Back tomorrow

Dear all, apologies for the lack of posts. I had to travel interstate for work again.

Back up and running tomorrow.


74 thoughts on “Back tomorrow

  1. Eric Worrall says:

    I hope you’ve purchased your carbon credits ;-).

  2. john byatt says:

    8 studies, same outcome, Human caused global warming


  3. john byatt says:

    El nino, La nina or neutral all trends the same


  4. Eric Worrall says:

    The Cyrprus bank crisis will have interesting repercussions on green politics.

    The EU for a long time has been one of the staunchest supporters of climate alarmism – they’ve set ambitious targets, shown real commitment to building wind turbines and creating a green economy.

    Now that green economy looks like its about to hit the ground face first.

    Skeptics already hold up the EU disaster as a cautionary example of what could happen to us if we travel the same road to green madness. If the EU suffers a soviet style collapse, the broken remnants will have other problems besides achieving wind turbine targets.

    And of course, Gillard will have to find enough carbon market partner.

    • zoot says:

      And of course, Gillard will have to find enough carbon market partner.

      But only until September according to you (above).
      Honestly, you’re just not capable of a coherent argument, are you?

    • zoot says:

      Skeptics already hold up the EU disaster as a cautionary example of what could happen to us if we travel the same road to green madness.

      That makes “Skeptics” sound pretty stupid. Are they all as unaware as you?

    • The crisis demonstrates that unregulated banks were a bad idea.

  5. john byatt says:

    It is never about the science for eric , always about politics,

    here are his right wing creationist mates going the full loony

  6. john byatt says:

    Try as we might to make the arctic summer sea ice last longer, to no avail


  7. Steve says:

    A 21 word post now has 22 comments.

    • john byatt says:

      consider it as an open thread steve

      • Steve says:

        Yes. I enjoy Eric’s comments.

      • john byatt says:

        Had a look at your books before, re bad boy five, what is the global temperature for that episode or not stated,?

      • john byatt says:

        oops bad boy four

      • Steve says:

        Sorry John, the actual global temperature in that book was not stated. Of course much of that book’s action takes place on places other than the Earth.
        At that time north Queensland is inhabited although most people were not living near the coast, and a new city had been built high enough in the hills to be a little cooler.
        In what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo the temperatures are too high for humans to live in.
        The ice at both poles has melted.

      • john byatt says:

        Interesting, at seven degrees C we abandon the tropics due wet bulb temperatures exceeding the mammalian maximum

  8. Sou says:

    Poptech made the millionth post on WUWT, according to Smokey the Mod. Couldn’t have picked a more fitting or arch-typical WUWT-er, eh!

    • john byatt says:

      Had a look, he seems to have flooded the comments knowing that the millionth was coming up, talking shit as usual

    • Nick says:

      Don Easterbrook has been corrected by commenters in painstaking detail for his misunderstanding of the dating of the GISP core graph he misattributed to Richard Alley… Despite having had the issue explained to him several times over the past three years, he ignores the help. The thread has gone stone dead…and the information has not been corrected. WUWT? Never apologise,never explain.

  9. john byatt says:

    comment on comment at wuwt

    Robert Smith says:
    March 15, 2013 at 2:38 pm
    C’mon guys, we need some action. Release some of the good stuff or the story will lose momentum.
    p.s. The reaction of the team on hearing that the password’s been released:

    too late robert it is already dead.

    • Meanwhile, Marcott simply reconfirms what’s been known for years. BEST of all (wearing pun coming) a Muller-ite does the graph,

    • Eric Worrall says:

      Marcott is surprisingly impressive – not only did he make interesting “beneficial” mistakes with the proxies, he even managed to apply Mike’s nature trick, using Mann’s own spliced dataset as his source.

      IMO Marcott is not so much a work of science as a homage to scientific fraud.

      • Nick says:

        Jesus wept,Eric,you cannot even read the stuff you want to believe. As JeanS says in that link, Mann[2008] was careful to note that the instrumental record had been added post 1850.. So Mann did no ‘splicing’,and what he did was explicitly described and colo-coded, hence the frequently-explained-but-always-deliberately -misrepresented context and meaning of ‘trick’,as in ‘procedure’. He added the instrumental data at the end,which is entirely reasonable because he wanted to show REALITY post the end of his proxies.

        Marcott has not spliced or added either,but played funny buggers with the dates some small amount of samples at the end of the group..I’m not really impressed with that,but at least please try and get your understanding and descriptions of things right,eh? Marcott also smoothes quite a lot,but at least read the authors justifications for that,along the reasonable line that regional proxies show a lot of variation,and a global scale atmosphere buffers that out.. Proxies are not tight temperature analogs any reconstruction has large error bars. However,palaeoglaciology supports the view that we are now as warm as high Holocene,and are waiting for some indices to catch up. Palaeoglaciology and recent retreats show that the MWP warm spikes were not as warm as currently. Did not need Marcott or Mann 2008 to tell us that,not that THEY were trying to. They are attempting multi-proxy recons over thousands of yeasr We know the hockey strick is real from so many angles.

        What Marcott et al has done just at the end appears to be unnecessary [I’m interested in any further comments from the authors] and distracts attention from the overall reconstruction. They could have showed the instrumental data,re Mann’s procedure.

        I could point you to any number of peer-reviewed papers by low sensitivity types who make arbitrary and poorly justified data choices. LIndzen and Choi,Douglas and Knox for instance. I can show you where McIntyre and McKittrick pull a swifty with their ‘replication’ and ‘criticism’ of de-centred PCA. So you can show Marcott the love you give those guys ,eh? LOL

      • Nick says:

        Started reading the paper,and the end point questions are addressed. Marcott et al suggest we have likely so far exceeded most but not all of the Holocene Optimum’s peaks,contrary to what was implied in serial dumbnialist distraction.

    • Watts is spam, according to SciAm. McIntyre’s work has been checked by, oh, McIntyre – a man whose track record is abysmal. Muller moment approaching…

  10. john byatt says:

    This is great, read as they go from jubilation to frustration to turning on each other,


    • Watching the monkeys fling faeces, even at each other, has limited appeal.

      I’ve recently been cyber-stalked, seriously, by some Tea Party deniers. I get the odd personal abusive note as a FB message, usually involving my age (old), shape (round), appearance (ugly), intelligence (low), drinking habit (either alcohol or Kool-Aid). It then moves onto the same abuse, extended to my family. And one created a sock puppet Facebook account as me – inviting my friends and family to befriend him so that he could abuse them. It wasn’t new to me, it probably isn’t new to you.

      But, interestingly, a couple of them referenced CFACT as their source of wisdom. So I headed over there. Now there is sponsored idiocy in all its glory. CFACT is citing Booker against Attenborough over, of all things, polar bears. CFACT maintains the population is growing. That’s easily debunked, there’s a nice table of bear populations and whether they’re in decline or growth – one is growing, but eight are declining. The really odd thing was using a Christopher Booker article. CFACT didn’t seem to be aware that Booker has already had to settle out of court, expensively, for smearing Pauchari and the IPCC. Ouch. Follow the money indeed.

      What’s really interesting to me is that their FB persona acts much like other deniers you may know and love. There’s a lovely graph on a billboard proclaiming no global warming. CFACT is being either praised for this (yeah, get them liberhul varmints) or much mocked for ignoring 97%+ of the globe and history (man, including me). There’s another on polar bears, as mentioned. There’s a terrifically naively unironic “Who is Mr FOIA?” campaign – positively inviting the “Where is Ms FOICFACT?” retort. They handle the questions in pretty well the same fashion as others of their ilk. Have a look at their FB presence – I’ve bored of it now.

      It brought back memories of the handful of media training courses from my personal life. One of the traditional end of day exercises was to be interrogated by a reporter – the objective was to pass on my, corporate, message – and avoid answering any uncomfortable questions. As an example, our task might be to be interviewed by a reporter having just declared our results were down. But my task was to ensure the corporate message, say expanding into South America, dominated the conversation. I was amazed by the tutor’s recommendations. Just don’t answer the question. Give it the slightest acknowledgement, then deliver your message. I, indeed all of us, were aghast. Really, we said – isn’t that crass – won’t it backfire? Trust me said the tutor. “I’m glad you asked me about our results. South America is a fantastic growth opportunity.” And that’s what CFACT do. It’s rather interesting. They have other techniques too, but most of it is stonewalling. Repeat your message, ignore their question – unless you have a rehearsed response, of course.

      It’s also interesting that they seem to have a theme at the same time everyone else has a theme. Yes, that verges on the conspiratorial (maybe I am one of them, at heart). But the unicorn that is flat-lining is all over the place. Polar bears. Mr FOIA will save the world (is Delingpole still here?) There’s an impression of simultaneity. CFACT is well, and secretly, funded (see Donors Trust) so it could well be that they are one of the inspirations of the echo chamber. There’s even the barmey 0.1C is indistinguishable from zero line from Monckton.

      I just thought you’d be amused by my having been stalked and then being led into the doubleplusungood world of CFACT.

    • Oh, I should also mention that CFACT drone on and on about Climategate. And on. And they completely stonewall the “lost nine times, you loser” response. Familiar?

    • And….CFACT has banned me – along with a few others. That’s the thanks I get for contributing facts, not CFACTs, to the discussion. I expected it and treat it as a badge of honour. One day I hope to deserve a “Hated by the Daily Mail” tee-shirt.

  11. john byatt says:

    Where to from here? 19/3….. arctic dawn 20/3 this year

  12. john byatt says:

    Eric why don’t you start your own climate denial blog,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: