    Report this

    31

    • #
      Tim

      After some research on Ian Plimer through Wikipedia, I found the statement: ”however, changes in solar brightness are too weak to explain recent climate change” (Press Release – UCAR, 2007)
      UCAR lead me to NSF, which leads to GRC, which leads to G20 and OECD.


      Report this

      30

  • #
    Crakar24

    A little OT but the diktatorship strengthens its grip

    http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/biden-obama-considering-executive-order-to-deal-with-guns/30691/

    and here

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

    And the result of all this is

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/technology/online-banking-attacks-were-work-of-iran-us-officials-say.html?_r=0

    From http://www.whatreallyhappened.com

    BULL BISCUITS! If the US Government can’t find the people filling our mailboxes with Viagra ads, they can’t find the hackers, and certainly cannot rule out a third party posing as Iranians to start a war, a virtual 9-11, if you will.
    The economy is on the verge of collapse, brought down not by foreign intervention but by a century of Ponzi-scheme central banking, Wall Street criminality and fraud, coupled with government corruption and ineptitude. Look at the rates of inflation throughout our nation’s history. Inflation was trivial until the unconstitutional transfer of money creation authority to the privately owned Federal Reserve. Then after Federal Reserve over-printing forced Nixon to end Breton-Woods gold convertibility, inflation took off like a skyrocket and has not slowed down since. Endless Quantitative Easing to prop up the main banks has destroyed the value and hence global demand for the US dollar.
    Wall Street and DC can’t stop the crash from happening, so now they are looking for a scapegoat for when the system comes crashing down, to duck the blame for their own crimes and stupidity and blame Iran (possibly even Russia) for it to anger Americans into supporting more wars of conquest.

    And while i am here another “sign” has been spotted in Vietnam

    http://vietnamnews.vn/Miscellany/234961/long-period-of-cold-weather-disrupt-lives.html


    Report this

    30

    • #
      john robertson

      The surest way to lose imagined authority, is to abuse it. We have played along with our authorities for years, tolerated their idiocies as not worth fighting over. Now they are bats hit crazy, crapping in their own nests and trying to take the productive part of society down with them. Now there is no law.Police are fully political, governments do not respect contracts, they forgot the authority was vested in them not their authority. Too bad so sad, just another example of ignorant, arrogant bullies mistaking politeness for fear.
      Next 2-5 years will be highly entertaining.
      Think Zimbabwe with an armed public.


      Report this

      00

    • #

      Executive orders do not override the constitution unless no one stands up and stops it. They are not absolute power–the people who wrote our Constitution were obviously brighter than today’s politicians.

      I agree, John. Maybe not with the “Zimbabwe” part, but I do think that politicians took the Obama victory as a sign that Obama was God. This whole mess is like the teenager who broke rule after and rule and got away with it, then decides he’s all-powerful and heads out to knock off a convenience store because no one will stop him. Maybe no one stops him this time, but as he continues to believe he walks on water, he does stupider and stupider things. One day, surface tension gives out and plunges into the freezing water. Politicians feel like gods at this point, which is kind of a good thing. I think of it as the faster they fall into complete delusional states, the faster people will realize this is not a game and stop the insanity. Hopefully they don’t wait too long.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Ross James

    1. Heat Wave hits Europe and GRIPS continent BREAKING ALL previous historical and ANY accounts of LOCALIZED heat waves.
    2. Heat wave hits Siberian deserts and GRIPS continent BREAKING ALL previous historical and ANY accounts of LOCALIZED heat waves.
    3. Heat Wave hits USA and GRIPS continent BREAKING ALL previous historical and ANY accounts of LOCALIZED heat waves.
    4. Heat wave hits Australia and GRIPS continent BREAKING ALL previous and ANY historical accounts of LOCALIZED heat waves.

    Anyone see a pattern here of global warming?

    The combination of extreme warming fluctuation with the heightened trend made 2012 bad for USA. Fluctuations will continue to come, some up, some down. The “up” ones will bring about a repeat of disastrous conditions we see in Australia. Any honest person will recognize records are being broken in a supposedly slowing down of global warming. And since the trend keeps rising, those future disasters will be even worse.

    The “down” temporal fluctuations of climate dog wagging will bring about a repeat of fake skeptics crowing about a “return to normal.”

    After all it’s still snowing in WINTER’s Northern Hemisphere. Rest easy now in Australia.

    Ross J.


    Report this

    216

    • #

      Oh Ross, DO something. Don’t whinge!

      Tony.


      Report this

      41

    • #
      Grant (NZ)

      Well spotted Ross.

      Now, add value to these observations by showing causality. What has caused this global warming? And show the mechanism by which this has occurred.


      Report this

      51

    • #
      AndyG55

      There’s been ONE hot day.. its all media hype !!!

      A heat wave is 4 or 5 in a row. !


      Report this

      22

    • #
      AndyG55

      Many Australia temp records are from 70 or even 100 years ago..

      If we really are breaking these (which I doubt, after discounting urban heat effects data worrying etc etc) then we are finally getting back up to the temperatures of 70-100 years ago !!!

      And what happened in the 30 years after all those late 1930′s records……
      I’ll leave it up to you to find that out. ;-)


      Report this

      41

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Ross,

      More hyperbolic and unfounded crap. No sources quoted, no verification, just the ranting of a zealot without any observational data to back you up. Global temperatures have showed no significant trend for decades now Ross.

      Where is this pattern of warming of which you speak?


      Report this

      50

      • #
        Ross James

        1. http://peakoil.com/alternative-energy/siberian-heatwave-brings-chilling-warning/ Heatwave Siberia
        2. http://english.sina.com/life/p/2012/0822/498808.html Heatwave Europe
        3. http://www.foxnews.com/weather/2012/07/07/extreme-heat-bakes-midwest-parts-east-coast/ Heatwavew USA
        4. http://www.news.com.au/national/australia-boils-as-extreme-heat-hits/story-fndo4eg9-1226547438214 Heatwave Australia
        5. http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/blistering-heatwave-grips-argentina-power-outages-gas-shortages-reported-from-increased-demand/ Breaking News………..South America hit by massive Heatwave

        And when the El Nino returns it is STILL in NEUTRAL – God help the Earth’s North and South Hemispheres when Summer returns each Global Warming step up caused by harmless minor radiative forcing on our climate. The Laws of physics of greenhouse gases is nudging us forward to an unknown new warmer climate regime each and EVERY year. In 10 ten years predictions come to roost – we need to cut emissions of CO2.

        We aren’t seen nothin’ yet.

        Ross J.


        Report this

        06

        • #
          llew Jones

          “We aren’t seen nothin’ yet.” Very true Ross. Simply because there has been nothing recently that has got anywhere near the sort of sizzling summers we experienced (in my case Essendon Vic.) when we were youngsters.

          Don’t know if the asphalt melted at a lower temperature than the current stuff but for weeks in a decent summer when we walked on asphalt surfaces we would leave our footprints deeply in the asphalt. That’s one sign of a fairdinkum Aussie summer.

          Don’t know how long you’ve been living in Australia but for those of us who have lived here all our lives the current “hot” spells with one warm day followed by several cool days simply is kid’s stuff compared with some of the extended heatwaves that we experienced when we were younger.

          That’s why our subjective experience of weather and reading anything we like into it about climate change is pointless. If we accept the proposition that a change in global temperature will tell us more about climate change whether caused by natural variability or human activities or a combination of both then that is the only measure that is important.

          That is why assuming that local and regional weather events or patterns tell us anything about climate change trends is nonsense.


          Report this

          50

        • #
          Mark D.

          Ross James, it’s so good to hear your wailing voice again!

          Funny, Maxine takes a break and you suddenly return????? :(

          Ross, Scroll down and read 41 Tell it to those poor freezing sods. Then try to find anything in the latest ACTUAL global temp sets.

          You’re right about one thing; we ain’t seen nuthin.


          Report this

          20

        • #
          AndyG55

          “we need to cut emissions of CO2. ”

          Take your idiotic message to China.. be a man, go and protest there, or India.

          Bet you don’t, because it doesn’t really matter enough to you.
          You are just a pussilanimous whinger.

          NOTHING we do in Australia makes one iota of difference.

          WE don’t need to do anything, in fact we are TOTAL FOOLS if we do because the only people that will get hurt are US.


          Report this

          00

    • #
      llew Jones

      “Anyone see a pattern here of global warming?”

      No. Because these are local and regional weather events.

      If you had any understanding of the Consensus climate science you are so beholden to, you should know the only numbers that count are the anomalies about the mean. So stop trying to needlessly scare yourself Ross. Just relax because things are OK i.e. no significant GLOBAL warming for 16 or so years. We’ll let you know when to panic.

      Here is where 2012, which is not even in the top 25%, sits in terms of Global Temperature Anomalies over the last 34 years:

      Globally, 2012 was the 9th warmest of the last 34 years, behind 1998, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, and 2010:

      1979 through 2012, ranked from warmest to coolest:

      1. 1998 0.419
      2. 2010 0.394
      3. 2005 0.260
      4. 2002 0.218
      5. 2009 0.218
      6. 2007 0.202
      7. 2003 0.187
      8. 2006 0.186
      9. 2012 0.161
      10. 2011 0.130
      11. 2004 0.108
      12. 2001 0.107
      13. 1991 0.020
      14. 1987 0.013
      15. 1995 0.013
      16. 1988 0.012
      17. 1980 -0.008
      18. 2008 -0.009
      19. 1990 -0.022
      20. 1981 -0.045
      21. 1997 -0.049
      22. 1999 -0.056
      23. 1983 -0.061
      24. 2000 -0.061
      25. 1996 -0.076
      26. 1994 -0.108
      27. 1979 -0.170
      28. 1989 -0.207
      29. 1986 -0.244
      30. 1993 -0.245
      31. 1982 -0.250
      32. 1992 -0.289
      33. 1985 -0.309
      34. 1984 -0.353


      Report this

      30

      • #

        Why do anomalies around the mean count? Can anyone explain the statistical or calculus basis for this belief? Was it always anomalies around the mean and does that indicate it was always based on extremes? What was the justification for using the “mean” in the first place?

        (I understand that llew is the AGW crowds own numbers won’t support their claims/)


        Report this

        00

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    A bit OT but pertinent to the general theme.
    http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2417/planet_gore_sells_out_to_big_oil_al_jazeera

    A bit late on the scene, but a sign that MSM is waking up at last.


    Report this

    10

    • #
      john robertson

      Big Al is rubbing it in, the true believers the eco-saviours are all just tools to be used to increase the wealth and power of their chosen leaders.


      Report this

      20

  • #
    AndyG55

    Jo, just in case no-one has mentioned it..

    in “decieve”…. “i” before “e” except after “c” ;-)


    Report this

    40

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    Those who have followed the Gleik story in USA will see some similarity to the events in Australia this week inmvolving ASIC investigating a green activist Jonathan Moylan (playing Gleik), comments by a Green Senator Christine Milne (playing thre AGU), the ANZ bank and the large company Whitehaven Coal (as the Heartland Institute).

    I shan’t repeat the events here, see http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/abetz-slams-greens-for-backing-hoax-20130108-2cerk.html or any one of dozens of reports on both the Gleik and Moylan affairs.

    It is particularly disturbing that Christine Milne is reported to have said last Tuesday Tuesday, that Mr Moylan’s hoax was ”part of a long and proud history of civil disobedience, potentially breaking the law, to highlight something wrong”. My comments here are not politically motivated. They are motiviated by law breaking.

    The responsibilty of bloggers like we are here, includes a responsibility to express support for the Rule of Law, plus disapproval of its abuse. More power to the blog, may the copy cats decrease.


    Report this

    90

  • #
    lmwd

    After reading all Maxine’s posts I was starting to feel irritated and I don’t like to end the evening in a bad mood. It’s usually my favourite part when it slinks off, tail between its legs after a humiliating encounter with any number of the numerous fantastic contributors here. I feared that not even an eloquently worded, classic Rereke slam-dunk of the dog would have put me in a better humour.

    Then I popped over to Quadrant and read this:

    For alarmist disciples of the emerging our-climate-system-is-becoming-unstable cults, however, every atmospheric change is merely another harbinger of anthropogenic Armageddon, not a product of (unpredictable) natural variability, such as the extreme heat in 1896.

    Nice link to Jo’s site there.

    http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2013/01/for-climateers-it-s-always-the-silly-season

    And just for the dog since it was making much of the hot weather.

    However, for meteorologists there is nothing particularly mysterious about the cause behind the extended hot spell.
    “Heatwaves over the interior are a common part of summer in Australia and this one is not likely to set individual (daily) state or national records,” Braganza says.
    “It has hit some site records, but we are really looking at the duration of the heat in many locations in terms of how unusual this has been compared with previous years.
    “It is a function of how stationary the weather patterns are over Australia at the present time.”
    This blocking of the monsoonal trough is the key to understanding what has been going on.
    A high-pressure system has sat over the Tasman Sea that has allowed heat continually to circulate over the continent.
    “That is almost always when you get a heatwave in Australia,” Braganza says.
    “The last two years we didn’t see much of it because we had a different seasonal climate influence.
    “You can say that for years where you didn’t get a very hot summer in Australia, you probably had less of the weather systems becoming stationary over the continent.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/the-great-heatwave-of-2013/story-e6frg6z6-1226549810192


    Report this

    101

    • #
      Ace

      Imwd…you only need to take not of what TonyFromOz has pointed out here, regarding, Maxine, Brookes and any others of their type: if they are so sure of the position theyve adopted, then why do they come to blogs like this and spend…seemingly most of their free time…arguing with people they claim are a looney fringe?

      If they believe what they say they do then why dont they just get on with it?

      Its one of those self evident self contradicting positions that they paint themselves into. Its like the guy whose suspiciously anti-gay and we thinks protest too much. They must know they cant convince fringe looneys, so who ARE they trying to convince?

      Obviouly.


      Report this

      90

      • #
        AndyG55

        I think you have it..

        Inwardly, they know they are wrong and that CAGW is a load of bunkum..

        Its themselves they are really trying to convince… and gees aren’t they getting desperate !!

        Thing is, they look and act like total fools, so if they are trying to convince us………

        ITS HAVING THE OPPOSITE EFFECT. :-)


        Report this

        60

      • #
        Byron

        Ace ,
        It`s called proselytising , and is a feature of most religions . With a bit of time it`s fairly easy to spot the people who`ve adopted CAGW as a substitute for for some sort of faith based structure in their lives vs those who support it as a hypothesis .


        Report this

        60

        • #
          Ace

          Ive long thought Neo Environmentalism (as opposed to the old type I used to endorse, would still do if it existed) is a religion. They even have a Goddess, some call her Mother Earth, others Mother Nature and one pillock says shes “Gaia”, how gay is that (no disrespect to any homosexuals, just a figure of speech).

          They base all their morality on what they claim will happen AFTER we are dead. How metaphysical is that?

          They arent happy just living by their ideals but make most of being SEEN to be doing so…ie Mosque on Friday.

          Pious, they consider themselves morally so superior they can have disbelievers put to death (Parncutters).

          I have come to religious belief myself, but I make a point of avoiding the latter traits and I certainly dont call it “science”. What they exhibit is “bad faith”, a determination to compensate for an actual lack of real faith.

          Why have they no real faith in their creed? Because it is hollow and offers no return. Unlike…crikey, I hate to say this but after years scoffing at others saying such things I now know what they were talking about… real experience of The Divine.


          Report this

          30

      • #
        John Brookes

        If only I knew Ace, if only I knew…


        Report this

        04

        • #
          AndyG55

          So.. you have no idea what you are doing here..

          I think we had all realised that, long ago ! :-)


          Report this

          40

          • #
            John Brookes

            Well I’m pretty sure I’m not changing anyone’s mind. So I think the trolls only function here is to keep you guys from being one giant love in.


            Report this

            12

        • #

          John–I hate to say it, I do, but you are right that “trolls” do keep blogs from being love fests. Up to a point. (It can be overdone and just be self-gratifying rudeness.) I rarely go on blogs where the only reason for the comments section is to make the blog owner feel like a winner. It is much more interesting when someone challenges the idea, IF you present some kind of cohesive argument, or just ask questions to get people to think, there is a benefit. The name-calling and bashing is not helpful, but overall, differing opinions do get people thinking.

          (Now please don’t turn insulting and annoying and make me dump you in the “Worthless Troll” category!!)


          Report this

          20

          • #
            Brian of Moorabbin

            blogs where the only reason for the comments section is to make the blog owner feel like a winner

            You mean sites like this one Sheri? Where the ast majority of comments are made by the owner (or one of his various alternate accounts in an attempt to look like he has support)?

            I wonder what kind of person would do that….. Maybe Maxine could enlighten us?


            Report this

            10

          • #

            Wow, what messy blog! Does look like the owner may be padding his own comment section. How sad. Blogging to get followers may lead to that, I suppose. I have few followers, so when I get a bunch, I’ll let you know if my outlook changes!


            Report this

            00

  • #

    American Geophysical Union – cheat, deceive, steal, “It’s OK”.

    Why should this group be any different than the rest of America?


    Report this

    50

  • #
  • #
    Streetcred

    We should have a “Moby Dick” category for the warmista Taliban here … jb, maxine (my feet are killing me, et al.

    They’ll swallow any warmista BS !


    Report this

    30

  • #
    Peter Crawford

    I have conducted a sociological survey from my institute deep within Holyhead Mountain. I sent a set of scientifically tested questions to various leading bellends. The results are remarkable and will be presented on the next ‘Unthreaded Weekend’ if Joanne permits.

    Lewandowsky gets ‘mainly D’.


    Report this

    30

  • #
    crosspatch

    The answer here would seem quite simple: Shun them.

    Do not cite papers published henceforth in their journals. Do not publish in their journals. Do not attend their functions and allow your membership to lapse. If you are refereeing something and someone cites a paper from one of their journals published since the Gleick incident, ask if there is a paper from a more reputable source that could be cited instead.

    They will notice a drop in the number of citations of their articles fairly quickly. Most of these journals use that to measure the size of their … influence.


    Report this

    30

  • #

    crosspatch: It may not actually stop the bad behaviour, but I do the same with companies I buy from (as much as possible), letting companies know why I stopped buying from them. My writings and blogs do no link to other websites if I find the sites objectionable, and I will drop them if I find out later our philosophies and truth levels are incompatible. This may not stop the lies and deception, it may not decrease the size of the their influence, but it helps keep me free from supporting that which I do not agree with.


    Report this

    50

  • #

    Sorry to be off topic here.

    Oh dear!

    Electricity price spike after generators mothballed as Queensland’s baseload capacity falls short

    Hmm! I wonder why those generators were mothballed.

    Hint: Just by closing two of Tarong’s 4 generators, the Company is saving $160 Million it now does not have to pay Canberra for the CO2 Tax.

    The chickens are coming home to roost.

    Tony.


    Report this

    81

    • #
      crosspatch

      Isn’t there another state election coming up in Australia soon?


      Report this

      10

    • #

      There’s a vital key word in this article I linked to.

      Mothballed.

      Note it does not say shut down.

      These generators are only 28 years old, so there’s at least another 22 years plus of service left in them before they reach the end of their life.

      Mothballed means they can then be brought back into service.

      Now note how long they are being mothballed for.

      2 years.

      That’s a saving of that $320 million. ($160 Million per year for two years)

      As I have often mentioned here, bean counters will do their sums and work out what is economically viable and then give their advice.

      Note specifically those TWO years.

      That is the fixed price period of that $23 per tonne of CO2 emissions.

      At the end of those two years the price moves to the floating auction price, currently around the $7 per tonne mark.

      So, the Company is obviously thinking along two lines of thought.

      1. The fixed price ends and the CO2 cost drops to a more manageable amount.

      Or 2. Labor gets thrown out of office and the CO2 Tax is scrapped.

      Now note who suffers in all of this.

      Queenslanders, who now have 700MW of power (that’s 24/7/365 Power, that power that fills the absolute Base Load requirement)) removed from the grid, and who will now probably have to pay higher prices for their electricity as those expensive to operate gas fired plants have to work longer periods of time to make up that power.

      Note here that while emissions have decreased from the coal fired plants mothballing, (temporarily) emissions have moved sideways because gas fired plants now have to take up the slack. Instead of operating for just a few hours a day to provide power at Peak Power periods, they now have to operate for considerably longer, emitting much more CO2 than they normally would emit.

      See how the CO2 tax does not lower emissions, and on top of that, it’s costing more for the electrical power.

      Federal Labor. Open Mouth. Change feet.

      Tony.


      Report this

      121

    • #
      AndyG55

      Oh, but this time its not Mr Abbott’s fault.. (actually, I think I saw someone blame him !)

