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

The rising catastrophe of The Pause Refugees

“Whole communities of climate modellers, activists, investors, accountants, lawyers, wind farmers, super funds and importers face oblivion…

John Spooner

Never underestimate the power of art to reach a new audience.

The best artists, of course, are those ahead of the crowd.

Source: SMH

The Pause continues:

Christopher Monckton with RSS data October 2014

h/t Bob Carter with Thanks to John Spooner (see more of his art at Chrysalis).

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (116 votes cast)
The rising catastrophe of The Pause Refugees, 9.3 out of 10 based on 116 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/kftbrz2

165 comments to The rising catastrophe of The Pause Refugees

  • #
    sillyfilly

    I prefer Kudelka on DA, but that was really funny, NEIGHHHHHH! The politics of the climate, reaching atmospheric significance! BTW UAH LT: 2014 hottest October on record 2014! No El Nino! No solar increase! More interesting statistics!

    398

    • #
      the Griss

      Wow.. hottest since 1979.. !! seriously.. are you really going with that. ? lol !!

      Lets just totally ignore the MPW, RWP, Holocene optimum, the around 1940 (pre-Wiggly

      The vast emptiness of your excremental rhetoric is further exposed !!

      831

      • #
        Safetyguy66

        But it always begs the obvious question. How the #@$% did we have those temperatures in 1979 with massive amounts less of CO2 in the atmosphere??? There is easily enough data to all but completely refute the notion that CO2 drives the climate. Additionally the data for the refutation argument is more convincing.

        I mean what is the relationship between CO2 and temperature if you can have the exact same results with 250ppm as you get with 400+ppm?

        Is it:

        A. Non Linear
        B. Linear
        C. Complex
        D. Non Existent
        E. All of the above (that one is for the modellers)

        I find myself just becoming more and more surprised that anyone still finds the argument that the prime factor in global temperature is CO2, its an argument that has basically nothing to support it and masses of observational evidence to refute it. The debate is pure politics and ideology, it has almost nothing to do with science anymore.

        450

      • #
        sillyfilly

        The pre 1979 data looks like this
        Oh dear, not what you wanted, perhaps? All those reconstructions, all that data and you’ll stand tall for denial?

        031

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Ah yes, the hockey-stick reconstruction, that utilised “Mikes trick”. An oldie, but a goodie.

          This would be based on the data and methods that Michael Mann has consistently refused to release for sceptical appraisal. One wonders what he might have to hide.

          330

        • #
          sophocles

          The pre 1979 data looks like this…

          “Oh dear” are really the words. Choosing that graph is risible. Have you ever done a statistical analysis using a least squares regression?
          Well, it seems Mikey hadn’t either, because he forgot to normalise. A member of The Team told him his `algorithm’ preferentially selected hockey-sticks from any data, including pink noise. Did he do anything about it? Of course not.

          I’m not a statistician

          he said. McIntyre and McKitrick are statisticians and they picked that mess apart.

          It’s been well and truly refuted. If you prefer to continue to idolise it, then I guess you’re going to be one unprepared filly when the cold arrives.

          250

        • #
          BruceC

          The pre 1975 National Academy of Sciences global temp used to look like this:

          https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/1975nasvsgiss.gif

          ……before GISS got to it.

          From: Tom Wigley
          To: Phil Jones
          Subject: 1940s
          Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
          Cc: Ben Santer

          It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”.

          60

    • #
      the Griss

      Poor SF.. are you feeling “victimised” by being a pause refugee ??

      Certainly sounds like it from your whinging panic.

      Just eat your mouldy hay.. that’ll fix things for you !

      592

      • #
        Yonniestone

        SF is upset because horses don’t have pause paws, unless it’s a Griffon.

        370

      • #
        sillyfilly

        You should access Spooner and Carter’s “Taxing Air”: that should give you some comic relief!

        024

        • #
          Robert

          Why, you are all the comic relief anyone needs. You just aren’t bright enough to realize it.

          220

        • #
          the Griss

          I have, and yes it was fun laughing at all the utter stupidity of the alarmista agenda that was revealed.

          You seem to have taken all that utter stupidity on board.. It suits you.

          190

    • #

      Silly Filley, you forgot, “No global warming” according to the satellites.

      It always gets down to the money. I predicted on this site and elsewhere that the political pendulum would swing the other way and that Republicans would take back control of the senate. In 2016 they will win the white house. I predict that Sen. James Inhofe is going to be in the lead in exposing this scam for what it really is: an eminent finanial threat to every taxpayer on the planet.

      I also predicted that when the wheels fall off of this scam that the rent seekers would find another pending catastrophe to worry about.

      The late Stephen Schneider was a real trailblazer in this area and was able to pivot from an impending ice age doomsayer to a global warming alarmist in months. He even had the moxy to use the same data to support both positions!

      When it comes to working the Rubes his words are worth remembering. “On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.”

      Stephen Schneider

      This scam is financially sputtering and will soon begin its death spiral. The only real question is what imaginary hobgoblin will the left exploit next to try and scare the populace into clamouring to be led to some socialist paradise? Pardon the paraphrase of Mencken. :-)

      811

      • #
        ma

        I completely agree with Eddy. Global pandemics maybe? There was a recent reference to the apparently outrageous number of deaths in Europe as a result of European-generated air pollution. Really?! Air is great because it is invisible and surrounds us – you can really say anything about it you like. Plus, no-one owns it so the state has to intervene. The oceans were a good second try. I suppose there’ll be trial after trial until something with the correct characteristics promises momentum. For the last decade we seem to have been putting more and more energy into Orwell’s endless war.

        200

      • #
        sillyfilly

        re:

        Silly Filley, you forgot, “No global warming” according to the satellites.

        Ah! but the satellite data says different: both UAH and RSS show unequivocal warming. Oh sorry! you forgot to get the cherry pick year into the mix. I thought you were making a false statement, but I’ll allow you your errors of omission!

        032

        • #
          the Griss

          Yawn,

          yet more meaningless, erroneous bluster from the dopey donkey !!

          Go back to kindy and see if you can pass this time !!

          170

        • #
          Debbie

          They all ‘cherry pick’ SF. That’s actually the point!
          Can’t do this type of modeling unless you have start/stops and alter the inputs.
          Which part of ‘empirical evidence’ is the FINAL judge are you missing?
          If real time data is not agreeing with the models. . .The real time data is NOT(!!!!) the problem.

          180

          • #
            the Griss

            The point with the graph in the main post is that is NOT cherry-picked at all.

            It ends NOW, and is mathematically back-calculated.

            The maths provides the starting date.

            There is no cherry picking involved!

            Just like McKitrick’s paper that shows that a zero trend is statistically supportable for something like 25 years in RSS, and 20 years in HadCrut4.
            (Verifiable using the SkS trend calculator.)

            ……. With no cherry-picking involved, just reasonably simple mathematics.

            190

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Nicely put Debbie. Have a hat-tip from me.

            90

    • #

      Just incase anyone was fooled by the lies.

      UAH LT: 2014 hottest October on record 2014! No El Nino! No solar increase!

      No it was not the hottest October on the UAH record it was tied with an earlier year.
      http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt
      No there has been El Nino conditions(It just has not been six months yet).
      http://www.weatherzone.com.au/climate/indicator_enso.jsp?c=nino34
      And No the Total solar irradiance is high(compare column 5 for October 2003 to October 2014).
      http://lasp.colorado.edu/data/sorce/tsi_data/daily/sorce_tsi_L3_c24h_latest.txt

      310

    • #
      James Bradley

      Ok, sillyfilly,

      I’ll play your little game with you:

      “hottest October on record 2014!”

      + no global warming for 18 years!

      = coldest July on record!

      … the increased entropy must be somewhere!!!!!!!!!!!!

      380

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        You won’t get a response, James.

        Sillyfilly is a drive-by troll. Fortunately, its’ aim is somewhat erratic, and it is using Government Surplus ammunition that is long past it’s use-by date, i.e. last decade’s “official responses”.

        It doesn’t actually know what its is spouting, it just chooses a response from a selection based on the subject matter of the thread, and the general way it is being discussed.

        I used to think it was a ‘bot, but it is not consistent enough for that. One thing is for sure, it knows nothing about the actual Physics involved.

        You could think of it as the opposite of canned laughter.

        200

    • #
      Lord Jim

      hottest October on record 2014!

      Just imagine the state SF would have been in when they first started taking thermometer measurements of temperature: every initial measurement would have been a record! And then as we cycled through the seasons there would have been more records broken! And then as we cycled through the years and the (gasp) climate changed there would have been even more records broken!

      IOW: broken records is a corollary of a naturally changing climate, not an automatic indicia of anthropologically induced climate change. Even if it was the latter it would still need to be shown that such change was dangerous (an almost exponential increase in co2 and no warming for 18 years suggests it is not dangerous).

      260

    • #
      Angry

      “silly filly”……..the serial pest who was banned from Andrew Bolt’s blog is now the latest TROLL here !

      150

      • #
        Robert

        Not the latest here, SF has been thread bombing Jo’s site on and off for years. It is just that the skeptic sites that will tolerate SF are becoming extremely few and as anyone observing SF’s behavior has noticed SF needs attention. That being the case, where else can SF go for attention as the one or two people that are regulars on an alarmist site are not a sufficient audience to salve the need.

        150

    • #
      Carbon500

      Sillyfilly: Since you refer to the UAH, here’s what Dr. Roy Spencer has to say:

      “Global warming” refers to the global-average temperature increase that has been observed over the last one hundred years or more. But to many politicians and the public, the term carries the implication that mankind is responsible for that warming. This website describes evidence from my group’s government-funded research that suggests global warming is mostly natural, and that the climate system is quite insensitive to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions and aerosol pollution.

      Believe it or not, very little research has ever been funded to search for natural mechanisms of warming…it has simply been assumed that global warming is manmade. This assumption is rather easy for scientists since we do not have enough accurate global data for a long enough period of time to see whether there are natural warming mechanisms at work.

      The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claims that the only way they can get their computerized climate models to produce the observed warming is with anthropogenic (human-caused) pollution. But they’re not going to find something if they don’t search for it. More than one scientist has asked me, “What else COULD it be?” Well, the answer to that takes a little digging… and as I show, one doesn’t have to dig very far.

      But first let’s examine the basics of why so many scientists think global warming is manmade. Earth’s atmosphere contains natural greenhouse gases (mostly water vapor, carbon dioxide, and methane) which act to keep the lower layers of the atmosphere warmer than they otherwise would be without those gases. Greenhouse gases trap infrared radiation — the radiant heat energy that the Earth naturally emits to outer space in response to solar heating. Mankind’s burning of fossil fuels (mostly coal, petroleum, and natural gas) releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and this is believed to be enhancing the Earth’s natural greenhouse effect. As of 2008, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was about 40% to 45% higher than it was before the start of the industrial revolution in the 1800′s.

      It is interesting to note that, even though carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth to exist, there is precious little of it in Earth’s atmosphere. As of 2008, only 39 out of every 100,000 molecules of air were CO2, and it will take mankind’s CO2 emissions 5 more years to increase that number by 1, to 40.

      The “Holy Grail”: Climate Sensitivity Figuring out how much past warming is due to mankind, and how much more we can expect in the future, depends upon something called “climate sensitivity”. This is the temperature response of the Earth to a given amount of ‘radiative forcing’, of which there are two kinds: a change in either the amount of sunlight absorbed by the Earth, or in the infrared energy the Earth emits to outer space.

      The ‘consensus’ of opinion is that the Earth’s climate sensitivity is quite high, and so warming of about 0.25 deg. C to 0.5 deg. C (about 0.5 deg. F to 0.9 deg. F) every 10 years can be expected for as long as mankind continues to use fossil fuels as our primary source of energy. NASA’s James Hansen claims that climate sensitivity is very high, and that we have already put too much extra CO2 in the atmosphere. Presumably this is why he and Al Gore are campaigning for a moratorium on the construction of any more coal-fired power plants in the U.S.

      You would think that we’d know the Earth’s ‘climate sensitivity’ by now, but it has been surprisingly difficult to determine. How atmospheric processes like clouds and precipitation systems respond to warming is critical, as they are either amplifying the warming, or reducing it. This website currently concentrates on the response of clouds to warming, an issue which I am now convinced the scientific community has totally misinterpreted when they have measured natural, year-to-year fluctuations in the climate system. As a result of that confusion, they have the mistaken belief that climate sensitivity is high, when in fact the satellite evidence suggests climate sensitivity is low.

      The case for natural climate change I also present an analysis of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which shows that most climate change might well be the result of the climate system itself! Because small, chaotic fluctuations in atmospheric and oceanic circulation systems can cause small changes in global average cloudiness, this is all that is necessary to cause climate change. You don’t need the sun, or any other ‘external’ influence (although these are also possible…but for now I’ll let others work on that). It is simply what the climate system does. This is actually quite easy for meteorologists to believe, since we understand how complex weather processes are. Your local TV meteorologist is probably a closet ‘skeptic’ regarding mankind’s influence on climate.

      Climate change — it happens, with or without our help.

      70

  • #
    Robert

    If it is true, prove CO2 had anything to do with it. Should keep you busy and, hopefully, quiet for awhile. It’s been years now and people like you still can’t prove CO2 has a damn thing to do with any of it. The only trend you’ve ever managed to show us is the one where you are consistently wrong.

    But you’re welcome to keep trying. It is people like you and your incessant gibberish and attitudes that are why the Republicans took the senate here in the states. What you’ll never get, which I’m fine with, is that every time you comment your lack of reason and logic combined with what you think passes for wit drives more people away from your cause than anything we could ever do.

    Keep up the good work, you’ll win it for us yet.

    790

    • #
      Robert

      The prior comment was supposed to be a reply to stupid horse. It didn’t nest correctly. Apparently even comments don’t want to be anywhere near her.

      580

    • #
      the Griss

      “incessant gibberish and attitudes that are why the Republicans took the senate here in the states”

      PRECISELY.. things like SF really do a lot of damage to the alarmista cause.

      Keep going SF, your country needs you to keep making a fool of yourself. ! :-)

      471

    • #
      sillyfilly

      Suggest you read up on the earth’s energy budget! Less long-wave radiation is escaping to space at the wavelengths of greenhouse gases. Maybe an historical run through the research of Fourier, Tyndall and Arrhenius might also help! BTW Every instrumental and satellite temperature record shows warming!

      028

      • #
        Robert

        Maybe you should go back to college and take some physics and chemistry courses so you can understand the inaccuracies in how the work of Tyndall, Fourier, and Arrhenius has been applied to that which you refer to. Of course since your only knowledge of those three men and their fields of work is apparently through hearsay from alarmist websites it is understandable that you are easily led around by the nose to make stupid comments such as the one you just made.

        You see there are people here that are far more educated in these matters than you.

        How about you read the actual literature instead of a propagandized recap before you come here trying to tell us how it works.

        Rah, rah, rah filly, keep cheering for the cause. People like you are driving people to skepticism in droves.

        170

        • #
          sillyfilly

          So explain me the physics of the documented warming. I’m sceptical of the many claims that the documented warming is propagated on natural causation. The evidence is paltry at best and most of the major arguments are scientifically inept and have been proven so. But keep believing!

          120

          • #
            Robert

            That’s rich, the scientifically inept (you) claiming an argument you don’t understand is scientifically inept.

            The difference between you and I: I acknowledge legitimate data, you believe propaganda. Now, when you get help for your reading disorder let us know and we will be more than happy provide you, again, with the information that shows why you are wrong. But until you can prove to us that you can understand it why bother? It went over your head the first time and there is no reason for any of us to expect it won’t go over your head this time.

            151

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Keep Robert happy.

            Do as he asks, and explain (in your own words) how the physics and chemistry of the documented warming actually works, from a climate scientist’s perspective.

            We might all learn something from that. Wouldn’t that be nice?

            101

          • #
            Bobl

            Learn it yourself… heres a few things to look up, what is the stopband of CO2 emission, and how much of the IR emission spectrum does it occupy?. How much is CO2 attenuating IR in it’s stopband?

            Now tell me this, after you account for the lapse rate and other NON GHG factors, how much does CO2 warm the planet from the theoretical -18C blackbody.

            When youve found the data then we can discuss what it means!

            Be aware that I know the answers to these questions

            40

          • #
            sophocles

            It’s really very simple:

            Less cloud = more sunshine across the globe.

            Sunshine is warm.

            Ergo, if more sunshine, then more warm.

            See? No CO2 anywhere in there.

            For OLWIR figures, you can obtain them from NOAA here and bring your superior statistical analysis skills to bear to do your own version.

            Robin Pittwood, in his recent article posted at Wattsupwiththat did just that and found:

            – Outgoing radiation has not declined over this period as expected by IPCC models. In fact it has increased. The missing heat has gone back to space – as usual and in the quantity as per Stefan Boltzmann’s law, via OLWIR,

            and

            – The increasing greenhouse effect expected by IPCC models, is not evident in the measurements. It appears there has been no increased greenhouse effect over this period. [A closer inspection of the relative emissivity trend shows the atmosphere is even becoming a little more transparent - though little should be made of this given the variability of the data] and the scale.]

            The period is 1974 – 2013. So there you are SF. The heat is not accepting your invitation to stay, it is heading back to space. What have you done to so annoy it?

            80

      • #
        the Griss

        Interesting study .. re satellite period.

        · Outgoing radiation has not declined over this period as expected by IPCC models. In fact it has increased. The missing heat has gone back to space – as usual and in the quantity as per Stefan Boltzmann’s law, via OLWIR, and

        · The increasing greenhouse effect expected by IPCC models, is not evident in the measurements. It appears there has been no increased greenhouse effect over this period.

        And with a large beneficial rise in atmospheric CO2 as well. :-)

        Oh well.. there goes the CAGNW meme.. down the gurgler..

        flushed to the sewer where it belongs !

        171

        • #
          sillyfilly

          Canadian philosophical researcher Shawn Alli ? From a host who says “But for the most part, I believe the forces of nature overwhelm anything man puts out”.

          “I believe”, science at it’s best?

          119

          • #
            the Griss

            Yawn..

            More irrelevant braying !!. !

            91

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            A philosophical researcher, is a doctor of philosophy. What did you think PhD meant?

            Of course, you knew, but were obfuscating in an attempt to imply that he was unqualified to have an opinion.

            And while we are at it, please name me one researcher who does not believe that the published results of their research are correct, at the time of publication.

            121

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        “The research of Fourier, Tyndall and Arrhenius” ???
        Dear gullible one, whatever you have been told isn’t true.

        Fourier did no research at all. He also had some very strange ideas.

        Tyndall proved that 100% CO2 absorbed some infra-red, and RADIATED it very quickly. He couldn’t do more because IR spectrophotometers hadn’t been invented.

        Arrhenius did no research on atmospheric CO2. He came up with the idea that 5% CO2 in the atmosphere was needed to end an ice age. As he was living in Sweden he was in favour of a rise in temperature. There was quite an academic brawl over this, with one scientist proving that the “greenhouse effect” didn’t exist. That was in 1906. I’ll leave you the task of finding the reference, the exercise will do you good, and might cause you to check some other ideas you’ve accepted.

        200

        • #
          Bobl

          I agree, I grew up through my early twenties wishing Fourier and Laplace had never been born – hint I’m an Engineer!

          40

      • #
        sophocles

        Ah, name dropping. I bet you’ve never read their papers on this matter? They’re in the public domain.

        Arrhenius was wrong. Knut Angstrom, whose research was investigating the radiation of heat from the sun, terrestrial nocturnal emission and its absorption by the Earth’s atmosphere, took Arrhenius to task over this. Arrhenius didn’t even try to debate his criticism and ignored it.

        You could try reading this article for more information.

        83

        • #
          The Backslider

          Hmmmmm…..

          In 1956, calculations by Gilbert Plass proved that Ångström had got it wrong: adding more and more CO2 to the atmosphere would trap more and more heat.

          Perhaps Sophocles you can give us a complete run down on exactly how this works. Science please.

          31

      • #
        cohenite

        Old nag says:

        Suggest you read up on the earth’s energy budget! Less long-wave radiation is escaping to space at the wavelengths of greenhouse gases.

        I did and as usual the old grey mare ain’t what she used to be; NOAA OLR TOA.

        81

      • #
        janama

        Filly – please explain to me why Dr Roy Spencer, the man who invented satellite temperature measurement and produces the UHA data set says there’s been no significant warming over the pause.

        110

      • #
        BruceC

        sillyfilly: BTW Every instrumental and satellite temperature record shows warming!

        FYI.

        All five ‘global’ temperature data sets as used by the IPCC…..show NO WARMING what-so-ever so far THIS CENTURY!

        Surface (land + ocean)
        GISTEMP: 0.022 ±0.210 °C/decade (2σ)
        NOAA: -0.003 ±0.194 °C/decade (2σ)
        HadCRUT4: -0.009 ±0.175 °C/decade (2σ)

        Satellite
        RSS: -0.060 ±0.242 °C/decade (2σ)
        UAH: 0.054 ±0.242 °C/decade (2σ)

        (source: the Trend Calculator at Play Skool Skeptical Science)

        Any child born on News Years Day, 2001 or later……just doesn’t know what global warming is.

        40

      • #
        Carbon500

        Sillyfilly: In response to a comment you say: ‘Suggest you read up on the earth’s energy budget! Less long-wave radiation is escaping to space at the wavelengths of greenhouse gases.’
        Dr. Roy Spencer is a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the co-developer of the original satellite method for precise measuring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites.
        As such, I take notice of his comments rather than any number of self-appointed gurus on various websites.
        I have a copy of his book ‘The Great Global Warming Blunder’, and on page 48 he comments that ‘Our satellite instruments still do not have the absolute accuracy to measure the small imbalance from Earth orbit that is believed to exist from more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so we cannot even directly measure the mechanism that supposedly causes global warming.’

        30

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    What is needed for these climate refugees is some serious counseling on how they were led into this catastrophe,

    how their university degree in Climate Science, or Climate Science Law or Climate Science Equality etc will be of no real value to them in

    the future world of “real climate” and most importantly who to blame.

    Many of them may be entitled to seek compensation from left wing groups who have uncritically embraced and promoted the unchecked

    unverified, unproven reality of Man Made Global Warming, aka death by incineration due to man made CO2.

    The community, the Government, The United Nation, no less. have all conspired to defraud these Klimate Fugees of a real path through life

    and have instead dumped them with the current equivalent of “Communism” which enslaved and inhibited Russians and many others for over half

    a century.

    The only peer reviewing seems to have been by vested interests peering into the future with a singular vision to promote the truth of this fallacious CAGW Religion to predict Global catastrophe.

    KK

    390

    • #
      ma

      Climate freeze! The unnatural state of no climate change – a threat to humankind.

      70

      • #
        sillyfilly

        “Hiatus Myarsus”: the blowing of insubstantial statistical bubbles!

        012

        • #
          Lord Jim

          “Hiatus Myarsus”: the blowing of insubstantial statistical bubbles!

          SF does not believe that global warming has stopped, but even Jim Hansen has said: “The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade.”

          Why do you deny the climate science of climate scientists?

          110

        • #
          the Griss

          “insubstantial statistical bubbles”

          As opposed to your blowing of substantial donkey f**t bubbles !!

          All that methane……..

          Please put a plug in it, for the planet’s sake.

