JoNova

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


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

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



Archives

Gullible activists bury their heads in the sand

I guess scientific debate is too hard for some people. While skeptics want to talk about the evidence, some people just want to put their heads in the sand.


This story tritely reminds us
that a picture is worth a thousands words. Indeed! The original caption read “Townsville Salutes the Australian government for their achievements in combating climate change”.  But the scientific evidence is clear that there are more accurate captions, so I thought I’d help them — strictly in the spirit of satire of course.

Fully 99% of climate models didn’t predict global warming would slow. Even in hindsight, they still don’t know why it happened.

The organizers want the idea to spread:

 Mr Hirst said he hoped that the concept would take off and that others would set up their own shots.

“People seem to like the idea … I would love to see people do it on Bondi Beach.”

 Go for it, I say. Tweet this!

 

Click here for the story of the 28 million weather balloons, and how tricky the IPCC can be at ignoring them. There’s more on the missing Hot Spot here.

Perhaps we can recruit more people to help Mr Hirst? How about this one?

Global emissions trading peaked at $176 billion US dollars a year. The voluntary part of the market is tiny. All of the emissions traders and financial houses that broker those deals depend on volunteers and lobbyists who pressure the governments of the Western world to legislate forced carbon markets. Without legal requirements on corporations to buy carbon credits, this market would vanish, and so would those profits.

Go on — be a part of it!

Join the climate-religion. Not convinced? You too can assume a smug sense of personal worth, knowing you are a superior human being, both morally and intellectually. All you have to do is parrot the words of government committees who use namecalling — “deniers” –  as their most persuasive scientific argument.

The original art had the wording “Townsville salutes” but knowing North Queenslanders it seemed a bit unfair. I’ve just reused the theme once, at the end here… I’d like to thank the volunteers who posed.

Credit where credit is due:

The image was the brainchild of Cranky Curlew Productions and the North Queensland Conservation Council, which wanted to support the People’s Climate March on Sunday, the largest climate march in history and which attracted more than 300,000 people in New York, by doing something a bit different.

“I felt like I wanted to do something different, we attend so many marches,” NQCC co-ordinator Wendy Tubman said.

The idea to capture people with their heads in the sand was the idea of NQCC member Penelope Sheridan. Her husband George Hirst, former editor of the newspaper Magnetic Times and now founder of Cranky Curlew, took the photo.

“I think it was an effective way of protesting but while also having a fun time. Once people had done it I think they actually enjoyed the process, they liked having their head in the sand … but maybe we shouldn’t tell people that,” Mr Hirst joked.

Vote for your favorite! Send in your suggestions…  : )

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.8/10 (125 votes cast)
Gullible activists bury their heads in the sand, 8.8 out of 10 based on 125 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/lc8y5bw

189 comments to Gullible activists bury their heads in the sand

  • #
    John Of Cloverdale WA

    I think Tim Blair should run another poll for the caption. I borrow one of his options from his last poll which could suffice, “future Q&A panelists”.

    240

  • #
    TdeF

    Methane is 25x more potent as a Greenhouse gas. Are these ABC reporters?

    200

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      I thought they were trying to find the missing heat.

      340

    • #
      Peter C

      Methane is 25x more potent as a Greenhouse gas.

      Just is case you might know the answer TdeF.

      What is the evidence for this extraordinary claim? Most references I have found show that the IR absorption of CH4 is small compared to CO2. And CO2 absorption is small compared to water vapour.

      80

      • #
        blackadderthe4th

        ‘that the IR absorption of CH4 is small compared to CO2′ as far as I understand it that is correct. Its potent life is also reduced down to perhaps decades and ultimately it becomes co2 which is 19% active after 1000 years. However the amount that is locked up in the permafrost and elsewhere in the deep oceans will have an effect, which are being released as they warm up due to GW.

        123

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          Its ‘potent’ life is measured in days, not decades.

          100

          • #
            blackadderthe4th

            Not days, but years!

            ‘Methane has a large effect (100 times as strong as carbon dioxide) for a brief period (having a half-life of 7 years in the atmosphere[4])’

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane

            021

            • #
              blackadderthe4th

              ADDITION

              (100 times as strong as carbon dioxide) for 100 read

              ‘it produces 21 times as much warming as CO2′

              http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/evidence/methane.shtml

              06

            • #
              Graeme No.3

              What an authoritative source! Guaranteed Connelley free?

              It is a pity that your ignorance of chemistry is so abysmal that no argument will penetrate your brain.
              I point out that it is a natural product and that means that some forms of life e.g. soil bacteria use it as a food source. Also that spontaneous combustion occurred above marshes, frightening people in the past with ghostly lights. That’s 2 ways it is reduced that aren’t mentioned in wikipedia.

              160

              • #
                blackadderthe4th

                ‘I point out that it is a natural product’ and that maybe so, but tons of it is locked up in the soils and the deep oceans, So when it is released due to global warming it will/is becoming, a serious consideration. And if 10,000s of years of locked up methane and co2
                is released in a short period of time, probably in a small number of decades, logic indicates there will be a price to be paid with regards to the climate.

                07

            • #

              Ba4 why don’t you just fart in a jar, seal it, take it out into the sunshine and see how long it takes to turn into water (and Co2).

              40

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          The Black Adder is wrong again. What a surprise!

          110

        • #
          Safetyguy66

          Is one of those asses yours?

          40

        • #

          Hey Bla,

          The planet was, conservatively, two degrees warmer during the holocene optimum that occurred in the Bronze Age. So, why isn’t there any proxy data showing a massive release of methane during the Holocene Optimum?

          130

      • #
        abt

        Peter C,

        For the same concentration of CO2 and methane, methane absorbs 21 time the amount of IR radiation relative to CO2. It is relatively insignificant because the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is about 200 times that of CO2 so the net effect of methane as an IR absorber is about 1/10 that of CO2. Sorry, I haven’t been able to dig up appropriate references but it has well known in physical chemistry for a long time.

        26

      • #

        PetC,exactly see this http://cementafriend.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/methane-good-or-bad/
        abt where did you find that nonsense -I bet you have no qualifications or experience with engineering science.

        40

        • #
          Peter C

          Thanks Cementafriend and TdeF

          The diagragm in your reference is the one that I have seen most often. Clearly CH4 hardly absorbs any infrared radiation and therefore cannot make any measureable contribution to global warming.

          Sorry to sidetrack your humous comment TdeF. It was funny. :-)

          00

      • #
        TdeF

        A good question, despite the fact that the comment was clearly meant to be humorous. Yes, the absorption bands are quite different, so it is a matter of position and width.

        As far as I can see, gases are classified under Kyoto according to their Global Warming Potential, a combination of absorption, position in the spectrum of that absorption and lifetime in the atmosphere. As such is it probably right but I cannot validate this quickly from the spectra available. If CO2 is 1, then CH4 is listed as 86, meaning that a molecule of CH4 over 20 years is going to trap 86 times as much Infra Red (in the reflected spectrum) as CO2. This is verifiable science which is not challenged. What is challenged is that it matters at all.

        I think the key issue is where the absorption is located, which is a puzzle as while they are very different in frequency position, the spectrum of IR is very wide. HFCs are in the thousands.

        The real question is the unproven core hypothesis of global warming which is the idea of a world wide hothouse. If so this hothouse has massive turbulence, no walls, no roof, vast temperature differences from the poles to the tropics, a huge 4km deep water base and a system where hot gases are free to rise, mix and reradiate. The simplistic theory of hothouse behaviour is effectively disproven by the refusal of the air to warm at all with increasing CO2 over the last 20 years. The idea that the heat has gone somewhere else is an admission that this is wrong.

        50

        • #
          TdeF

          Actually Peter C, you have me thinking. A good question, as I said.

          I had just used this figure because I had heard it used many times and it seemed likely to be reasonable science, but I have been forced to realise that a lot of the weighting for GreenHouse gases is the lifetime in the atmosphere. This is held to be 72 years for CO2, ten times that of CH4 which is combustible and reactive where CO2 is not. So how does anyone know this on a planetary scale?

          This lifespan underpins the entire Man Made Global Warming business. If it is wrong, the whole thing is wrong. It is wrong.

          As I put in my own notes under globalcarbon.blogspot.com , from simple carbon dating physics you can show from the rapid C14 decay after the doubling of C14 with the atom bomb tests in the 1950s, that the half life of CO2 is only 14 years, due probably to rapid absorption in the ocean, the Suess effect. So there is very little man made CO2 in the atmosphere, destroying the whole logical chain. The only conclusion possible is that CO2 levels are dictated by the science of equilibrium and the slight warming of the oceans last century, not fossil fuels.

          If that is also true of CH4 and CFCs, we would have a collapse of the extraordinary taxation systems, which use these weightings to extract money even from say graveyards for methane under carbon taxes and airconditioners under other taxes where recharging can cost more than a new airconditioner. Underpinning all this Global Warming revenue is casual punitive taxation, in Australia still operating separated from Carbon Tax legislation.

          Governments are greedy. As Jennifer Morohasy points out, a 12kg bottle of refrigerant has jumped from $300 to $2100. However if CFCs produced the Ozone hole, the 2% of the world’s population in the southern sub tropical zone including Australia is a fraction of the 58% in the Northern sub tropical zone, but we have an ozone hole and they do not. That does not make sense. It could just be the far lower air temperatures in our zone. A lot of this massive taxation is simply opportunistic and unjustified.

          40

  • #
    pat

    how funny.

    meanwhile, the gullible Fairfax continue their love affair with Obama. note the lying headline:

    24 Sept: SMH: ‘Bigger threat than terrorism’: Barack Obama signals Australia, India and China must improve on climate change
    by Mark Kenny and Lisa Cox
    Barack Obama has signalled to developed economies such as Australia and emissions-heavy emerging giants such as India and China that they must lift their games on cutting pollution – declaring “nobody can stand on the sidelines anymore”.
    In a powerful speech listing out recent weather calamities sweeping the world, he told the UN Climate Summit it was still possible to act …
    ***While he singled out no individual countries, there was little doubt as to the targets of his argument: the rapidly developing economic giants of India and China and the high-carbon wealthier economies such as Canada and Australia…
    Australia’s statement at the UN Climate Summit was labelled disappointing by environment groups on Wednesday in comparison to announcements by other countries…
    The Climate Institute said while the summit had brought a “mixed bag” of commitments from world leaders, the Abbott government’s failure to share a post-2020 target put Australia at risk of “being bogged in the backwaters as other countries and capital move on in serious climate action, investment and opportunities”…
    Economist Frank Jotzo from ANU’s Crawford School of Public Policy said the statements from the United States and China showed those countries were taking positive steps to do more to combat climate change…
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bigger-threat-than-terrorism-barack-obama-signals-australia-india-and-china-must-improve-on-climate-change-20140924-10l51d.html

    23 Sept: Bloomberg: David J. Lynch: Obama Joins Climate Summit That Doesn’t Force Remedies
    President Barack Obama joins more than 100 world leaders today at a United Nations summit on climate change that’s designed to move the issue beyond talk to action — though not just yet…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-23/obama-joins-climate-summit-that-doesn-t-force-remedies.html

    Jeffrey Sachs in Washington Post today: “From a policy point of view, what’s needed are plans. Where is the U.S. plan? It doesn’t exist! With all the speeches that Obama may give about the commitment, where is the U.S. pathway to deep de-carbonization by 2050? It doesn’t exist. We’ve never written it down. That’s the responsibility of governments. Show us the pathway.”

    51

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      OK, so everybody is blaming everybody else for doing nothing, whilst not doing anything themselves. That sounds productive, in an Orwellian sort of way.

      220

    • #

      Barack Obama has signalled to developed economies such as Australia and emissions-heavy emerging giants such as India and China that they must lift their games on cutting pollution – declaring “nobody can stand on the sidelines anymore”.

      Over the last ten years, China has been bringing on line one large scale coal fired power plant every 7 to 10 days, so, that’s around 500 or so of them. They are also not easing back much on the scale of that construction.

      Those plants are expected to last anything up to 50 years.

      If you, anybody, anywhere, expect China to just close them down, (because that’s what is meant here) just because Dear President quotes this text from the autocue in front of him, then you are seriously dreaming.

      Meanwhile, back in the U.S. not ONE coal fired power plant greater than a Nameplate of 800MW has closed in the last 8 years as a direct result of this CO2 emissions beat up.

      In fact, those smaller plants which have closed down because they are older than 50 years, well they have been replaced, not in their totality, but by a greater Nameplate than what has closed, and what have they been replaced by? CO2 emitting Natural Gas fired plants.

      This is Hypocrisy writ large, when this guy stands up in the UN, and says China, India and Africa need to be kept living a subsistence life while we in the Developed World can do what we like.

      Do as I say, not as I do.

      Tony.

      500

      • #
        Keith Willshaw

        In fact of course US coal consumption for electricity generation has been dropping by around 5% per annum over the last few years and in 2013 stood at around 1.6 billion tons. Naturally the older smaller and less efficient plants close first, that’s just good business sense.

        In the meantime Chinese coal usage has risen around 9% per annum and now stands at 3.8 billion tons per year. In fact China uses almost as much coal as the rest of the world combined. India and China are simply telling the greens to flutter off. The real losers are the poor countries in Africa who are denied the opportunity to use native coal reserves by eco zealots who insist they must use ‘renewable’ generation methods that not even Germany can afford.

        As for the policy of replacing coal with gas this is a very sensible decision all round. Gas produces less CO2 per megawatt of heat released, combined cycle gas plants are far more efficient than coal fired plants and best of all the gas generated power is cheaper. So cleaner, cheaper and less polluting – what’s not to like ?

        70

        • #
          the Griss

          ” So cleaner, cheaper and less polluting……” ????????

          You aren’t, for one second, suggesting that CO2 is pollution , are you ?

          110

  • #

    The 97% of climate scientists…

    …looking for the missing heat.

    660

  • #
    Owen Morgan

    “…the largest climate march in history and which attracted more than 300,000 people in New York…”

    Well, plus or minus – and I’m definitely going with the minus: 100,000 people at the Polar Bear end of the count (and very possibly a figure a long way south of that).

    140

  • #
    Owen Morgan

    In any case, what does the length of a march prove? Eschewing an obvious example, I’ll just mention that Napoleon led half a million troops into Russia. How did that work out? Come to think of it: how did Napoleon’s climate consensus work out?

    190

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    It’s the latest craze – synchronised mooning of the International Space Station.

    300

    • #
      Edward

      Nah, they’re all trying to have a quiet word with Gaia. Probably asking why she was’nt playing at the warming game. Bloody rude really – all of them trying to talk to her at the same time. No wonder that she has stopped listening.

