you're reading...
Bob Tisdale, Climate Science, Donna Laframboise, General Topics, Hypocrisy, Loony Toons, MSM, Settled science?, SST (Sea Surface Temps), These items caught my eye, UK politics, Windfarms

These items caught my eye – 9 June 2013

1: If you ever thought the Greens are working for you, think again; 2: MetOffice have their feet held to the flames, again; 3: ‘Sustainable’ – there’s that word again; 4: Everytime Trenberth gets a mention, it’s a travesty; 5: Is there any way to OBSERVE the actual nature of “water feedback”?; 6: Ed Davey? Who he?; 7: Britains’ Top Scientist? – I feel a joke coming on; 8: Yeo Ho Ho! We told you so; 9: And they wonder why we scoff at their stupidity; 10: Wind Energy’s Absurd – New Facebook page; Please remember to read the comments, as the information (and the links) contained in them often put the main article into context..

Green Targetism jumps the shark

Posted on June 9, 2013 by Robert Wilson

Last week the Green Party’s sole MP Caroline Lucas tabled an amendment to the UK’s Energy Bill calling for electricity demand to be reduced by 103 terawatt hours by 2020.

(1) The Secretary of State must within 12 months of the passing of this Act publish a strategy setting out policies to achieve a reduction in demand for electricity of at least 103 TWh by 2020 and 154 TWh by 2030.

(2) The strategy must include an assessment of the cost effectiveness of the policies included in it.

(3) Before publishing the strategy the Secretary of State must consult such persons as in his opinion may have information that will assist him in drawing up the strategy.

(4) The Secretary of State must—

……(a) implement the strategy; and

……(b) report to Parliament every year on progress

For context total electricity demand in the UK was 365 terawatt hours in 2011. So, Lucas is proposing a 30% drop in total demand in a mere 7 years, or roughly 5% per year until 2020. […]

Click here to read the full article


Keenan Confirmed!!! Met Position Laid To Utter Waste!!

Posted on June 9, 2013 by suyts

Editor Note: This post is written by Hank. Anyone familiar with Hank’s style and demeanor knows he’s not given to bombastic statements. However, if one reads this post, one can plainly and easily see how entirely inept our climate science community is.

The point isn’t so much that Keenan is correct, although in this point he most assuredly is. The point is that the Met, and the other groups of climate science nutters have been entirely wrong …… for years!!

The stubborn inability of the cli-sci community to accept proper criticism, over decades, has rendered them useless for science advancement and have relegated them to nothing more than political advocacy. This particular episode is a damning example of just that. —– James “Suyts” Sexton

Click here to read the full article

Don’t Let Your Daughters Grow Up to Be This Kind of Scientist

Posted on June 9, 2013 by Donna Laframboise

Donna Laframboise


A new essay in the peer-reviewed literature searches for the secret formula by which to manipulate public opinion.

Amy Luers calls herself “a scientist.” An online bio tells us she

holds a Ph.D. in environmental science and an M.A. in international policy studies, both from Stanford University, and a M.S. and B.S. in environmental resources engineering from Humboldt State University. [bold added]

It also says she used to lead the “Climate Program for the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) in California.” You remember the UCS? I mentioned them back in January:

Rather than being limited to those with scientific credentials, membership in that US-based lobby group is open to anyone with a credit card.

As environmental writer Mark Lynas observed recently, this is “one of the most ideological of all the green groups.” In his view, scientists who work for that organization “leave their credentials at the door.”

Luers is now the director of climate change for the Skoll Global Threats Fund, which is financed by the Skoll Foundation – which itself pursues a “vision of a sustainable world of peace and prosperity.”

Click here to read the full article

A Couple of Comments about the Oppenheimer and Trenberth Op-Ed in the Washington Post

Posted on June 9, 2013 by Bob Tisdale

In response to the May 19, 2013 op-ed Overheated rhetoric on climate change doesn’t make for good policies by Lamar Smith (Chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology), the Washington Post published an op-ed by Michael Oppenheimer and Kevin Trenberth on June 6, 2013. The Oppenheimer and Trenberth op-ed was titled Climate science tells us the alarm bells are ringing. Oddly, it is chock full of overheated rhetoric, which Representative Smith was cautioning against. Unfortunately, the Oppenheimer and Trenberth op-ed is typical of the responses by many climate alarmists to Representative Smith’s op-ed, as discussed in Judith Curry’s blog post Rep. Lamar Smith on climate change.

In addition, a couple of things caught my eye in the Oppenheimer and Trenberth op-ed.

It failed to mention Balmaseda et al (2013) Distinctive climate signals in reanalysis of global ocean heat content, of which Kevin Trenberth was co-author. Instead, they linked a couple of other recent papers and webpages. Their op-ed reads:

Much has been made of a short-term reduction in the rate of atmospheric warming. But “global” warming requires looking at the entire planet. While the increase in atmospheric temperature has slowed, ocean warming rose dramatically after 2000. Excess heat is being trapped in Earth’s climate system, and observations of the Global Climate Observing System and others are increasingly able to locate it. Simplistic interpretations of cherry-picked data hide the realities.