          80

          • #
            sillyfilly

            You seem to have some sort of ongoing psychological faecal fixation. Must be the Turdish origins.

            016

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              That happens when you work around horses. I used to be an Event rider, so I appreciate how much manure a horse produces. The fillies are the worst, especially when they are in season. Cleaning out the horse truck was not the high point of my day.

              110

            • #
              the Griss

              Poor donkey child really has nothing to offer but hot air, from either end.

              What a sad sad existence your life must be, if this is how you choose to spend it.

              Please, for your own sake, find something positive and at least a tiny bit worthwhile to do with your life.

              90

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          What is the technical definition of an “insubstantial statistical bubbles”?

          In fact, what is a “statistical bubble”; insubstantial, or otherwise?

          This is a serious question, because I have not come across the term before.

          80

  • #
    a.e.

    It’s now called Catastrophic Global Pause

    440

  • #
    scaper...

    Well, it would be humanitarian disaster to see these refugees not contribute to a global warming age of nefarious et hilarious.

    Could get them digging dams or better still…put them in the stocks and pelt them with the surplus tomatoes due to the increased yields produced by the hot air they exhale.

    Now, they are the green jobs of the future. Kermit is livid.

    171

  • #
    ROM

    “Whole communities of climate modellers, activists, investors, accountants, lawyers, wind farmers, super funds and importers face oblivion…

    I really think that statement is a bit over the top.

    I know for a fact that some of these so called “Pause Refugees” have shifted to Portugal and taken up new professions that offer promise of even greater returns than can be earn’t from their former involvement in climate catastrophe advocacy related proffessions.

    My evidence for this is a Lisbon based Portuguese lawyer’s letter informing my self and my wife only a couple of days ago that a sum of 7.5 million euros has been deposited in a Lisbon bank from a deceased estate to be passed onto a like named individual.
    A provision that my family name comes close enough legally to fullfilling the similar name provision as required in the estate deeds according to our esteemed Lisbon lawyer friend.

    Along with the name provision certain other provisions have to be met but first it is essential that the money is in safe hands by ensuring it is transferred to my bank account which will be promptly done as soon as i send the details of our personal bank accounts plus our phone numbers, e-mail addresses and etc.

    Of course the lawyer after all his trouble and hard work tracking us down way down in the antipodes also expects about half the proceeds of the deposited amount will be refunded to him as a recognition of his dedication to this quite difficult job of finding a suitable recipient for this substantial amount of monies.

    I really wouldn’t lose too much sleep over the sad plight of the Pause Refugees as they, from the low life street level types to the academically qualified level of having two lines of letters outlining their extensive proffessional qualifications after their names, in short the ones who outnumber every other Pause Refugee group combined, all have this quite remarkably ability to show up in large numbers whenever and wherever there is a truckload of fast and barely legitimate and very shady bucks to made at the expense of the more morally and ethically inclined citizens.

    After all they all have had lots and lots of practice in ripping off anybody, everybody, anytime, anywhere and everywhere whilst they practiced their skills in the climate alarmist advocacy proffession.
    They in short won’t starve although others might [ and have ] due to their pure unmitigated rapaciousness.

    271

  • #
    Richard

    I’m amazed they’re still getting away with this when there’s been no global warming for 18 years. How long can they keep this up I wonder with excuses like ‘that amount of time is not statistically significant’ or ‘the warming has gone into the deep oceans’. I still find it absolutely amazing how CO2 can warm the deep-oceans without first warming the surface-ocean. The miracles of CO2, eh?

    280

    • #
      Bill

      How long? Apparently many lives of men. Paul Ehrlich said there would be hundreds of millions of starvation deaths due to population growth in the 1970′s and also lost a famous bet with Julian Simon about commodity prices. Ehrlich got to pick ANY 5 commodoties and Simon bet they would all go down in real prices and he was correct. Any five picked by the loser of the bet!!
      But Ehrlich is still around and giving talks at universities and “respected” as an environmental “genius” guru.

      I’m curious as to whether they will go back to the global cooling is due to fossil fuels meme and then switch back and forth every 30 years and if they could get away with that. I like to think humans are smarter than that. Guess we’ll see over the next
      20 years or so.

      260

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Thirty years is a generation, and we are now starting to see the emergence of fourth generation of “conditioned” believers.

        The Green Meme actually started its life in Germany, prior to the Second World War, where love and protection of the environment [particularly the German forests] was a core principle of the Hitler Youth Movement. Germany and Austria still constitute the spiritual home of the Green movement, since Germans still have a greater sense of connection with their roots, than most other Europeans.

        You can blame Austrian-American, Edward Louis Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud, and a pioneer propagandist for Woodrow Wilson during the first world war, as the father of the modern PR, the advertising industries, and modern propaganda. His PR company started in 1919, in New York, in a quiet side street called Madison Avenue. He literally wrote the book on Propaganda, which was published in 1928.

        From advertising, to influencing, to conditioning, to manipulating, to controlling, to owning, are all small steps, in themselves. But the overall effect, as we now witness, are dramatic indeed.

        That is probably why a lot of people like watching Zombie movies, they feel right at home.

        290

  • #
    handjive

    No compassion here for the “pause refugees”.

    Make their life hell just as they wished a diminished life on you.

    And … maybe ‘the pause’ is actually ‘a peak’:

    “For 30,000 years ice sheets came and went, at one point covering two-thirds of Europe.
    Old cultures died and new ones emerged – such as the Aurignacian and the Grevettian – over thousands of years, and the hunter-gatherer populations ebbed and flowed,” says co-author Marta Mirazon Lahr, from the University of Cambridge’s Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies.

    Lead author Eske Willerslev adds: “This work reveals the complex web of population relationships in the past, generating for the first time a firm framework with which to explore how humans responded to climate change, encounters with other populations, and the dynamic landscapes of the ice age.”

    http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2014/11/07/4123675.htm
    * * *
    “how humans responded to climate change

    If only the Aurignacians and the Grevettians had a carbon(sic) tax!

    You know it makes sense.

    130

  • #
    Robert O

    Satire is one way of pointing out the blinding obvious, but there is a lot of momentum left in the AGW industry. How can so many expert climate scientists, bankers, politicians, economists, etc., etc., be so so wrong?

    170

    • #
      Dariusz

      RO
      Most of the time the experts will argue they are not wrong.
      As a result, there have been heaps of consensus before. Some examples below:
      1. Earth was flat despite the Greeks knowing the radius of the earth and hence its size.
      2. Earth was in the centre of the universe until Copernicus. Heliocentric theories existed since the Greeks but we’re ignored for some 1500 years.
      3 Earth could not be more than some 80,000 years old according to Lord Kelvin based on his laws of heat retention and dissipation.
      4. The sun could not exist for more that some 25,000 years (-/+ from memory) otherwise it would have exhausted its heat thought to be coal before the discovery of radioactivity.

      And most recently physicists thought that the expansion of the universe was slowing down, that the universe was eternal (this is still being debated though), and what you see is what you get. All of these “facts” were settled until discovered otherwise.

      Now the 21st century physics is in shambles with:
      1. The Identification of dark matter ( this was discovered in 20th century but ignored for decades)
      2. Realisation that universe expansion was accelerating
      3. 10% of observable universe is moving in one direction – called the dark flow (probably the most significant discovery so far as this suggests the presence of another universe in the “vicinity”)
      4. Gravity is still as enigmatic as usual and even the discovery of the god,s particles did not improve our chances of coming out with one unified theory which would combine the extremely small with the extremely large.

      You,re telling me that bankers, politicians and economists that can,t predict what they are supposed to be good at are used as some sort authority in climate prediction? 15-20 years ago there was no such profession as a climate scientist (and still there is no such thing in my option). And you call them authority? Do your own research before quoting the experts.

      One thing that I have learned through my own geological work is that I am often wrong and only sometimes closer to the right answer. I am not threatened by being wrong in fact I celebrate complexity of Mother Nature. If I am wrong start again. But when you say you are certain particularly in science that deals with chaotic systems you betray reason and scientific method.

      At the risk of sounding satirical I call your experts the money sluts.

      311

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        … the god,s particles did not improve our chances of coming out with one unified theory which would combine the extremely small with the extremely large.

        The latest fashionable hypothesis seems to be derived from the works of Nikola Tesla, and based on electric plasma, that exist at all scales in the Universe.

        You know it must be true, because there are YouTube videos about it /sarc

        For those who want a reference: watch?v=0Q4fecFbYBg

        50

      • #
        Debbie

        Dariusz,
        In the demographic you are commenting about, it is even more confusing than simply arguing they are ‘not wrong’… they also will often happily concede the opposing case is ‘not wrong’ as well as pointing out why it’s ‘not right’. While these confusing , frustrating & time consuming ‘consultations’ occur, we continue to pay them for the privilege of continued confusing consultations that conclude that ‘it’s complex’ and ‘not wrong’ & ‘ not right’. :-)

        20

    • #
      ROM

      Robert O
      November 8, 2014 at 9:47 pm

      Satire is one way of pointing out the blinding obvious, but there is a lot of momentum left in the AGW industry. How can so many expert climate scientists, bankers, politicians, economists, etc., etc., be so so wrong?

      A question that has been asked for some years now and one that is gaining popular currency and regularity as the hiatus in the warming or more likely the phase change in global temperature trends reverses itself for and over another unspecified number of decades ahead.

      You know the shift is well under way by the specific wordage of language used to describe situations. The subtle shift in verbiage used often foretells a significant shift under way, a shift that will only become obvious to most still quite some time ahead.

      About three or four years ago on the now closed by the proprietors Weatherzone climate forum, closed due to continuous aggressive trolling by the carbonistas aided and abetted by a couple of bigoted moderators, I started to use the term “cult” to describe what was becoming a faith based / believer based non science supported global warming ideology.
      I certainly was not the first or only one to do so.
      So it’s interesting that the term “cult ” is now emerging in the lexicon of those who are dissecting the rather odorous intestines of the global warming ideology.

      And the wording used, quite deliberately by a luke warmer to trigger this particular thought was a “Congregation of scientists” with all the narrowly descriptive connotations that the very specifically used word “congregation” implies.

      To return to Robert O’s question.

      A long perennial puzzle that just might have had some form of answer and it is not quite what might have been expected.

      For the more cerebral denizens here who like to delve into those deep and hidden depths of mankind’s intellect , via Judith Curry’s “Climate etc” Week in Review post on her blog this article some of which I differ with [ but who am I to differ? ] might get some deep thinking and understanding going of the factors surrounding the belief or otherwise [ and usually contrary to the hard observed evidence, eg; Silly Filly amongst many others ] involved in the creation of the “Catastrophic Global Warming” cult.
      __________________

      Striving for a Climate Change
      To get beyond debates over science, Dan Kahan seeks their roots

      [ selectively quoted]
      Braman also sent Kahan the work of Mary Douglas, an anthropologist who, several decades earlier, had developed a cultural theory of risk assessment. Social norms, above all else, informed how people judged risks, she said. The public divided along two spectra: one measuring their support of social structure, running from egalitarian to hierarchical; the other, their devotion to individualism or communitarianism. The scales combined for four essential “worldviews.”

      Kahan looked past controversy over Douglas’s work—in particular, a 1982 book she co-wrote that attacked environmentalists (whom she saw as extremely egalitarian and communitarian, and motivated by contempt for industrial society)—and saw a powerful tool. He had already dipped into psychological research showing how we engage in “motivated reasoning,” shaping facts around our beliefs, especially in situations that threaten our identities. Perhaps the worldviews described by Douglas were shaping those biases and causing conflict? A believer in free markets might balk at climate change, given the predominant warming narrative aimed at curbing economic growth; an egalitarian-communitarian, meanwhile, would find the centralized authority demanded by nuclear power unbearable.
      &
      This was in 2005, when a narrative had begun to form about a Republican war on science. A vast divide seemed to be opening up on topics like evolution, stem cells, and climate change. Kahan was the first to look at it diagnostically, says Edward W. Maibach, director of the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University. This wasn’t just about the Republicans, and Kahan’s work moved the field away from blaming conservatives. “It encouraged us,” Maibach says, “to look at our own practices as being the problem.”

      Many scientists continued unaware, however, content to dwell in the idea that if members of the public just got the right information, they would change their minds on climate change—the information-deficit model, as it’s called. As one researcher told me, geo scientists have often thought “like Englishmen talking to foreigners: The solution is to talk more slowly and more loudly.” That began to change in 2009, when a batch of stolen emails from climate scientists gave contrarians a new outlet for criticism; misconstrued, the letters could make it seem that the researchers were being underhanded in how they handled their data. The backlash had begun.

      [ more ]

      30

      • #
        mem

        ROM, I found your post most interesting,but couldn’t find a link to the rest. Can you point me in the right direction?

        00

        • #
          ROM

          G’d evening MEM.

          The link I assume you are looking for is the [ red ] heading of the article. Striving for climate change;

          The article actually starts off with the following passage which I refer to ;

          “Last year, as the summer heat broke, a congregation of climate scientists and communicators gathered at the headquarters of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a granite edifice erected in the heart of Washington, to wail over their collective futility”

          The choice of the verbiage ie a congregation of scientists and communicators” and this from a [ luke warmer ? ] believer in CAGW is very interesting and perhaps indicates that the shift towards and increasingly hostile attitude towards the green / enviro/ cagw meme is just on the point of starting to get very nasty for those in the green / radical enviro/ CAGW meme camp who have been use to dishing it out in spades to all and sundry who don’t agree down to the last dot and tittle with their own ideological beliefs.

          A couple of weeks ago I had a post where I commented that I believed we are just starting to see a generational shift towards the political right . That feeling was based on commentary and the increasing use of certain phraseology and verbiage and word usage that was starting to appear across the blogs, MSM and in the general public’s street level comments.

          Then came the American mid term senatorial elections a few days ago where the Democrats got creamed.

          My betting is Obama’s EPA will face both massive cuts in funding as will the IPCC and a good possibility that a full scale senatorial investigation will forcibly lift the lid on much of the dodgy underhand activities of Obama’s EPA. and THAT will spell the end of Obama’s reign as some sort of mediocre US president.
          His presidency will go down as the worst and most politically biased and ineffective and disastrous USA presidency since pre WW2, a point already commented on in some sections of the American media.

          Given the abysmal levels of capability and political skills of most but most definitely not all of the presidential office holders since WW2 that is quite some statement to make.

          The shift to the political right is happening in Australia, the USA, is getting under way in the UK, in Russia with an unfortunate xenophobic extremism already creeping in, China with Xi’s dominance of the political process, Merkel in Germany is just starting to feel the heat, the French have had a guts-full of increasingly disastrous leftist politics, the Poles and Eastern Europe are shifting right in part as a reaction to Putin’s thuggery.

          The wetting the pants in anguish, do gooders are going to wet their panties a lot more as their cosy little leftists socialistic world which dominated western global politics for the last third a century all comes very unstuck into the next decade.

          And with it goes extremist environmentalism, most of equally bad and extremist climate science, large sections of the more way out there to the left academia who will find the capitalist money pot has run out as far as they are concerned and they aren’t qualified for anything else of any use to society except as street sweepers.

          To quote that reputed [ and incorrectly allocated ] old Chinese curse; “May you live in interesting times”

          Hope this helps.
          Cheers.

          50

  • #
    TdeF

    Meterologists and the IPCC have known about the ‘lack’ of warming all along but Pachauri only admitted it in Melbourne last year. So they were lying for 18 years. Even now in the latest warning of imminent cataclysm, the IPCC admits only “more than a decade” when it is more like two decades. Then it is called a hiatus, as if it is going up again when they have no explanation for why it is not increasing with increasing CO2 and ask for another 30 years to be sure that it is not in fact a run away catastrophe pretending to be a non event?