      120

  • #
    Robbo_WA

    > “People seem to like the idea … I would love to see people do it on Bondi Beach.”

    They will, and pretty soon, if the Greens & ABC have their way.

    Five times a day.

    270

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    Time for the High Tide. ( It washes away rubbish ).

    161

  • #
    Pedestrian Lank

    I think it looks like a bicycle parking area.
    Maybe prepared for UN Climate summit attendees.

    320

  • #

    Borrowing from an episode of Futurama:

    Climate activists prepare to battle global warming…

    … by simutaneously igniting their flatulence
    to send the planet into a different orbit

    260

  • #
    realist

    Other captions:
    Climate busy activists looking for Trenberth’s missing heat.
    Nothing to see here but some Greens praying to Gaia, move along.
    Join the Greens now, keeping our heads in the right place.
    Rent seekers Green solar collectors powering up in the morning sun

    I’m sure better brains can add more.

    170

  • #
    Leonard Lane

    Amazing what some people will do to be noticed.

    60

  • #
    handjive

    Communicating with Gaia.

    Climate activists take direct action in an attempt to plead with Gaia to stop sending future climate to here, now.

    100

  • #
    reformed warmist of logan

    Good Afternoon Jo,
    That missing e-mail explaining the 18 year and 10 month pause must be around here somewhere!!
    …or…
    The latest Flashdance craze when another country gives the “finger” to the IPCC’s “Consensus”; Let’s show Canberra that us here in Townsville really know how to show-off our superior intellect!!
    Thanks, keep up the good work, kind regards.

    70

  • #
    pat

    financial industry now realises the carbon bubble (co-opting that term again) makes the housing bubble looks small, says McKibben. Olivia repeats it, saying “I love that”.

    under Obama, US has passed Russia & Saudi Arabia in gas and oil production, says McKibben, but he’s done more for CAGW than Dubya. hilarious stuff:

    VIDEO: 23 Sept: Bloomberg: McKibben: Carbon Bubble Makes Housing Bubble Look Small
    Bill McKibben, author of “The End of Nature” and head of 350.org, talks about efforts to bring awareness to climate change and global warming. He speaks with Olivia Sterns on Bloomberg Television’s “In the Loop.”
    http://www.bloomberg.com/video/bill-mckibben-carbon-bubble-makes-housing-bubble-look-small-VT4UbhlkTOatJ3CgaJB6ig.html

    more laughs:

    23 Sept: Vice: Alice Speri: Naomi Klein on New York Protests: ‘What We’re Seeing Is the Birth of a New Climate Movement’
    KLEIN: Well, I think it helps to actually name what you’re up against, and I think what gives me hope is this is almost three years to the day since Occupy Wall Street. A lot of the people here today were involved in that action, that moment, that process, and, at the time, climate change wasn’t on the agenda for the movement.
    In fact, you know Occupy Wall Street came up with a document that listed everything that was wrong with Wall Street, and wrong with capitalism, and climate change wasn’t on the list. Three years later, post-Hurricane Sandy, it’s almost like the movement is going, ‘We were righter than we knew because it’s not this is a system that isn’t just foreclosing on people’s individual homes, it’s foreclosing on our collective home.’ The idea that this is some far away, abstract issue — it was decisively put to rest by Superstorm Sandy…
    I think that on an individual level there are a lot of people in the financial world who understand what a big problem this is, but they’re locked within a system that actually won’t allow them to act on that knowledge.
    For me, the best example of this is Michael Bloomberg. This is somebody who talks about climate change all the time and talks specifically about the financial risks associated with it…
    The reason why Bloomberg is such a good example of this is that, while he talks publicly about the carbon bubble, and risky business, and climate change, his personal fortune of more than $30 billion is invested in oil and gas. Specifically, the fund that manages his wealth specializes in oil and gas assets…
    https://news.vice.com/article/naomi-klein-on-new-york-protests-what-were-seeing-is-the-birth-of-a-new-climate-movement

    51

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Given the current level of CO2 perhaps he should shut down 350.org.

      50

    • #
      James Murphy

      almost 3 years to the day since Occupy started cluttering up the place making vague, but noisy demands about various things?

      It seems like their models for change on a global scale have been faulty too…

      30

      • #
        Leonard Lane

        James, I disagree. Occupy had finished when Obama was reelected. With 27/7 media coverage and repeated reminding people that Romney had Bain Capital and was part of the “Wall Street Problem”, enough of the undecided moved to Obama. This and numerous unlawful tricks got Romney elected instead of Romney. We will have to live forever with Obama and all his turning toward supporting Islam (made tech transfer to Muslim Nations the focus of NASA, etc.) and his lazy, incompetent, and radical leftist work trampling on the Constitution and slowly destroying the economy. What a disaster he has been to the US and everyone else he attacked except our enemies. I would say Occupy Wall Street accomplished its objectives very well to help elect Obama and to distract the public from the real issues.

        80

  • #
    pat

    funny, on so many levels, including the fact it’s in New Scientist:

    22 Sept: New Scientist: Catherine Brahic: Hope against the odds is mood of NY climate march
    At one minute to 1 pm on Sunday, 310,000 people marching on the streets of Manhattan stopped. Aztec dancers in colourful traditional costumes and feather headdresses froze. Native American singers silenced their drums. Up and down the streets and avenues, the protestors observed a minute of silence – “for those who have died as a result of climate change”, said one. The contrast with New York’s iconic advertising screens was frankly bizarre. Their glamorous images illuminated placards calling for more solar and wind energy.
    Then, at 1 pm on the dot, sirens and horns blared and everyone erupted into a loud fanfare…
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26245-hope-against-the-odds-is-mood-of-ny-climate-march.html#.VCAoCbS9KSM

    30

  • #

    Should have been “Climate alarmists mock the prophet” :-)

    370

  • #
    TdeF

    Finally, the 3% of climate scientist who could not tick the right box.

    70

  • #
    handjive

    Green Jobs:
    Bicycle racks.

    230

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    I like a good analogy as well as anyone, but . . .
    The “bury their heads in the sand” notion comes from the behavior of ostriches, but . . .
    They do not, repeat, do not hide their heads in sand thinking trouble will go away.

    This tale originates from the fact that the male ostrich will dig a large hole (up to 6 to 8 feet wide and 2-3 feet deep) in the sand for the nest / eggs. Predators cannot see the eggs across the countryside which gives the nest a bit of protection. The hen as well as the rooster takes turns setting on the eggs and because of the indention in the ground, usually just blend into the horizon. All birds turn their eggs (with their beak) several times a day during the incubation period. From a distance it appears as though the bird has his/her head in the sand.

    An ostrich’s first response to fear is to run. Not only do they not stay to protect the eggs, they attempt to detract a predator to follow them. Due to the fact that they can run sustained speeds of about forty miles per hour, most predators are quickly lost and the eggs are safe.

    The photo at the top of this page was set-up by placing food in a hole.

    See here:
    http://www.ostriches.org/factor.html

    110

  • #
    pat

    re McKibben Bloomberg/Olivia interview -

    you can almost see them & their finance cronies salivating over the “carbon bubble of derivatives” they desperately want to create, using everyone else’s money, of course. damn them.

    that’s one bubble too far, folks. forewarned is forearmed.

    50

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    These Gullibles do have some help along the way in forming their view of the world.

    This morning in the car I listened to a broadcast from Their ABC about the “shooting” of a poor fellow down south.

    All the emphasis was on the fact that he was confronted by two policemen and ended up shot.

    he apparently had no connections to violent Islamism etc and listening to the story you would feel he was hard done by.

    That is until you get the full unedited story from another source.

    Apparently he sprung an attack on the policeman and then the AFP Officer.

    The AFP Officer was near death and is lucky to be alive.

    His crime should have been described as Attempted Murder but the ABC saw it as a shooting because he had placed a few unpleasant posts on the net.

    Disturbing editing of the facts.

    No wonder people are confused and easily led.

    KK

    270

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Sadly KK it seems nowadays the victims are blamed more often especially if the perpetrator is an in vogue activist, this is disgraceful behavior for any Australian citizen regardless of personal beliefs.

      Even in this news link on the crime you get some sympathy towards the accused and of course the old minority excuse is rolled out, when the potential minority can be counted in millions there is reasonable cause for concern.

      110

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      KK,

      It’s not limited to Australia either. We’ve or share of recent shootings the press has misrepresented, not to mention the grievance industry as personified by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

      I wouldn’t want you to feel alone in the fight against this problem.

      Roy

      60

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        We’ve our…

        20

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Al Sharpton as on a few weeks ago when that problem was at its peak.

          Very dapper and self assured; he looked the part.

          Last night on TV we had a glimpse of John Kerry.

          His bouffant grey hair was amazing. Is it a wig??

          There are no science trained people in journalism; they are supposed to tell us what hhappened and maybe then a bit of analysis but they don’t just report the facts they create the story which they believe should be told.

          KK

          30

  • #
    Robber

    LOL, ROTFL!!!!
    The missing heat – it’s in the sand.
    I can see more clearly now, and it’s definitely getting hotter, 100% consensus!
    Shhh – Gaia is speaking to her followers.
    There are none so blind as those who will not see. (1546 John Heywood)
    Biblical verse Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not’.
    Did someone just turn out the lights?
    We need more wind to drive those turbines.
    Ahh, hindsight beats predictions.
    No deniers here, move along.

    140

    • #
      Peter C

      Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not’.

      :-) , Thanks Robber, It deserves saying again.

      50

  • #
    pattoh

    Yep, just add water & sunshine – no fertilizer needed.

    150

  • #

    Is it a new design for a wind farm?

    260

  • #
    Grant (NZ)

    [SNIP. Nah. We don't do those kind of jokes]

    60

  • #
    James Bradley

    What climate activists?

    All I see is just another bunch of ar*eoles.

    141

  • #

    [...] seen at JoNova. Share this:StumbleUponTwitterFacebookEmailLike this:Like [...]

    20

  • #
    Truthseeker

    Followers of the Climate religion …

    Putting their best feature forward.

    120

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Following the religion theme, I predict next week’s climate protest….

      Climate Warrior: The climate deniers are bringing about their own destruction by delaying action on climate change!
      Climate Acolytes: YEAH!
      Climate Warrior: They are poisoning themselves with carbon emissions and they don’t even know it!
      Climate Acolytes: YEAH!
      Climate Warrior: We’ve got to send a message that shows them how switched on we are and how gullible they are!
      Climate Acolytes: YEAH!
      Climate Warrior: So to show how self-destructive these climate deniers are, you are now all going to drink this Climate Koolaid!
      Climate Acolytes: YEAH!
      Climate Acolyte: I’ll take two!

      40

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Only I can’t figure out which end of the body is that “best feature”. I’m truly confused about what part of these demonstrators counts the most, the head which doesn’t think or the other end which doesn’t think either.

      50

  • #
    Paul Evans

    Looks like a heap of bike racks!

    80

  • #
    TdeF

    Has anybody seen that warming?

    120

  • #
    TdeF

    The approved IPCC Global Warming debating position.

    160

  • #
    the Griss

    Why are climate activists ALWAYS making a target of themselves?

    Couldn’t you have fun with a [snip] !

    [not here.] ED

    160

  • #
    Truthseeker

    All hail the Goreacle …

    Let no truth pollute our dogma!

    90

  • #

    Last Friday I went to hear John Cook at Bristol University. Cook is a prime example of those who avoid the issues. His techniques in the talk – as elsewhere – are to claim false authority; make misleading, exaggerated, statements and completely misrepresent skeptics.
    My summary of the talk is as follows:-

    John Cook started the presentation by trying to establish his expert authority on the global warming hypothesis. Then he let slip that he does not believe all global warming is from rising greenhouse gas levels. The centerpiece was the 97.4% scientific consensus paper where he was lead author. But, as Cook himself admitted, the survey looked for support for the most banal form of global warming, and the surveyed papers were not all written by climate scientists. Yet Barak Obama is enacting policy based on the false impression of a scientific consensus of dangerous warming.
    Then in dissing an alternative viewpoint from actual scientists, Cook has implicitly undermined years of hard campaigning and entryism by green activists in getting nearly every scientific body in the world to make propaganda statements in support of the catastrophic global warming hypothesis and the necessity of immediate action to save the planet. Cook then parodied his own “four Hiroshima bombs a second” widget, before finishing off with a flickering gross misrepresentation of the sceptics, a number of whom were in the room listening politely.
    About the final question was from someone who asked about why nearly all the questions were coming from sceptics, when the vast majority of the people in the room were in support of the “science”. At the end there was polite applause, and the room quickly emptied. I think the answer to the lack of questions was the embarrassment people felt. If John Cook is now the leading edge of climate alarmism, then the game is up.

    My fuller report is here.

    351

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Kevin,

      Thumbs up!

      But about Obama — my observation of him says he doesn’t even care whether climate change is happening or not. He’s after power and a legacy that will put him in the history books forever. What could be more ready made for him to take advantage of than climate change? And the more so since all it requires of him is to talk and turn over all the dirty work of regulating things to others so he can bask in the glory and play golf.

      50

      • #
        Mark F

        The big “O” might just be setting things up for a run at Sec’y Gen of the UN.

        40

      • #

        Roy,

        President Obama might desire a legacy of having saved the planet, but he is heading for something quite different. Whatever happens, global emissions are going to increase over the 50 years. This holds try even if the US the EU and Japan cut emissions by 80%.
        In the very unlikely event the the apocalyptic prophesies come to pass the difference the US will have made will be small. They will have increased hardship, and the people of the US will still bear nearly all the climate catastrophe.
        If Obama successfully imposes emissions reductions, and the warming does not happen his legacy will not just be of one who falsely imposed hardship for not good reason. “Climate” is a dogmatic belief system, so Obama will remembered as a President that failed to uphold the Constitution, for the first amendment states

        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

        40

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Kevin,

          We know for certain that Obama has no use for the Constitution. He’s already said as much many times over. He’s a very dysfunctional individual who has only one goal for his presidency, to tear down his country until it can no longer oppress anyone anywhere. He is what Dinesh D’Souza called, the last anti colonialist, desperately continuing the battle his father tried to fight in Kenya. Being a narcissist (the opinion of Charles Krauthammer, a psychiatrist, not mine, I’m not qualified), he cannot get things right to save his life. Thus he stumbles through his presidency, bluffing his way along but always working toward that anti colonialist goal. Whether climate change is a real risk or not doesn’t concern him in the slightest.

          When I first read D’Souza I was somewhat incredulous about his theory. But then I began to think about what Obama does and realized that it all fits D’Souza’s theory to perfection. And Obama would be even farther along by now if he wasn’t so full of himself that he can’t risk the disapproval of those he believes are his supporters. He was ignoring ISIS until he was shamed into paying attention to it by the press and members of his Democrat party. He’s still shouting about being the president who ends wars, not starts them, even after finally developing a sort of strategy for dealing with the problem, a strategy calculated to please American public opinion about him rather than actually solve the problem.

          If you’re skeptical about what I’ve just said, ask yourself this question: have you ever heard him speak about his country in loving, approving terms? I’ll bet you can’t think of a single instance where he’s demonstrated any degree of love for the United States. He is a foreigner in every respect except birth, and we stupidly put him into the highest office in the land.

          He’s the perfect storm, determined and ruthless but incompetent. He has already done so much damage I can’t see a way to undo it any time soon. I don’t care what he wants for a legacy or how history will regard him, I want him out of politics, local, national and international and thoroughly disgraced, so thoroughly disgraced that his name will never be spoken again. He is the all time greatest disaster I can think of. And he got elected President of the United States, not once but twice.

          And I’ve no way to get that. To top it all off, we have once more proven to be incapable of honest public debate about the problem, just as we have with so many other things.

          And now that I’ve been up on my soapbox delivering my rant, I should apologize for it. But somehow I can’t quite muster up the belief that the rant shouldn’t be said.

          30

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      If that is the man behind the mask of Skeptical Science, a site that many would refer to regarding questions of science in general. Then I’m more disillusioned still.

      How could anyone believe anything he says on any subject? He is too blind by far.

      10

    • #

      On Tuesday evening there was a follow-up event at with Micheal Mann.
      I was surprised that Dr Mann did not speak about a revelation he made for John Cook’s “Consensus Project” earlier this month.

      There are now dozens of hockey sticks and they all come to the same basic conclusion.

      Backing for this claim would have been a major boost for Ban Ki Moon’s climate talks, and even have got Dr Mann on the front page of the Guardian and the BBC 10 o’clock News. Strange that he should pass up this opportunity. Maybe he was concerned that he would give poor Anthony Watts a heart attack and Andrew Montford a cracked jaw.

      10

  • #
    TdeF

    Can you feel it getting hotter?

    60

  • #
    Fox From Melbourne

    It (the picture) should be called,”True Believer’s with their head’s in the sand about climate facts.” Shouldn’t it, after all what prediction by a climate scientist has come true? First the ice is all going to melt away, not. The temperature is going to go up up and away, not. We’ll get a hot spot in the troposphere and it will amplifier everything, millions of weather balloons say not. Its in the deep ocean instead now, really? Oh so on and so we can go now can’t we. Its does make a good t-shirt don’t you think. “Climate Change Believers Heads in the Sand over Climate Facts”, written on it, I’ll take my one in a Large please.

    60

  • #
    David S

    Warmists take action after being told how to avoid drowning from rapidly rising sea levels.
    (To be honest it’s no more stupid than anything else they believe.)

    70

    • #
      PeterK

      Actually, isn’t this a demonstration to prove that sea level rise is real? What the Greens won’t do to prove this true…

      News Headline Tomorrow: Rising Sea Levels

      ..drowns 97 climate scientists unexpectedly while researching local sea level rise…

      00

  • #
    thingadonta

    It’s projection.

    One of the features of totalitarian thinking is to project one’s own fears, methods, and weaknesses onto others.

    70

  • #
    Frankly Skeptical

    Renewables are an ass-up.

    70

  • #
    David S

    Now let’s all say together to the nasty skeptics

    I’M NOT LISTENING TO YOU !

    60

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    The religion of (Green) peace at prayer.

    70

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      The theme is good Kevin. I think a skilled wordsmith could make something of this. Sadly, that’s not me.

      00

  • #
    Ursus Augustus

    That these nuff nuffs could not see the utter absurdity of the image they present says it all. Can I suggest they stay there until the tide comes in? No, not really they are such fun top have around, so easy to laugh at. My the global village is getting large, isn’t it – so MANY idiots in one place.

    Is this sort of stuff and Ban Ki Climate Loon’s desperate but broadly ignored appeal in New York really where these idiots have got to for all their sanctimonious effort? I hope so.

    60

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      Ursus listening to some of the speakers at the conference reminded me a lot of the Southpark hippy jam episode. 6 weeks of smoking dope, dancing and rolling in mud described as “taking action”. Obama was priceless “Im here to say we are doing something”. Yup its called @#$ing in the wind.

      http://youtu.be/mBO_x01Zze4

      30

    • #
      gnome

      Why is everyone so cruel? Didn’t you read the line where the organiser said it was an effective protest?

      30

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      That was my thoughts too Ursus, as I logged onto my computer, wondering if Jo had a new post up; and my mind wanders back to this one.

      Couldn’t they see just how ridiculous they were making themselves out to be?

      20

  • #
    ColA

    You are all so slow the captions are OBVIOUS;

    Heads up … BREATH IN

    Heads down …. BREAT OUT

    Finally a carbon sequestration model that actually works – the green way!!

    230

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    You couldn’t make it up could you? I mean how dumb are they?

    70

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      It seems perfectly logical to me … they have got it arse-backwards, which is demonstrably the normal state of affairs, with the wharmists hand-flutterers, with this exercise being the demonstration.

      100

  • #
    turnedoutnice

    I have a complaint Jo: you haven’t covered the RS snail story.

    That means I haven’t been able to crack my Richard Feynman joke: his prediction of Escargot cult science………….

    90

  • #

    Nobody fart!

    Remember Methane is 23 times more dangerous than CO2!

    Tony.

    70

    • #
      Peter C

      Same question to you Tony.

      What is the evidence for this claim? The IR absorption of CH4 seems to be small compared to CO2. And CO2 absorption is small compared to H2O

      30

      • #

        Peter C,

        (sarc)It must be true. 97% of scientists said so. Then the UN adopted it. Then the Australian Government legislated it.(/sarc)

        Along with 23 other gases, as shown at this Australian legislation as shown in this image at this link, a direct copy from that Australian Legislation.

        Where you see the number in the last column, that’s the CO2 price multiplied by that number.

        Now can you see why they want a CO2 Tax.

        It’s an enormous money bringer inner.

        Then a large part of that money gets sent to the UN, again as per the legislation, as required by the UN for Governments to pass, and the UN then redistributes it, minus their cut of course.

        Tony.

        80

        • #
          Greg Cavanagh

          Holy snapping turtles Tony. If you were right, and I’ll have bet you are. I could easily imagine someone was keeping that little secret to themselves until the scheme got some momentum behind it. Then wow, just wow.

          20

        • #
          Peter C

          Thanks Tony,

          Now I know the source. The science is still obscure to me.

          00

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Methane will burn so I think the danger is probably getting a fire started.

        CO2 doesn’t burn so it’s much less dangerous.

        30

  • #
    the Griss

    What’s the bet I am going to get [snipped].

    ” Waiting for Big Al !! “

    70

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I am curious. Was that “[snipped]” a self-snip, or was it a genuine snip applied by a qualified and duly authorised snipper?

      And is the past tense of a “snipper”, a “snapper”? In which case, it would sound fishy to me.

      90

      • #
        John F. Hultquist

        I caught a snapper once. In the Gulf of Mexico. As I recall, it was a red snapper. Caught on a spinner. The snapper swallowed the spinner and we had to snip it; the line I mean. So we did snip the swallowed spinner in the snapper. What was the question?

        10

  • #
    John

    They enjoy being shafted so much that they are making it too easy for climate scam artists.

    80

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Possible headlines,
    star comment

    - Sand culture hydroponics experiment goes wrong, giant tasteless green vegies produced.

    - Planet worshippers pay homage to Uranus.

    - Global warmists wrong, now seeking heat in earths core.

    - Sea levels drop, bottom feeders exposed.

    - Coastal view ruined by a$$holes, now called the ‘Sh$tsundays’

    - Huge cracks appear in Climate Change argument.

    - Ugly people allowed on beach under one provision…

    - Renewable energy investors prepare for dividend.

    490

  • #
    ExWarmist

    So the people who put this stunt together actually thought that it would be taken seriously? And would not be lampooned?

    Their — literally — the ones with their heads in the sand???

    Just when I thought that the Greens have plumbed the depths of stupidity – there they go – surprising me with a new example of how dumb they can be.

    I need to exercise more imagination.

    110

  • #

    If only Townsville had climate theatrics and an active klimatariat in 1867 and 1870. Back then the locals saw their brand new town smashed by cyclones and none of them bothered to stick their heads in the sand. Nobody called Premier Lilley or Governor Blackall to account. Nobody!

    Had they learned by the time Althea clobbered the city in 1971? Still no bums-up, no heads in the sand. Losers.

    70

  • #
    Farmer Gez

    New beachside wind farm
    Fills the gap when the wind don’t blow.

    120

  • #

    Climate Change, the wind’s of change are coming alright…

    50

  • #
    TinyCO2

    I love all the suggested captions. Mine-

    It doesn’t matter how much peer reviewed data you collect, you can’t get an accurate measurement of global temperature with rectal thermometers but climate scientists argue they make good proxies so long as the data is inverted.

    180

  • #
    Sunray

    So far, I really like “Bicycle Racks”

    50

  • #
    Tim

    “Anyone find the heat?”
    “Naah, nothing”
    “Me neither”
    “I even tried Mike’s thermometer trick”
    “It’s a travesty.”

    100

  • #
    John M

    Insert climate $ donation here ->
    (No 50cent coins please)

    100

  • #
    ROM

    Obviously “Skeptical Science” denizens;

    John Cook has just announced he has upgraded his Hiroshima climate fission bombs to “Tsar Bomba” sized Fusion bombs.

    _______________________

    Michael Mann’s lawyers, most of them, when they read his court presented resume and then his real one.

    60

  • #
    PhilJourdan

    Actually the image looks like breaching whales, but instead of air exiting their “blowholes”, it looks like a large contribution of methane to the planet’s biosphere.

    You guys in Australia eat a lot of beans?

    60

    • #
      James Murphy

      The lower explosive limit for methane in air is roughly 5%, so I’d hate to think just how many tonnes of beans (or cattle) that’d require… ‘lots and lots’ is, I think, the scientific term.

      30

    • #
      gnome

      A conga line of blowholes.

      This is becoming a lot of fun, and unfortunately I can’t see it becoming a very popular form of protest because of it. It deserves a place in the MSM.

      (An extra green thumb for the “footwear testing ground” comment somewhere below while I am at the keyboard.)

      10

  • #
    Escovado

    “Michael Mann’s students hiding from the decline.”

    70

  • #
    David A

    OFF topic, but I do not see a tips page here. The error bars for the global average T just increased about 100 fold

    http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/uploads/media/E___E_algorithm_error_07-Limburg.pdf

    David, please check the email you are using is correct. Thanks, Jo

    40

  • #
    mem

    And how many of these guys would have bared their naked bottoms to the world if the photo director had requested it? Mmm quite a few if not all I suspect. And some think what Hitler and Stalin achieved by mass persuasion was never to be repeated in an educated world? My heart bleeds…

    60

  • #
    John in Oz

    As they all seem to think the sun shines from their fundamental orifices (orifi?), would this extra heat need to be added to the climate models as another forcing?

    20

  • #
    Gary in Erko

    Why is this article about climate or lack thereof headed by a photo of a footwear testing ground?

    80

  • #
    David Smith

    Is this how much of an ass Jim Hansen feels when he compares his A/B/C scenarios to the real world temps?

    40

  • #
    Stacey

    My caption would be

    Alarmists talking out of their aspitistras

    51

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    It looks like they aren’t really dedicated to their demonstration and their cause. From the pictures it’s clear that they’ve merely dug a hole and stuck their heads into it. That’s not really buried in the sand. Doesn’t it make sense that if they truly wanted to demonstrate “heads buried in the sand” that they would have someone come along and fill in the holes for them? ;-)

    40

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      More nonsense. Don’t you just love the protester mentality? It’s a continual surprise how stupidly they can behave. :-(

      40

  • #
    mark haeck

    Warmist marchers in Syria/Get a Cool welcome from ISIS (terrorist group not pleased to learn they’re #2 world problem)

    40

  • #
    William Astley

    The warmists scientists and their followers are ignoring data that indicates there are fundamental errors in the AGW theory/climate models. The implication of that data and other analysis is that roughly 90% of the warming in the last 50 years was caused by solar magnetic cycle changes, not the increase in CO2.

    There is a real unsolved scientific mystery (paradox) as to what is the physical reason why there is no tropical tropospheric hot spot. The explanation as to why there no tropical tropospheric hot spot is not just cloud cover increases or decreases in the tropics to resist forcing changes. Cloud cover in the tropics does increase and decrease in the tropics however that does not explain the no tropical troposphere paradox. The following is an overview of the latitudinal warming paradox which follows from the tropical tropospheric paradox and also requires another mechanism to explain the high latitude warming.

    As atmospheric CO2 is more or less evenly distributed in the atmosphere the potential for greenhouse gas warming should be the same by latitude. The actual amount of warming due to the increase in atmospheric CO2 is proportional to the amount of increase in CO2 and the amount of long wave radiation that is emitted to space prior to the increase in atmospheric CO2. As the tropical region emits the most amount of long wave radiation to space the most amount of warming should have occurred in the tropics. The warmists’ general circulation models (GCM) predicted that the tropical region should have warmed twice as much as the extropical regions of the planet. (i.e. CO2 warming has a signature, any warming of the planet is therefore not proof that CO2 caused the warming and there is also the fact that there has been no warming for almost 18 years to explain.)

    The tropical region did not warm twice as much as the average planetary warming (see paper below for details). The Northern extropical region warmed twice as much as the average warming of the planet and four times as much as the tropics. The least amount of warming occurred in the tropical region. The warmists ignored the fact that the observed latitudinal pattern of warming does not fit the signature of warming if the increase in CO2 was the cause of the warming (the latitudinal warming paradox).
    The warmists appealed to some mysterious arctic/northern hemisphere amplifying mechanism, a tipping point, to cause what is observed or just ignore the paradox.

    The mechanism that caused the high latitude warming is a decreased in the amount of low level clouds (there are peer reviewed papers to support that assertion as well as a tedious climategate type of war fighting that finding), not CO2 (further support for the reduction in cloud cover mechanism to explain high latitude clouds warming in the last 50 years is the fact that there are cycles of warming and cooling in the same high latitude regions following the same pattern as was observed in the last 50 years, the cyclic warming and cooling correlates with solar magnetic cycle changes.) There is a new paper that supports the assertion that changes in cloud cover is the cause of the reduction in the Arctic sea ice cover. Cloud cover in the Arctic is now increasing which has resulted in cooler Arctic summers.

    The latitudinal warming paradox provides further support for the observation that there is no tropical tropospheric hot spot at roughly 8 km above the earth’s surface. The warming in the tropics should/would have been caused by increased long wave radiation back down to the surface of the earth from the tropical troposphere. Lindzen explains this in one of his lectures on climate sensitivity and the greenhouse gas warming fundamental theory. As Lindzen notes, the increase in atmospheric CO2 does not directly cause warming in the lower regions of the troposphere. There is minor direct CO2 forcing in the lower regions of the troposphere due to the number of CO2 molecules per unit volume before the anthropogenic increase and the amount of water vapor. (CO2 only absorbs two narrow bands of long wave radiation and one band overlaps with water vapor.

    Higher in the atmosphere there are less CO2 molecules per unit volume (due to the reduction in pressure with elevation) and there is less water vapor due to atmospheric cooling with elevation. The increased CO2 should therefore cause the upper regions of the troposphere to warm which in turn would have enable the upper regions of the troposphere to hold more water vapor which would cause increased warming.

    http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/ipcc-ar5draft-fig-1-4.gif
    http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.0581.pdf

    Limits on CO2 Climate Forcing from Recent Temperature Data of Earth
    The global atmospheric temperature anomalies of Earth reached a maximum in 1998 which has not been exceeded during the subsequent 10 years (William: 16 years and counting). The global anomalies are calculated from the average of climate effects occurring in the tropical and the extratropical latitude bands. El Niño/La Niña effects in the tropical band are shown to explain the 1998 maximum while variations in the background of the global anomalies largely come from climate effects in the northern extratropics. These effects do not have the signature associated with CO2 climate forcing. …

    Figure 2 shows the UAH_LT anomalies for NoExtropics, Tropics, SoExtropics and Global. The average trends over the range 1979-2007 are 0.28, 0.08, 0.06 and 0.14 ºK/decade respectively. If the climate forcing were only from CO2 one would expect from property #2 a small variation with latitude. However, it is noted that NoExtropics is 2 times that of the global and 4 times that of the Tropics. Thus one concludes that the climate forcing in the NoExtropics includes more than CO2 forcing. …

    30

    • #
      Peter C

      Excellent William Astely,

      Another prediction of the Greenhouse Theory, which can be tested empirically.
      Another Fail for the theory.

      How many fails does it take? One fail should be enough to be rid of this theory, which has been responsible for so much damage.

      00

  • #
    Colin

    How about “Climate Activists trying to stop the tide – errrr – Climate Change”

    40

  • #
    ATheoK

    Climate Activists? Naaahh…

    Climate activists don’t have their heads stuck in the sand.

    I wish they did, as then there would be a chance they’d get some sunlight occasionally.

    I’d volunteer to do the same pose though; anything for real science, but especially when the photo is to be used against the faked science of the alarmers.

    30

  • #
    TdeF

    Yes, we are all individuals!

    60

  • #
    Bite Back

    Someone needs to jerk these protesters’ heads out of the place they really have them stuck up.

    20

  • #
    Binny

    Are you sure this is not just a social experiment, to see how easily some people are to manipulate?
    I’m sure the people who think these things up are secretly septics, who delight in getting the true believers to make fools of themselves.
    Remember the backwards walking? not to mention that dreadful 10/10 ad.

    40

  • #
    mmxx

    Not a CAGW protest, it could be an IS victims’ rehab lesson.

    30

  • #
    gnome

    Crocodile heaven!

    10

  • #
    ExWarmist

    My apologies – boundaries noted.

    00

    • #
      the Griss

      lol.. when you have the mods arguing amongst themselves .. you KNOW you are doing something right :-)

      [Yeh, sure, now I am in mod gaol THANKS.] ED

      No Griss. Not helpful. – Jo

      10

  • #
    James Bradley

    I find it heartening that those who briefly considered themselves to be the establishment so quickly adopt the role of activists.

    00

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Perhaps that’s because the warmists recognise they’ve already lost the argument and are no longer the establishment. No multilateral deals for Kyoto II, major countries making excuses about dentist appointments instead of attending the latest climate congress, and public interest is waning. The climateers had to adopt activist rebellion mentality rather than establishment superciliousness, because the old hat just doesn’t fit. That’s internationally, the situation being far worse for them in Australia.

      Abbot has picked his Team Australia and the warmists have been relegated to… bench warmers basically.

      20

  • #
    Thermodynamics Physicist

    We don’t “have control, influence, or impact on the climate” for one key reason. The gravito-thermal effect (first explained by the brilliant 19th century physicist, Josef Loschmidt, and never correctly disproved by people like Robert G.Brown of WUWT fame) has been overlooked.

    All the energy diagrams have major flaws:

    (1) They imply that solar energy absorbed by the surface comes back out of the surface in the same region, thus playing a part in determining local temperature. That is simply not the case for more than half the surface which is the thin surface of the oceans in non-polar regions. That surface is hotter than the floor of the ocean, and so there is significant downward diffusion of thermal energy which then does not surface again until it reaches the polar regions. Furthermore, most of the solar radiation passes right through that thin transparent layer, warming lower regions in the thermocline from where the energy continues its downward trend.

    (2) Back radiation only slows that portion of this ocean surface cooling which is by upward radiation. It does not slow evaporative cooling or upward conduction, diffusion and convection. Nor does it have any effect on the cooling caused by downward diffusion to the depths of the ocean in these non-polar regions where nearly everyone lives on land that is affected by nearby ocean temperatures. Nor does back radiation help the Sun to raise the temperature in the first place, as is implied in the way climatologists use the Stefan-Boltzmann Law.

    There is obviously a huge amount of “missing energy” that must be entering the ocean surface. There is indeed, and it comes from downward diffusion (“heat creep”) which is restoring thermodynamic equilibrium, just as the Second Law of Thermodynamics says will happen. The energy diagrams don’t show this.

    [Why do I get the feeling this is a Sky Dragon writing?] ED

    20

    • #
      Thermodynamics Physicist

      I guess you don’t understand that they push a totally different paradigm and think that planetary surface temperatures are determined by radiation. They have a hard time explaining Earth’s surface temperature that way when hardly any solar radiation is absorbed by the ocean surface. They are totally wrong.

      00

    • #
      Peter C

      Possibly because Doug has a tendency to repeat his arguments.

      However the thermo gravitational theory had a stunning success when Ross Macleod applied the Ideal Gas law to the planetary atmospheric themperatures as published by NASA.
      http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-ideal-gas-law-the-planets-and-the-fraud-of-climate-science.html

      As I understand it the thermo gravitational theory is an expression of the ideal gas law as applied to planetary atmospheres.

      The ideal gas law correctly predicted the NASA measured temperature in every case. The Green house theory was only approximately correct in one case.

      00

    • #

      Geez I am going to have to throw out all these text books now that this anonymous person has asserted, without evidence, that they are all wrong.

      01

  • #
    Ray Derrick

    I count 80 people in that photo. As of 2010, Townsville apparently has a population of 172,316 souls (according to the local council). So we have a mere 0.0464263% of the town’s population burying their heads the the sands of ignorance. Interesting that such a very tiny proportion of the townsfolk are really that stupid and I find that somewhat reassuring.

    Also 0.04% is extremely close to the present concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. A curious coincidence? Or is it a serendipitous indication that these people will have as insignificant an impact on climate change as CO2 does?

    40

  • #
    pat

    24 Sept: LA Times: Neela Banerjee: U.S. joins other nations in deforestation accord at UN summit
    Yet from the outset, problems in the initiative have emerged. China and India, two of the three largest carbon polluters in the world, have not signed on, though other participants can join later. Brazil, where deforestation is on the upswing after years of decline, has also declined to participate.
    Greenpeace, the architect of a publicity campaign that pushed Asia Pulp and Paper to change its forestry practices, was among several deforestation activists absent from the accord. The group welcomed the plan, but said its voluntary commitments were too weak. Under the accord, countries and companies are not required to meet annual goals, signatories do not spell out how they plan to end deforestation and there is no system of verification or penalties for failing to miss targets…
    The lack of clarity in the agreement underscores its weakness, critics say…
    Brazil’s environment minister told the Associated Press that her country declined to participate in the pact, in part, because she worried the agreement’s goals would conflict with her country’s laws, which allow for logging in the Amazon…
    http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-deforest-climate-change-20140923-story.html

    24 Sept: UK Independent: Climate Change summit: Brazil refuses to sign UN’s pledge to slow deforestation
    ***The fit of pique gravely undermines the declaration, which was meant as a centre-piece of the one-day summit…
    The Brazilian delegation claimed measures to end illegal deforestation had been drafted behind closed doors at the United Nations without its participation…
    Brazil’s stance took the summit by surprise. “Unfortunately, we were not consulted,” Brazil’s Environment Minister Izabella Teixeira told the Associated Press. Her government, she said, was “not invited to be engaged in the preparation process” and was merely handed a copy of the text when it was completed…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/climate-change-summit-brazil-refuses-to-sign-un-pledge-to-slow-deforestation-9751770.html

    00

  • #
    pat

    24 Sept: Guardian: UN climate change summit in New York – as it happened
    by Adam Vaughan and Karl Mathiesen
    12.16pm Without wanting to sound like The Onion or The Daily Mash… Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, which is home to Oxford Street where nitrogen dioxide levels are the highest in the world and in breach of EU safety limits, has won an award for clean air…
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/live/2014/sep/23/un-climate-change-summit-in-new-york-live-coverage

    24 Sept: RTCC: Megan Darby: Strong Paris deal needed to make carbon pricing work – analysts
    One of the main outcomes of this week’s climate change events in New York was a declaration of support for carbon pricing.
    More than 1,000 businesses and investors backed a World Bank campaign for taxes and emissions tradings systems to make climate polluters pay…
    But carbon pricing initiatives will not work without more ambitious political targets to cut emissions, analysts from Thomson Reuters’ Point Carbon team warn…
    Point Carbon senior analyst Hege Fjellheim: “Oversupply has pushed allowance prices to low levels across the world. None of the carbon markets are generating much abatement in the short term and it is currently questionable if they send the right signal for long-term investments.”…
    http://www.rtcc.org/2014/09/24/strong-paris-deal-needed-to-make-carbon-pricing-work-analysts/

    00

  • #
    pat

    Green Climate Fund, after pledges at the Climate Summit, stands at $2.3 billion:

    24 Sept: Reuters: Megan Rowling: UN climate summit falls short for marchers, world’s poorest
    According to a tally by aid agency Oxfam, fresh pledges in New York totalled $1.325 billion, with France making the largest contribution of $1 billion over the next four years…
    The total promised so far to the fund – which will hold its first pledging conference in November ahead of annual U.N. climate talks in Peru – is just over $2.3 billion…
    The Red Cross said it would work with governments and others to strengthen the use of climate information in at least 40 countries by the end of 2015, and quadruple the number of cities where it implements urban risk reduction programmes…
    Leaders from 19 countries, plus 32 investors and other partners, backed the creation of an 8,000 km-long clean energy corridor across east and southern Africa…
    But some aid agencies were critical of another major initiative, to help 500 million farmers adapt to more stressful growing conditions through “climate smart” agriculture…
    ActionAid said there was no definition of what types of agriculture could be called “climate smart”, warning it could be used as an unfair way of getting poor countries to take on a large portion of emissions cuts and open the way for agri-business firms at the expense of small-scale farmers…
    “We marched for the banning of new fossil fuel projects, and for the promotion and funding for community, decentralised, renewable energy systems,” said Lidy Nacpil of the Philippines, director of Jubilee South, the Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development. “Neither of these were advanced by the summit – it seems they were listening to the corporate sponsors rather than the people.”
    http://www.trust.org/item/20140924161708-vnbda/?source=fiHeadlineStory

    $250 billion for monitoring?!

    24 Sept: Reuters: Alister Doyle: World risks spending $250 bln just to monitor U.N. development goals
    The world risks having to spend about $250 billion just to monitor U.N. development targets for 2030, diverting cash from goals such as ending poverty or protecting the environment, according to a study published on Wednesday.
    The report said governments should sharply cut a current draft list of targets for 2030 from a current 169 to avoid over-spending on compiling statistics. A World Bank official contested the study, calling the cost estimates too high…
    The report by Morten Jerven, a development expert at Simon Fraser University in Canada, estimated that each new target would cost $1.5 billion if it were tracked via censuses and surveys of households, living standards and health.
    That would mean a total $254 billion for all 169, or about twice the amount of annual aid donations by developed nations worldwide, he wrote…
    “If you are serious about monitoring development … you need to narrow the list” of targets, Jerven told Reuters of his study for the Copenhagen Consensus Center, which seeks to put a price on challenges from fighting malaria to climate change.
    The study said that data collection costs are high, even with the help of the Internet and modern technology…
    Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, said the United Nations should limit targets or risk diverting money from spending on health or fresh water supplies.
    “This is a wake-up call to avoid costly demands on the global system,” he told Reuters of Jerven’s estimates.
    http://www.trust.org/item/20140924115801-lgxuu/?source=fiOtherNews2

    00

  • #
    pat

    for the gullible MSM who keep insisting China is doing so much more than Australia to combat CAGW. read it all.

    don’t back down, China, and the CAGW scam will finally end:

    24 Sept: Fox News: George Russell: Climate change? China rebuts Obama
    EXCLUSIVE: While President Obama challenged China at the United Nations to follow the U.S. lead in pushing for drastic reductions in national carbon emissions to save the planet from “climate change,” it appears that China has dramatically different ideas. As in: no.
    According to a document deposited at the Geneva-based U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in advance of a planned meeting next month, China…insists that the U.S. and other developed countries endure most of the economic pain of carbon emission cutbacks, and need to make significantly more sacrifices in the months ahead…
    Among other things, the Chinese communist regime insists that the incentive payments it demands must come from “new, additional, adequate, predictable and sustained public funds” – rather than mostly private financing, as the U.S. hopes…
    A promised $100 billion in annual climate financing that Western nations have already pledged to developing countries for carbon emission control and other actions by 2020 is only the “starting point” for additional Western financial commitments that must be laid out in a “clear road map,” which includes “specific targets, timelines and identified sources
    “…
    Western countries also need to remove “obstacles such as IPRs [intellectual property rights]” to “promote, facilitate and finance the transfer” of “technologies and know-how” to developing countries in advance of any future climate deal…ETC
    CLICK HERE FOR THE PAPER
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/09/24/climate-change-china-rebuts-obama/

    00

  • #

    Indeed, an accurate depiction of much of the general electorate; but,it would require a troupe of exceptional contortionists to put their heads where the climate alarmists have have put theirs.

    00

  • #
    Jaymez

    “Shark baiting approved in Townsville”

    10

  • #

    After a pause, I “borrowed” the main image above for my own blog article “Looking for the Missing Heat

    00

  • #
    nightspore

    My suggestion:

    “The missing heat has to be here somewhere”

    10