      It is being put down as Mr Newman’s fault, (by the far-left-loonie, Courier mail audience)


      Report this

      41

      • #

        See how blame can be laid depending upon whose politics you support.

        If the Labor introduced CO2 Tax was not in place in the first place, then the State owned plant would not need to close 2 of its generators to save the money they would have to pay for the CO2 Tax.

        Either way now, those other Companies who own the natural gas fired plants are now paying (considerably) larger CO2 tax, because they have to operate longer to take up the slack, hence they have increased the cost of the electricity they produce to cover that huge extra impost.

        Nobody wins here, and emissions have not been lowered, which was the intent of the introduction of this Tax in the first place.

        Hey look over there ….. Poles and wires.

        Tony.


        Report this

        81

    • #
      wayne, s. Job

      No but yeah but the new wind turbines and solar panels should adequately cover two generators, or have the green mobs been lying to us? [sarc}


      Report this

      50

  • #
    Peter Crawford

    Q. You are asked to attend a fancy-dress costume party the theme being popstars. Whom do you dress as ?

    A. Lemmy out of Motorhead
    B. John Bonham of Led Zeppelin
    C. The slightly poofy one from Take That
    D. Elton John.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Bulldust

    One of our favourite mates, Bob Brown, is writing at the SMH pretending the Whitehaven hoaxer is an environmental martyr:

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/its-coalminers-not-moylan-who-are-costing-us-the-earth-20130110-2cix6.html?rand=3577925

    Shame there is no comments section. BTW he starts with James Hansen’s quote from the 2008 congressional testimony:

    “CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.”


    Report this

    71

    • #
      AndyG55

      I hope that green eyed moron gets to see his beloved Greens party pulverised into the dust.


      Report this

      61

      • #
        Bulldust

        Oh the Greens do serve a purpose. The are a focal point for the whackos, which makes it easier to identify them in society.

        That’s not to say there aren’t smart people there as well, but they are usually in one of two categories:

        1) They haven’t spent time to actually evaluate the impacts of Greens policy objectively; and/or
        2) Their cleaving to Greens dogma gets in the way of their objectivity.


        Report this

        101

    • #
      ianl8888

      The parallels between the Gleick affair (a noble cause, you know) and Moylan’s actions with their on-going ripples are pretty obvious:

      alleged forgery & identity theft, alleged malicious financial damage to the target (in Gleick’s case, the donor base of the Heartland Institute), support of these actions by Greenies for the noble cause, compliant MSM (in Gleick’s case, the AGU)

      Copy cat progression through noble cause corruption


      Report this

      20

  • #
    pat

    Bulldust -

    worse was ABC radio last nite with tony delroy holiday replacement – always someone who sounds like a high-school student doing “Work Experience” – doing what i imagine was a whole hour on Moylan (i only heard the final half hour or so).

    by sheer coincidence(?) Moylan’s mother phoned in with her defence of her son, plus there were what sounded like set-up callers from “save the reef” guy (admitting funding from CAGW activist Center for Biological Diversity in the US) and others, all praising Moylan. one said he was the Jack Mundey of our time!

    if only taxpayers weren’t having to fund the ABC.


    Report this

    91

  • #
    pat

    10 Jan: Daily Mail: James Delingpole: The crazy climate change obsession that’s made the Met Office a menace•The £200 million-a-year official weather forecaster often gets it wrong
    •This week it has admitted there is no evidence that ‘global warming’ is happening
    •The Met Office quietly readjusted its temperature projections on its website on Christmas Eve
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2259942/The-crazy-climate-change-obsession-thats-Met-Office-menace.html


    Report this

    31

  • #
    Crakar24

    Another “sign” has been witnessed at Mission Ridge

    We’ve had historic, near-perfect snow conditions,” said Jordan Lindstrom, the Ridge’s marketing and sales director. “Early wet snow gave us a good, solid base, and lots of powder came soon after. It’s one of the best starts since we began keeping records 42 years ago.”Second best, in fact. Through November and December, 124 inches of snow fell at the Ridge for a 62-inch snowpack at the summit with 41 inches at the base. The only season to beat it was back in 1996-97, when 133 inches blanketed the mountain.

    http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2013/jan/08/historic-snow-favors-ridge-and-crowds-follow/?a

    We have heat at one end and cold at the other what more evidence do you need to prove A (BOOGA BOOGA) G (BOOGA BOOGA) W (BOOGA BOOGA) is gunna gitcha if you dont repent. Repent now while you still can.


    Report this

    60

  • #
    pat

    10 Jan: Daily Mail: Sean Poulter: Enough to make you shudder! Temperatures set for sudden plunge to minus 10C… as average heating bill for the elderly soars to £1,350
    •Cold snap will put huge pressure on elderly, fearful of turning up heating
    •Average gas and electricity bill for over-65s reached £1,356 last year
    •Five of ‘Big Six’ energy firms put up tariffs as winter began
    •Experts warn thousands will die from medical conditions worsened by chill
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260490/UK-temperatures-plunge-minus-10–average-heating-elderly-soars-1-350.html


    Report this

    40

    • #
      crosspatch

      This is going to be an extremely hard freeze from China, all the way across to Europe. Moscow is probably looking at 30 degrees below normal in Moscow between 19-24 Jan possibly lasting into February. This is going to be a major news story in a couple of weeks time. This is an epic blast of cold air unlike anything we have seen in 50 years.


      Report this

      40

      • #
        AndyG55

        But you can almost bet that it will still be “The warmest January on record” !!!


        Report this

        50

      • #
        John Brookes

        What will be interesting is to look at arctic temperatures at the same time. A freezing Russia matched by a warmer arctic could be a very strange thing.


        Report this

        13

      • #
        Byron

        Crosspatch ,
        Mongolia is in the grip of a tsagaan zud (livestock killing snowy winter )at the moment , 80% snow cover and rising , temp range is -30/-38 degrees Celsius during the day and dropping to -40/-45 degrees Celsius at night . Poor sods , They`re still recovering from the 2009/2010 zud where They lost 8 million head of livestock by the end of it


        Report this

        20

  • #
    Leo Roberts

    I’m not sure Gleick was making any statement on behalf of the AGU. His hoax was in a personal capacity. Seems you’ve overreached in this article Joanne.


    Report this

    04

  • #
    pat

    for George Monbiot who continues putting out the fake meme that Murdoch Media is CAGW sceptical – a cartoon from Sean Leahy in the Courier Mail this week on the bushfires – includes the words “CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL”. according to wikipedia: “Leahy’s cartoons continue to appear in more than 150 publications throughout the world via the Cartoonist’s and Writer’s Syndicate in New York. Major papers such as The Times and The International Herald-Tribune have printed his work.”

    Climate Change Denial
    http://www.leahy.com.au/leahy/comic.cfm?cid=2071

    what about the eye-catching headline in MSM here, including News Ltd outlets, & some overseas MSM, which is so misleading when u see the two pics that even involve australia???

    Astronaut snaps Australian bushfires from space
    http://www.news.com.au/technology/sci-tech/astronaut-snaps-australian-bushfires-from-space/story-fn5fsgyc-1226550365218

    in all the Heatwave coverage i’ve seen, it’s been mostly grass fires and friends holidaying down at sussex inlet, who were evacuated temporarily but not overnite – say all the locals consider this year’s fires to be mild compared to 2000 and 2002 & they are wondering what all the MSM fuss is about. in queensland, the flooding of the outback in recent years has led to a desert of grass instead of dirt, but when does the MSM mention that aspect:

    26 Oct: ABC: Chrissy Arthur: Simpson Desert travellers warned of fire threat
    Birdsville grazier David Brook: “They can burn for quite a long time now, with the whole country, even the stony areas, are covered with grass.”
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-26/simpson-desert-travellers-warned-of-fire-threat/4335270


    Report this

    20

    • #
      John Brookes

      Yes Pat, Leahy gets it. Most of us get it. I hate to think how much worse it has to get before you guys get it.


      Report this

      13

      • #
        Sonny

        Worse by what standard?

        Do you mean worse according to mass media indoctrination?
        Or observationally worse?

        I’m waiting for the latter to happen. Can’t say I’ve noticed anything unusual in Melbourne in terms of global warming or climate change in my life.

        Infact the last few summers have been refreshingly wet and cool. This ones been a bit warmer (there have actually been some beach days woohoo?)

        I’m not scared John. That’s because I am an independent thinker.
        You cannot control me through fear.


        Report this

        10

      • #
  • #