    So on for the entire history of this massive international scare and in 2007 when our Australian Prime Minister called Global Warming “the greatest moral, economic and social challenge of our time” everyone knew it had already not warmed for ten years. Lies, damned lies and the IPCC. Ably supported by own Tim Flannery, our wonderful Climate Commissioners, the ABC, the BOM, NASA, the Royal Society, The American Physicists Association, the Greens and the entire meteorological industry. You have to wonder where the lies stop and when and we have to be thankful for satellites, as without them this would have continued without end.

    230

  • #
    MichaelB

    How could this be? How could this appear in the Silly Moaning Herald?

    90

  • #
    Considerate Thinker

    Ah it’s the racing season, the blinkers are on, ears stuffed with cotton bill to shorten the odds, but trust the alarmists to flog the dead horse of Global Warming all the way to the knackery and hopefully the electoral result will mimic a Titanic sized green disaster – sorry triumph of reason over belief and silly filly wailing in the background..

    150

  • #
    Ted O'Brien.

    Well, it’s a good cartoon about the “Pause refugees”. They do indeed represent an economic problem for the government, a problem which grows every day that Al Gore and Bill Shorten can stave off the collapse.

    But has the SMH really at last twigged to the truth? We can only hope.

    60

  • #
    Mark D.

    Sometime within the next 14 months these refugees will find another potential catastrophic cause to get behind. We’ll then be asked scared into puting monies or taxes into a solution.

    What will it be this time?

    50

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Water Quality – we are all going to die from the toxic wastes produced by industry, by subsistence farming, from tourism to the antarctica, by fluoride in toothpaste, and by not believing in the tooth fairy.

      130

    • #
      pattoh

      How about the forestalled real end to the GFC – the end of the $US hegemony?

      That would be global enough & give the Fabains at the UN a good excuse to have their own “real” global currency instead of a fake one through carbon credits & carbon exchange rates.

      NWO through currency.

      40

  • #

    These poor people need a good counselor or psychologist who will hand them come to terms with the reality they have been trying to avoid for so long. Under no circumstances would I recommend this one, as he would only make their condition worse.

    50

    • #
      Leonard Lane

      Kevin. I would much prefer defunding the AGW scam and let them fend for themselves. Sometimes reality with losses for the scammers is good medicine for everyone.

      30

    • #
      Leonard Lane

      Can you imagine what a 20year or so hole in their resumes might do to their chances of getting back on the taxpayers’ back.

      80

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Life must be really tough for those who hitch their wagon to an empty cause. Opportunists all! I have no sympathy for them.

    130

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    O/T, but related to refugees of a different kind, such as your Ebola thread two weeks ago…
    Some medical academics will be doing an Ask Me Anything on Reddit on Sunday morning (ie today) at 4am AEST. It’s in r/Science.
    Their answer to the question about it being “airborne” should be interesting.
    They also want medical staff returning from Africa to avoid quarantine, which seems a bit holier-than-thou.

    _ _ _ _ _
    We now return you to your regular PDO-scheduled Pause in Warming.

    70

  • #
    Lyle

    I blame cell phones. They would have been able to get jobs in the field of public pay-phone sanitation.

    60

    • #
      James Bradley

      Lyle,

      Weren’t all the telephone sanitizers sent off first on the ‘B’ Ark?

      20

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      But the germs from the cold you had last week are still all over, and inside, your cell phone, and can be transmitted to your friends and relatives in text messages. Quick, put your cell phone in this “Blue light sanitization station” [TM], and pay the requisite fee. It takes less time than drinking a cup of coffee, and you know it makes sense to take precautions about such things.

      100

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      As an afterthought, you can also get slip-on latex protectors for cell phones. It allows you to have safe text.

      170

      • #
        James Bradley

        Rereke,

        That a wonderful green solution (not the hotshot but the answer to a problem) no doubbt it will be environmentally embraced by the same Green friends who saved energy recently by putting their new iphones into microwave ovens to recharge.

        Save the planet at any cost.

        Bunch of dead monkeys…

        50

      • #
        the Griss

        “slip-on latex protectors”

        I think I have one in the drawer next to my bed that might fit . !

        40

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Textually transmitted diseases are not phoney, especially if you’re a receiver.

        150

    • #
      James Bradley

      Lyle,

      We should implore the UN to build an entire fleet of arks in non-alphabetical order to save humanity… and insist “communities of climate modellers, activists, investors, accountants, lawyers, wind farmers, super funds and importers” be ‘F’ Arked off first.

      100

  • #
    Ted O'Brien.

    Tim Blair had a blog on feminism linking to instapundit.com which linked to this. It is very pertinent to current problems.

    This is what I saw happening.

    http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=260

    10

    • #
      redress

      Thank you…good link….frightening and sobering to see the parallels between “the Soviet Union’s memetic weapons” and Islam.

      10

  • #
    Manfred

    Thank you Ted #19. You link to a fascinating article posted in November 2006 that frames some of the practicalities of the daily diet of IPCC cli-fi encapsulated by Nietzsche: “Whoever fights with monsters should see to it that he does not become a monster in the process. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.”
    [Beyond Good and Evil, aphorism # 146.]

    Eric Raymond, the author of the article entitled ‘Gramscian damage’, so named from Antonio Gramsci , an Italian Marxist ‘best known for his theory of cultural hegemony, which describes how states use cultural institutions to maintain power in capitalist societies‘, highlighted a way out of the current predicament in the following paragraphs, paraphrased from his article.

    The first step to recovery is understanding the problem. Knowing that suicidalist memes were launched at us as war weapons by the espionage apparatus of the most evil despotism in human history is in itself liberating. Liberating, too, it is to realize that the Noam Chomskys and Michael Moores and Robert Fisks of the world (and their thousands of lesser imitators in faculty lounges everywhere) are not brave transgressive forward-thinkers but pathetic memebots running the program of a dead tyrant.

    I remain more optimistic than this. I think there is still an excellent chance that the West can recover from suicidalism without going through a fevered fascist episode and waging a genocidal war. But to do so, we have to do more than recognize Stalin’s memes; we have to reject them. We have to eject postmodern leftism from our universities, transnational progressivism from our politics, and volk-Marxism from our media.

    The process won’t be pretty. But I fear that if the rest of us don’t hound the po-mo Left and its useful idiots out of public life with attack and ridicule and shunning, the hard Right will sooner or later get the power to do it by means that include a lot of killing. I don’t want to live in that future, and I don’t think any of my readers do, either. If we want to save a liberal, tolerant civilization for our children, we’d better get to work.

    The title of the present thread, ‘The rising catastrophe of The Pause Refugees‘ would seem to suggest we might lay claim to some success at rooting out the ‘progressive’ climate chancre that has become not only increasingly obvious but painful and damaging to society and ironically, real progress. I for one would like to think so. The multi-billion dollar failure of Gaia to dance to the tune of the IPCC models remains nevertheless the most obvious rejection of her toxic green suitor.

    Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’

    Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 7th May, 2009

    20

    • #
      sillyfilly

      Dr Phil Jones has no worries: UAH LT current upward trend. OMG, I’m developing the dreaded ‘Hiatus Myarsus’.

      08

      • #
        Robert

        If he has no worries then why can’t you link to material provided by him directly rather than “wood for trees”? Could it be because he hasn’t any material that supports your claims?

        You’re developing something alright, but the mods are busy enough without them having to snip me for saying what it is.

        40

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Well, “wood for trees” has a plotting tool. Sillyfilly claims that the plot output shows “UAH LT current upward trend”.

        I beg to differ. When you look at the tool, you find that you can feed any datasets you like into it, and the tool will faithfully produce plots of the supplied data.

        You can call the data anything you like, such as “uah/mean:13″, and “uah/trend”, and “uah/from:2011/trend”, for example.

        The tool gives you some pretty lines, but that is all it does. It is nothing more than a presentation medium.

        Without knowing the probity of the source data, the pretty lines are … just lines. They mean nothing.

        I also smell a large rodent when I note that the title of the graph is, “Audio waveform – Raw data – Charity Tip Jar”. Say, what? Oh, dear.

        I have to conclude that Sillyfilly is just making this stuff up, and therefore has absolutely no credibility.

        30

        • #
          sillyfilly

          Click on Raw data and you get:
          Data from UAH National Space Science and Technology Center
          #http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/msu/t2lt/
          #—————————————————-
          #
          #File: tltglhmam_5.5

          [SNIP crass]

          02

        • #
          Robert

          Either that or:

          1 – Someone else told her “Go here and use this” which she did without understanding it

          or

          2 – It was the first thing she found that she could link to thinking it proved something, again without understanding it

          Short version, she doesn’t understand the material she uses to support her claims so how can she even understand her claims?

          10

  • #
    mem

    The climate change movement has been an elaborate leftist strategy centred on solving a problem that didn’t exist. It has licensed leftist governments and the UN to:
    Extract $billions in taxes
    Attack industry and in particular the energy and mining sector
    Channel funds to collaborators and leftist causes
    Gain entre into third world countries and influence development
    By-pass national governments and influence local, state and regional governments
    Gain enormous influence in universities and scientific institutions
    Influence superfund investment strategies (more $ billions)
    Control the environment debate internationally
    Take the moral high ground and dominate political debate
    Develop a network of true believers, activists and followers
    Reward its followers with employment, grants, subsidies, positions and honours

    It has not
    Influenced the weather or the climate
    Hoodwinked the majority of the public

    50

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      And how disgusting is it that the Labour movement in Australia spent 7+ years trying to destroy our economy and the jobs that go with it, over an ideological bent to “save the world”. You expect it from fools like Milne/Bandt etc, but from the party of the worker???

      Rudd and Gillard basically said “get stuffed” to the workers of Australia. They tried to get an international spotlight on themselves by sacrificing our industry to the gods of NOTHING. As you rightly point out, there was and is absolutely no environmental benefit to pricing carbon, but the effects on jobs and industry are in reality as catastrophic as the dud predictions for our environment were not.

      “Professor Flannery’s concession last week that even if all carbon emissions stopped today, it would take 1000 years for the atmosphere’s average temperatures to drop.”
      http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/year-vision-fuels-climate-fight/story-fn59niix-1226029695904

      This is in itself a typical Flannery guess. It has no basis in science or fact whatsoever, because we have no idea what other factors may come in to play during that 1000 years. Its perhaps the fingerprint statement of Flannery as a pseudo scientist and general nit wit.

      I am proud to call myself a labour voter at heart. But I have not voted labour since Keating because the party has utterly lost its way. If Rudd and Gillard had any conception of the purpose of the labour party, we would be enjoying some of the lowest cost energy in the world right now. This would have come about after 7 years of passionate, traditional labour policy which would have focussed almost solely on ensuring industry flourished in Australia and “get stuffed” to the rest of the world and what they may think of us, as they themselves exploit their resources and pump their industry to compete with us. There are very few areas in the modern global economy which Australia can claim a genuine advantage, cheap, reliable, nationally available energy should have been one of them, I don’t think we have completely missed the boat, but gangplank is definitely going up and if what currently passes for labour get back in in 2 years…. science help us…

      http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/carbon-price-on-bill-shortens-agenda-as-he-goes-to-electorate-20141010-1148xe.html

      Nothing learned, just the same bunch of imposters posing as a labour movement.

      110

      • #
        Robert O

        Talking about energy costs Australia is about the 4th. highest in the world in the 20+ cents per Kwh group. Canada and USA are 7-8 cents. We have lots of cheap coal but, unfortunately, lots of administration too.

        00

    • #
      Dariusz

      Hi Jo
      Ok. Can u publish the 1st paragraph only perhaps? My point is about what may be next after the AGW scare. Moncton talks about agenda 21 on regular basis.

      Can u also tell me if your tip jar is tax deductible?

      I also noticed that predictions of war particularly In the near future are usually avoided on blogs Eg bolt. Do u hold similar position? If so will avoid this. Have great day.
      Dariusz

      40

  • #
    pat

    yet another incestuous abc lovefest:

    9 Nov: ABC RN: Margaret Throsby Interviews Dr Karl Kruszelnicki

    link to podcast below, as it’s been on ABC Classic too:

    4 Nov: ABC Classic Midday: Dr Karl Kruszelnicki
    Podcast Audio
    http://www.abc.net.au/classic/content/2014/11/04/4119284.htm

    LISTEN FROM 6 MINS 45 SECS IN TO 16 MINS: Dr. Karl doesn’t believe CAGW is true, he accepts the science of the climate scientists. scientists at the Uni of Qld have had not only their cars egged, (DEEP, LOW VOICE) BUT THEIR HOMES. will steffen has had a GUN PULLED ON HIM. followed by much Oreskes, tobacco, etc etc.

    THROSBY BEGINS THE PROGRAM WITH: i suppose it’s predictible, that surveys on “most trusted by the community”, show obvious ones such as used car salesman, advertising people, politicians at the bottom of the heap, with nurses, doctors, teachers up the top.

    Throsby above is talking about Most Trusted Professions Lists; Throsby is apparently unaware of UK consumer group Which? survey on professions (& others around the world) which spark headlines such as “Politicians, journalists and bankers least trusted professions”. Throsby now goes on to Most Trusted People list.

    readers’ digest 100 most trusted list this year has scientists in top 3 places. charlie teo, fiona wood, ian frazer. scientists are trusted, admired & looked up to by the rest of us, except…a big except…when it comes to CLIMATE CHANGE. FOR SOME INEXPLICABLE REASON, WITH THE VAST MAJORITY OF SCIENTISTS IN AGREEMENT THAT CC IS REAL AND MOST LIKELY CAUSED BY HUMANS, they suddenly disbelieve, they attract not just criticism, but sometimes vicious attack and threat. why does this topic cause such violent opposition from a small but loud minority?

    btw:

    Readers Digest: MOST TRUSTED PEOPLE IN 2014
    SCROLL DOWN TO 50 MOST TRUSTED PROFESSIONS:
    42. Journalists
    43. Radio talkback hosts
    http://www.readersdigest.com.au/trusted-people-2014

    p.s. if anyone would like to critique the arrogant Dr. Karl, it would be much appreciated.

    50

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      I have Dr Karl’s own words to condemn his idiocy from just a few threads ago. He said no one should listen to anyone who is not a climate scientist on the subject of AGW. So basically almost no one he quotes or cites has any credibility by his own measure.

      Using Dr Karl’s logic people like this man is the only person anyone should really be listening to and I heartily agree with him on that.

      40

      • #
        Bobl

        Surely that means we should not listen to Dr Karl since of course he has no cliamte change credentials at all, unlike say Carter, or Lindzen who have written books on it

        20

  • #
    mem

    And the Labour Party can’t bring itself to support small business either. The best it can do is ramp up awards, red tape and taxes. So the people that put their houses on the line and work inordinate hours, you know the mums and dads, the corner shops, the people with enterprise are left out of the Labor equation. This is mostly the case with farmers, although in recent years Labor and Greens have appointed spokesmen in the major organisations to influence the debate their way. Hence the ploughing of the field to run the pro AGW advert. Most farmers would see this guy as a lefty stooge. But the leftist media would have set up the shot in advance and someone paid for the chopper to take the photos. As for Labor and the climate tax.I think Shorten’s time won’t last because they know it is a dead duck and he is has been left carrying it whilst they try to come up with some national policies. The faceless men will replace him with a new “progressive” in due course and he will be dumped.

    50

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      mem, the unions, and the ALP, hate small business people. The fundamental reason is that the less you pay them, the harder they work. This does not sit well with a regulated workforce.

      The farmers are their own worst enemies, because they appoint to their lobby people who have gained their “wisdom” in Gough Whitlam’s universities. The NFF is the worst enemy of rural Australia.

      Re the faceless men. I saw a comment the other day which called Gough Whitlam “the face of the faceless men”. Exquisite! Then and now!

      20

      • #
        mem

        Ted, Having much to do with agriculture I can tell you that the appointee stooges usually run the worst farms and are the first to put their names up for grants and the first to get them. The best farmers (both men and women many working in partnership, women managing the property finances, compliance, marketing and labour and men doing the physical work and/or supervising it on a daily basis) are too busy or alternatively deliberately by-passed when government sponsored committees are formed. Consequently the most knowledgeable farmers are left out of the policy decisions. There used to be many agricultural extension officers who understood this and made special effort to engage farmers but many were replaced under Labor. The thing that gives hope is that ultimately the farmers come out of the blocks and stop the rampant leftism and naivety from stuffing their businesses but it is a wearing process and does not support good decision making and forward planning.

        60

        • #
          Robert O

          A very good comment which is true in the big wide world: those people who beaver away doing their best in their field don’t have the time to talk about it. There are the “doers” and the “talkers” who don’t do very much, but plagiarise the works of others.

          00

  • #
    the Griss

    How odd ;-)

    Emissivity looks like it has RISEN as atmospheric CO2 has risen !!!

    The absolute opposite of what should happen under the so-called greenhouse effect

    71

    • #
      the Griss

      I like these two statements.. (re dates covered by satellite record)

      · Outgoing radiation has not declined over this period as expected by IPCC models. In fact it has increased. The missing heat has gone back to space – as usual and in the quantity as per Stefan Boltzmann’s law, via OLWIR, and

      · The increasing greenhouse effect expected by IPCC models, is not evident in the measurements. It appears there has been no increased greenhouse effect over this period.

      121

      • #
        the Griss

        How many stakes through the heart can he CAGNW meme survive !!! ?

        Its like a vampire.. sucks like one, too !!

        91

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      Nice link. Even I can understand it.

      40

    • #
      Peter C

      The Green House Gas Effect. A Zombie Theory that refuses to Die!

      Surely this study should end it all. Judith Curry seemed to speak for all the luke warm skeptics when she said at the Congressional Enquiry; “all other things being equal more CO2 means the Earth will be warmer”. Well it is not warmer.

      Emissivity has increased as CO2 has gone up. But it can’t be due to increased CO2 because that would mean that CO2 is a cooling gas.

      70

      • #
        the Griss

        ” A Zombie Theory that refuses to Die!”

        Don’t you usually get rid of a zombie by de-braining it.?

        That could be an issue, because the GHG zombie (like its denizens that visit here) doesn’t seem to have a brain.

        30

      • #
        Bobl

        Of course CO2 IS a cooling gas in the stratospher (and above) all GHGs will give off IR to space. The more molecules of CO2 in the stratosphere, the more emission there MUST be if something else isn’t bottle necking the energy transport from surface to stratosphere. The argument is that the concentration of CO2 alters the transition height where the atmosphere goes from declining temperature by height to increasing temperature with height. Hence this idea that CO2 will cause the surface to get warmer and the stratosphere cooler. Of course anyone who know anything about thermodynamics will instantly see, that increasing the temperature gradient will lead to an increasing energy flow due to convection and conduction.

        This is the problem I have with the GHG theory, if you look at the mechanics, GHGs cool, they maintain the temperature gradient that permits energy flow from surface to space. Without them the gravity (gas law warming) would be 10/6 × what is currently is (surface temp about 50 deg). Since GHGs comprise part of the cooling mechanism, one would theorise that more of them would cool better. Counterintuitively some scientists say this view is wrong.

        Looking at the entire earth system though, if emission increases with CO2 then overall it’s gotta be cooling, the total equilibrium energy balance must decrease, the counterintuitive description of the klimate krew must be wrong.

        00

  • #
    Gary in Erko

    “Grandad, what did you do in the ‘Warming Delusion’? Were you on the embarrassment side?”

    80

  • #
  • #
    • #
      the Griss

      And you could, if you so wished, continue that cooling trend back right back to the Holocene Optimum.

      We at actually a very cool point in the current interglacial.

      Its been warmer by 2-3 times the current small warming, in the not too distant past.

      And NOT driven by plant life atmospheric CO2.

      10

      • #

        You’re right Griss,
        I knew there are better graphs out there, I just didn’t have the time to find one.
        I’m getting to the stage now where I just laugh to myself at their feeble attempts.
        Wetting themselves over a 1/100th of a degree increase in some tiny location on the planet.
        I’ve noticed that you engage them, I’m afraid I can’t. I’ve tried, but I’ve decided it’s like banging one’s head against a brick wall.
        They have no intention of debating or trying to learn from others. So more power to you. :D

        10

        • #
          the Griss

          I used to be a maths teacher.. Sometimes you end up having to try to teach those 10-maths-5 classes (the bottom rung 15-16 year olds, not quite ‘special needs’, but close)

          Trying to educate the alarmista trolls here is similar. :-)

          11

  • #
  • #
    pat

    Safetyguy66 -

    what disturbs me is ABC can carry this throsby interview with dr. karl across two stations and he can say anything he likes, for instance the rubbish about a gun being pulled on will steffen, and throsby just laps it up completely. am sure she would never research a word he said for herself. abc is pitiful.

    20

  • #
    Considerate Thinker

    Thinking of future scares that could be run, the Ozone holes are likely candidates, then there will be the mind bending discovery that water vapour is the powerful addition by mankind and nature that is changing our climate, our weather, especially scary weather, lightning strikes, and warming and cooling, depending upon where you stand in the world and the season of choice.

    All very fertile ground. Then there will be the nuclear energy rich and the nuclear energy deprived disparity, with lots of Green hysteria and don’t be surprised that when China’s huge number of Fusion reactors come on line, (2030,?) that the immense heat and consequent cooling requirement, with lots of venting of steam for visual effect will be powerful images of wanton discharge of evil water vapour into our atmosphere – blanking out all the solar panels? changing wind patterns? o that windmills grind to a halt to prevent breakdown? too many clouds hiding the sun, and domination and ability to set pricing of technology at the level chosen by those with energy capacity to produce such goods and of course it might be convenient to ban any other nation from taking the China path to world leadership in “Green Energy” Once you are in front, stop your competitors!

    You might reckon this is a bit hard to sell, no idiot would fall for such tactics, but then when you look back over the handful of greedy sociopaths who dominated science with their evil scheming and already sold a generation of believers on the evil nature of a simple invisible trace gas essential for plant growth and fundamental to our existence on planet earth, calling it black carbon to emphasize its evil nature and enlisting children to fight their parents and their vile environmental habits?

    Then you have a failed American President praising his losing agreement with China as a great breakthrough in the fight against carbon and most of the eco nuts and left wing media in Australia (yes, including the ones that buried their heads in the sand recently and got written up in that same media)all singing the same chorus line in prayerful agreement for him saving the world!

    I say it is an easy task, as when any reasonable person looks at that one sided deal, china gets the go ahead to not only continue with its real polluting ways, it has 16 years of increasing environmental pollution and the concession given is that in 2030 when its accelerated use of coal and real pollution by way of black particulate discharge provides the basis for its new pathway to energy self sufficiency, the new clean green nuclear energy power stations can take up the energy load. China say yes, that at that time, they can then reduce reliance on coal,oil,gas, for vital base load power generation.

    Now how to make sure that places like Australia, America, Europe, don’t follow…easy enough as the simple idiots that bought and praised that lame deal are still around and dumb enough to be fed a similar line and conned once more, and play that song again, “there is ample hard scientific data that” ……is the next great scary thing to stop them from catching up, Watermelons are so easy to grow, and cultivate almost by auto suggestion if the climate is rife!

    00