Click here to read the full article

The True Sign of Water Vapor Feedback is Negative

Posted on 9 June 2013 by The Chiefio

In the AGW FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) push, and in all the computer climate models (i.e. fantasy) projections (i.e. a prediction that has ‘plausible deniability’ built in) the Big Scare comes out of a positive and fairly strong Water Vapor Feedback value.

CO2 alone is not enough to get things hot, so there is a postulated positive feedback loop of more heat causing more water vapor causing more IR trapping causing more heat causing…

This got me thinking:

Is there any way to OBSERVE the actual nature of “water feedback”? (Notice I’ve left out the world “vapor”. Why? Because water does not STAY vapor. As a first direct observation, we observe that water vapor rapidly turns into things like clouds and rain. It is the entire system that matters and what really happens that matters, not just some theoretical water vapor that never changes phase…)

I just did a 2 day rapid run from coast to coast. During that time, you get to see things. How do clouds form over the day? How does the weather change and how do the temperatures change with an 8000 foot drop of elevation in an hour or two… What happens between the high desert and the low plains. Gets a fellow to thinking.

First off, lets look at a temperature map for today:

Temperature Map 8 June 2013

Temperature Map 8 June 2013

Click here to read the full article

Ed Davey’s anti-science, anti-British and anti-Liberal attack on Climate Sceptics

Posted on June 9, 2013 by manicbeancounter

Ed Davey, Secretary of State for Climate and Energy has, according to the Telegraph recently said

“Of course there will always be uncertainties within climate science and the need for research to continue.

I agree that there are uncertainties with climate science. But if you only allow believers in that “science” to contribute, without any training in decision-making under conditions of uncertainty, then the conclusions drawn out of that research will be wrong.

“But some sections of the press are giving an uncritical campaigning platform to individuals and lobby groups,”

Such as the Guardian, the BBC, or central government departments? It can work both ways.

“This is not the serious science of challenging, checking and probing.”

Are you speaking of sceptics or of climatology? You must first establish that climatology is not just a science, but is a science of the highest standards.

“This is destructive and loudly clamouring scepticism born of vested interest, nimbyism, publicity seeking contraversialism or sheer blinkered, dogmatic, political bloody-mindedness.”

Click here to read the full article

Britains’ Top Scientist – “Why Antarctica will soon be the only place to live–literally”

Posted on June 9, 2013 by Paul Homewood

The Independent, (or poor man’s Guardian), reported in 2004:-

Antarctica is likely to be the world’s only habitable continent by the end of this century if global warming remains unchecked, the Government’s chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, said last week.

He said the Earth was entering the “first hot period” for 60 million years, when there was no ice on the planet and “the rest of the globe could not sustain human life”

“No ice was left on Earth. Antarctica was the best place for mammals to live, and the rest of the world would not sustain human life,” he said.

Sir David warned that if the world did not curb its burning of fossil fuels “we will reach that level by 2100”.

Ever since, defenders of King have claimed that he never said any such thing. Given that the article was written by the appalling Geoffrey Lean, who knows?

Either way, let’s see how the prediction is planning out.

Click here to read the full article

Yeo Ho Ho! We told you so

Posted on June 9, 2013 by Anthony Watts

Not much more to say, really, is there?

Yeo in the shit again.

Yeo in the shit again.
© Cartoons by Josh

Click here to read the full article

Humanity Guilty of Global Warming Until Proven Innocent

Posted on June 9, 2013 by evilincandescentbulb

We’ve all heard about the Left’s faux world of polar bears dying from America’s second-hand smoke — or, runaway global warming — but, what is reality? Instead of normal temperatures, now we have torrential normal temperatures. Now we have cataclysmic usual climate. Worse, we have a generation of Western schoolteachers destitute of the impulse to any uplifting activity who would deprive all humanity of the fruits of Western civilization’s industrial man. Public education has become teaching hypocrisy to children.

If climate research money had been spent to find the actual causes of global warming and dedicated to single-cause, AGW groupthinkers in an attempt to prove CO2 was responsible all climate change over the last 100 years, it would be clear to everyone by now that, “temperature variations over the last 2,000 years suggests global warming (and cooling), are the rule, not the exception… ~Dr. Roy Spencer

What is the evidence base for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)? Amazingly, it doesn’t exist. The logic of global warming alarmists is about like averaging temperatures taken twice a day in a relatively few discreet areas around the world and execute a Jew a day until the average begins to drop.

Click here to read the full article

Wind Energy’s Absurd

Posted on June 09, 2013 by S.W.A.T @no2wind

Wind energy is absurd

Wind energy is absurd


Based in Scotland, standing up against the injustice and lunacy of British wind energy policy and laughing at those who implement it. War is declared. Join in the fun on Twitter as well Wind_Energy’s_Absurd@Real_BWEA



We are against industrial wind for all of its very many failings. We despise the policy and politicians that allow this parasitic industry to spread across our land and seascapes, shattering the lives of those who live near to turbines, destroying the environment and wildlife in its quest for our money.

Click here to read the full article


Comments are closed.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Follow me on Twitter

Flag Counter
%d bloggers like this: