Climate Change Alarmism is Snow Joke
Last night on Twitter, noting that according to the Met Office this summer is one of the coolest in decades. Guido mocked Global Warming Theory, predictably this resulted in a lot of abuse by people ranting that weather is different from climate, the science was settled etcetera. Guido promised to dig out some of the hysterical predictions from a decade ago from those scientists. Here is one of Guido’s favourites:
Snowfalls Are Now Just A Thing of the Past According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.
The Independent on 20 March 2000
The well funded CRU is at the epicentre of global warming alarmism, notorious for faking up statistical evidence to fit the theory. The Indy is the paper that warns of impending ecological disaster as often as the Express reveals the truth about Diana. So the above is a double hit. A decade later the subsequent lack of global warming and the continuing ability of children to build snowmen has propelled a shift in the green movement’s propaganda. After all, scare tactics have to scare and perhaps be a bit more credible than the Guardian science correspondent’s “Green aliens may attack“.
The scares are no longer about global warming, but climate change, since global warming theories have been falsified by reality. Any extreme weather is therefore now cited as a result of “climate disruption”, since we always have weather extremes this is less like to be perceived as contradicted by reality. Around the world polls show that the alarmists are losing credibility as a result of their shrill hysteria. Is there any wonder why?
anything backed by Gore is doomed.
americas jonah
This man made gloal warming is getting ever more expensive, farmers are now getting in in the act. Not content with massive subsidies from the CAP they are now tapping the FIT (feed in tariff) bonanza.
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/8/31/farmers.html#comments
The daft thing is that over millions of years plants have become the most efficient converters of solar energy. It is crazy covering fertile land with solar panels and windmills when it can be growing food or even trees and the waste material used to generate energy. carbon in = carbon out.
I agree
Coldest Winter in 50yr. Coldest Summer in 20 yr. That is if you believe the DATA.. My Garden Destroyed by -30 temperatures from Last Winter. The Global Warming Alarmists CO2 isn’t working to keep us WARM, So why are we being Taxed for producing it? Yes to create another NOT for profit industry that Knacker Politicians and Qunago’s can work in and be apart of as they don’t need to make a profit something that is way beyond the Ruling classes ability. They couldn’t run a corner shop never mind an economy. Economic Disaster and Starvation on Way.
Fear of gods, fear of communism, fear of international terrorism, global warming…
The control mechanisms change, but the intent is always the same: mass coercion via the politics of fear.
@Plantlife – Plants convert sunlight to stored (chemical) energy at about 0.1% efficency, whereas solar panels convert sunlight to electricity at somewhere between 12% and 18%.
Yeah plants use CO2 and Capture it within the Carbon based growth, But dont tell the Knacker Political Class, as they want to Capture it and Try and Fail to Store it. F–kwits and Quango crat State. They might also want to build a load of windmills that dont make any economic sense, So lets just Skin the Country of all its spare Cash.
Total bollocks Anon.
Photosynthesis is 8% efficient plus it removes CO2 from the atmoshere and produces oxygen.
How arrogant of the warmists to think their solar panels are better for the planet than Plants and Plankton.
@arrogance – Typical trees and plantlife you would see in a picture postcard of British countryside yields about 0.1%. Only biofuel crops or algae would get close to 8%, none of which would grow in a UK sunlight regime, and would require all the indigenous trees, hedges etc to be cut down.
That is chemical energy, so would undergo a reduction in overall efficiency if converted to electricity. (25-45% efficient, leading to max efficiency of less than 4%).
So, still significantly less than the sort of 12-18% solar panel being installed today (lab solar efficiencies are already beyond 45%).
GF is not really the place to have these discussions, but I was reacting to the statement “over millions of years plants have become the most efficient converters of solar energy” which is exactly the sort of ‘back to nature’ horseshit espoused by the very ‘warmists’that you incorrectly accuse me of being.
Fortunately, solar panels grow on trees.
Thumbs up, good point. Solar panels are awful, just like wind turbines, both are blots on the land and they should never see the light of day. Solar panels take 25 years to repay the money, ‘CO2’ and energy used to produce them, but they fail after 15-20 years so they are a net contributor to harmful CO2 (if you believe all that CO2 is harmful bullshit that is) and a waste of energy and money.
The only people making money are the manufacturers of these awful things out of our tax money and the landowners who get huge subsidies, our tax money again, for allowing these blots to be on their land.
As I explained to Neil first you plant the seed then nature grows the seed.
Who cares about the truth, I’m making LOADSAMONEY!
“predictably this resulted in a lot of abuse by people ranting that weather is different from climate”
… Until a strange weather event occurs, and then it is a sign of climate change!!!
Typical lefty hypocritical bastards those ecomentalists.
These “warmists” are similar to Russian communists, passionate and ruthless to achieve their goals but ultimately judged to be wrong by history.
Everyone knows now that all this climate change garbage is a left wing conspiracy, a massive money earner for Al Gore and an excuse to raise tax revenue.
and most of our politicians jumped on the bandwagon, providing the energy cartel a wonderful opportunity to load prices, increase profits and enhance fat cat salaries.
Last week, CERN in Geneva said research into the effect of Cosmic Rays on water vapour suggested a significant connection to cloud formation (see http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/research/CLOUD-en.html)
The Inconvenient Truth is that this was the main conclusion of climate scientists in the much derided 2007 Channel 4 documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ)
We have a duty not to pollute the planet, but it is still not proven that human activity is the cause of climate change.
The Inconvenient Truth is that politicians and commercial interests use bad science to collect taxes and make money.
When will this ever become an issue between the main parties? When will the electorate have a serious chance to stop the green taxes and allow cheap energy? This issue is becoming more and more like the parliamentary Europhile “consensus”, confounding our economy in the same way that Europe confounds our democracy.
Step 1. Get Huhne out of goverment
n
Do you have a link to “last week’s” release ? Your link seems to be an old one, simply announcing the work. .
Thanks.
Billy you must have it wrong, he was honoured by the most important scientific body in the Us of A, known worldwide as the foremost experts in the field of climate science. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science is not to be scoffed at by such as you, have you no shame casting doubt on one of their alumni. I’m shocked at you.
Surely anyone who got their science degrees from RADA, The Brit School, The Julliard School of performing arts, The American Academy of Dramatic arts, California institute of the arts, etc is worth listening to
So how do we vote for a party which is NOT tied terminally to the sinking ship of climate alarmism?
Of the serious parties, ONLY UKIP reject climate alarmism and prefer climate realism. With the excellent Viscount Monckton as their official spokesperson on Climate, they are the only political party speaking the truth about climate change.
There is NO empirical evidence that climate change is accelerating, or that the climate is heading towards any sort of tipping point of runaway warming.
Here’s another failed prediction. Dr Hansen, from NASA, predicted that Manhattan would be under water by now. The road outside his own office should be permanently flooded by now according to sea level predictions he made some 20 years or so ago. Global sea levels have risen about an inch in the time he said that they would rise by up to 2 feet.
And another failed prediction:
The Claim: 50 million climate refugees will be produced by climate change by the year 2010. Especially hard hit will be river delta areas, and low lying islands in the Caribbean and Pacific. The UN 62nd General assembly in July 2008 said: …it had been estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010.
It never happened.
“So how do we vote for a party which is NOT tied terminally to the sinking ship of climate alarmism?……”
It never happened and never will
Only problem is that many posters on here or maybe a few with multiple alias require a Political party which is not only anti Global Warming but also advocates full inglish independence, which of course rules UKIP out.
Personally I’d be quite happy for you Engles to get full independence.
I’m so pleased I’ve got so many other things going on in my life than just waiting to pounce on the latest post on this blog.
Poor spelling can often be forgiven but apostrophe ignorance is a sin.
The Ordnance Survey has a lot to answer for. I’m sure the removal of apostrophes from place names started the rot.
Billy are you British?
He’s from another dimension. There’s some sort of hellhole portal in Cardiff spewing out aliens and underarm bowlers.
UK would be fantastic if we had weather like the Riviera. The Riviera would be unihabitable but thats OK as it’s the French.
Science and science journalism are two different things. The latter is typically awful (if you compile a list of all the food types that the Daily Mail say supposedly give you cancer then all food gives you cancer, so you may as well not eat). Scientists have a range of views on a certain topic, so you will always find the rediculous, or an argument that agrees/disagrees with your stance. The point is that science isn’t static and held to one opinion. It is an ongoing process based on a body of work. You need to look at scientific opinion in aggregate to understand how likely something is. If you do this then there is a 90%+ chance that anthropogenic climate change is occuring, and roughly a 10% chance that it isn’t. As time moves forward scientific consensus will change and these probabilities will change with it. May be to 99%, may be in the opposite direction. At the end of the day, we have to act on the best information we have available to us now. If you ignore the present scientific consensus on climate change, then you clearly have as much sense (faith in empirical evidence) as someone who likes to cross the motorway with their ears muffled and eyes closed shut.
Don’t be a complete prick.
science and consensus hmmm, bullshit
Guido
I thought the latest was “climate concern”.
Back in the 80s we was told by some that we was headed for a i ce age, then we were all going to die from global warming.
Its all so confusing.
They’ll be going back to that one soon, I shouldn’t wonder.
I do not find it in the least confusing.
A bunch of politicians who do not understand science any more than they understand how to administer a sweet shop, find some scientists with an odd theory. The politicians throw lots of money at the scientists who value the cash more than their reputations.
By hyping the false scientific analysis the politicians can convince enough mugs among the electorate that there is a crisis. As we know, crises can only be addressed and never solved and that requires lots more tax – never less tax.
Result, a positive feed-back loop to the advantage of the players in this little scam and at the expense of the public.
What is confusing about that?
When the whole thing blows up the culprits will be retired or else morph into coldists.
Got it in one!
Oh yes, tovaritch, I know exactly what you mean!
Is there such a thing as voodoo science?
well they used to burn witches – now they vote them in as an mp
… and all this promulgated but the Bastard BBC.
Have a little look at what their pension is invested in, and who’s doing it, and you’ll see they have a financial interest in only telling warmist lies.
“Climate Change Science” – now there’s an oxymoron.
Meanwhile Big Al Gore claims that CC deniers are racists. Add me to the list, Al, you hypocrite with your $30,000 heating bills and pointy-end travel penchant.
Climate change is definately going on but it’s got fuck all to do with humans and has err…kinda been going on for ever. More to do with astrophysics than the fucking Chinese or whether I leave my radiator on.
haha
caught you
have you left your radiator on again sir?
Al will be livid if he reads this Telegraph article..
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100102296/sun-causes-climate-change-shock/
All Politicians should read this article.
Those who fail to understand it will be treated with complete contempt and total derision by an electorate who have had enough of corrupt science being used to justify green taxes which penalise the poor and destroy any chance of an economic recovery.
Warmist politicians now have “IDIOT” clearly stamped across their foreheads.
Stamping is not indelible, they should be branded or tattooed instead.
They don’t care what we think ,they live in an armour plated world now.
Let the corrupt bastards rot in it.
Thieves and liars.
The coming few years will see their system fall ,governments will fall all over the western world and the cause will be the stupidity of politicians and the bad counsel they adhere to even if it makes them look utter fools.
It almost looks like they read the book,How to destroy an economy in three easy lessons.
Warmists?
That’s so nineties.
Haven’t you heard? we’re “changists” now.
And if you’re not a changist, you’re a racist. Simples.
Have the Maldives sunk yet? Any progress on that – one of the more colourful predictions? Last I heard, some proper scientists who actually know about sea levels said that the sea level in the Maldives had in fact receded slightly over the last few decades!
This “coral islands will sink” nonsense has nothing to do with the climate.
The Bahamas are the top of a carbonate platform at least 2 miles high that has been forming out of coral for well over 200 million years. In that time, we’ve had hotter climates, ice ages, dinosaurs, meteor strikes, and God knows what. And yet the coral kept growing.
The problem is that someone built a load of concrete on top, stopping the natural building process, and then expected it to remain dry.
As for climate change, well yes, it does. Duh.
Guam is in danger of tipping over!
Some years ago I posted something below a Johan Hari piece in the Indy,long before his exploits in the realms of fiction became widespread news,pointing out that something he had written about as being unprecedented evidence of warming had been recorded 60 years previously.
Strangely the site would not accept it.
I heard Hari being interviewed on the radio during the Copenhagen debacle during which his confident assertions of things he clearly knew nothing about convinced me the man was an extreme fundamentalist rather than a rational individual.
I am reading a book called “The Hockey Stick Illusion” by A.W. Montford. Subtitled “Climategate and the Corruption of Science”. I don’t understand all of the statistics and maths, but it is still an interesting road. Specially of interest for anyone studying graphs, statistics and palaeontology. This proves the adage “there are lies, damned lies anstatistics”.
That is an excellent book. I can highly recommend it.
+1
Such vile books should be burned and the author tortured until he espouses the true faith.
But wouldn’t that cause global warming?
And Guam to tip over?
The key point is that you could feed random noise ( 1/f or “pink” noise to be explicit ) into the algorithm that was used to produce the hockey stick from climate data, and the algorithm woul produce …… ta! da! ….. a hockey stick.
In any real field of science, that monumental blunder would be a career killer. And the organisation that promoted it would be ridiculed. But not in climate ” science”.
Some fun this a.m. on BBC news – Simon McCoy says to the midget “forecasting” the weather that it is very cold, and has been for a while, so what about this global warming malarky. Said midget is taken aback, mumbles something about it being a global phenomenon and our coldest summer is just a local quirk. Midget then hastiliy goes on to tell us about the cold and rain.
Methinks McCoy will be in the torture cellars under the Al Beeba compound having his “thought crimes” bashed out of him. Be interesting to see if he ever appears again, or becomes one of the “disappeared.
Made me chuckle to see the face of the weather pixie when he asked the question though!
Is that the bloke who was in The Bill?
http://primetime.unrealitytv.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/grahamcole.jpg
anyone got a clip of it?
I thought it rather strange to watch an article on Breakfast news where they were showing how to save energy and keep warm in the unusually cold end to summer. They turned it into an article on how to save money by reducing energy usage and as far as that went it was OK.
I was waiting for them to mention something about tackling global warming, but I guess even the dolts at the BBC could have seen how hilariously ironic it would have been to have an article about how to keep warm in a cold late summer in a way which will also tackle global warming.
Never underestimate the ability of our leftist friends doing one thing but saying another.
McCoy is a delightfully loose cannon, only occasionally released from captivity to be seen on BBC1 – shame, because he seems to be one of the few ‘real’ people to appear on it.
His ‘climate change’ quip this morning was a classic throwaway line and the dumbfounded weather-pixie looked completely pole-axed by it.
Let’s have more McCoy and less of the right-on-message autocuties (especially the whale-sized Silverton – the sooner she’s on Maternity Leave, and sterilised, the better).
The scares are no longer about global warming, but climate change, since global warming theories have been falsified by reality.
Nonsense. Reality has been disproven by Climate Change models!
lmao thumbs up
+1
It’s no coincidence that most Ecofascists were formerly members of the Hard or New Left, that most Green activists are arts based academics and that the BBC – the champion of this flat earth “science” has much of it’s pension funds invested in “green” or “eco” businesses.
Subsidy junkies love witch hunts, abuse of opponents and superstitious emotionalism.
These crazies assume that:
1 Weather/climate are different
2 That the climate only warmed up recently – in fact it has changed dramatically over the millenia – Southern England was tropical in primordial epochs
3 That solar activity is less important that human activity – an humancentric arrogance that goes back to the Middle Ages
4 Science/rationality is irrelevant, so fit the theory with the emotive dogma – a sovietisation of intellectual endeavour much favoured by the National Socialist Workers Parties and their thuggish supporters
Do the math.
The BBC is a notorious peddler of hard left propaganda and the biggest danger to the public safety of citizens in this country.
Time to dismantle the publicly funded monster and protect our future.
Right we know what needs to be done, the question now is how? Over to you Dave…………er, Dave?
Face it, NONE of the top three parties are correct on climate change, or on the EU (which is also wrong on climate change).
If you want policies which are based on what is good for the people of the UK, and not based on misplaced climate alarmism, or on what is best for the EU or the Bankers…. Do not vote for any of the top three parties.
The EU and climate alarmism are effecting more and more policy areas to the extent that they will dictate almost every decision made by government.
There is only one way to stop this mad delusion. Vote against the top three and get a party of realists into power. That party being UKIP.
How depressing it is therefore to be a realist and realise that the party of realists has no realistic chance of getting into power.
And for Chrissake don’t tell them about the last big sea level change – poor bloody mammoths got drowned on Dogger Bank.
Do the math.
I’m not sure what “math” is. If it’s all the same to you, I’ll do the maths instead.
Actually its not math or indeed maths but arithmetic
Or mathematics
That is why ecomentalists are commonly referred to as ‘water melons’, green on the outside, red on the inside…
The biggest problem with climate change science is that the dataset is still way too small and therefore subject to significant margin of error, even with all those retrospective (and highly selective) tree ring and ice core analyses. Later we will be told 2011 is the hottest year on record on the basis of mean global temperature but in practice this is a meaningless concept, given the impact of urbanisation in many areas of measurement. As for the British 2011 summer – it was impacted by the biggest “greenhouse gas” – water vapour, which significantly reduced insolation levels.
Anyway, it’s all bollocks.
They should be forced by law to list all the places they took the temperatures, for all the years they use, and to admit any “corrections” and “compensations” they did to the data.
And return the huge slush fund they have fiddled out of governments across the globe…..
Read the book I recommended, it’s all in there, tree rings and all. Barry in a cold climate event in West Cork.
It also relies on the temperature being Gaussian distributed so that a 8 degree August should only be followed by a 7 or 9 and if 8 inches of rain fell then there should not be one inch next August.
Blimey, have not posted for a while and now this “awaiting moderation” thingy pops up.
Does that mean I cannot call Miliband a Hunt now then?
Just askin, like
He’s a cuпt.
+1
Guido’s stasi machine is in need of fixin’…
‘Global Cooling/New Ice Age’ became,
‘Global Warming’ became,
‘Climate Change’ becoming,
‘Climate Concern’ and when it’s proven that this too is a tax-generating myth and the climate is a generally flat model with periodic peaks and troughs caused by the cyclic nature of the sun it will probably be sold to the tax payers as:
‘Climate Pause’ just before the ‘Next Catastrophic Climate Event’.
Chicken Licken had nothing on these shysters.
I thought that climate change, or whatever you want to call it, was a wonderful taxation opportunity. I would have made the most of it if I hadn’t been so busy saving the world.
Mr & Mrs Balls are a great comfort to me. I wish they would visit me more often. It’s lonely in this little room…
You must be a long way from Canterbury….
Eins Global Varming, Eins Euro, Eins Volk, Eins 4th Reich!
never mind, an E in GCSE German is not too bad, could have been verse.
Fuck the Germans, they should learn English, after all we did win the war…….didn’t we?
Yes, but we’re so ashamed of beating you, we never mention it.
Most of them do speak English – often better than the natives.
You mean you believe my propaganda?
Yeah, but we lost the peace……
Latest research by NASA shows clearly that the earth’s climate is mainly controlled by sunspot activity, which affects the magnetosphere & thus cosmic ray effects on cloud formation. And it’s those very clouds that provide fine-tuning of the heat retained or escaping the atmosphere.
CO2 is a 2nd or 3rd order effect, whether man-made or natural. But, as this does not support the carbon taxation frenzy, it is being ignored by Gore-lovers.
It’s not only being ignored, it’s being suppressed.
Close down The Sun immediately!
It will cause Guam to tip over!
Where the fuck is Guam?
Thhat Irene storm in the States is being blamed on AGW, then in the same breath they say it was the worst storm in 80 years. So what did they blame the one 80 years ago on?
And now the BBC is featuring the Row to the Pole expedition proving that the Arctic is melting fast but failing to tell the viewers that they did not row to the real North pole but an arbitary 1996 North Magnetic Pole which is 700 miles short of the geo North pole. If the BBC did a bit of history they would discover that the RN were sailing around the Islands that the expedition went to in the 1800s looking for a North west Passage. Names like Devon Island and Cornwall Island sort of gives the game away.
Don’t pester the BBC with facts. They haven’t got round to rewriting that bit of history yet.
BBC News is more like Blue Peter in the 1970′s or early an Newsround when doing features for children.
Too right, they have a morning editors meeting deciding what they’re gonna teach us kids today.
Can I come out yet ?
Blue Peter in the 70′s had far more integrity than present day BBC News.
Except that Irene was not even the biggest storm in 80 years, but in about 10. And that is biggest in terms of geographical area, not intensity. When it made landfall it quickly dissipated into a tropical storm and was not at all unusual in strength.
The alarmists predicted that Katrina level events would become the norm. That global warming should make hurricanes more frequent and stronger. Looking back over the last 100 years, the frequency and intensity of storms show no overall trend at all, so either the earth has not warmed, and global temperature increase is due to sighting issues, with regards to weather stations and statistical or analytical errors, or they have the physics of hurricanes all wrong.
And with regards to the “row to the pole” fraud, not only did they not reach any current North pole, (magnetic or otherwise), they never rowed all the way either. They had to walk much of it, dragging their boat over the ice!
The MSM bullshit reporting on this matter well shredded here
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/26/telegraph-geography-fail/
:Awaits ranty Delingpole blog.
Just for bit of fun (again) and recognising that one icicle does not a winter make, it is bloody COLD here now at 10 deg north in the sub-Sahara. Something to do with the dense cloud I think. Haven’t seen the sun for a day or two. Maybe it is the weather?
There is a story doing the rounds here about two blokes on one push bike in the hills at night. They came to long down hill stretch and freewheeled down at full speed. When they arrived at the bottom they were dead from the cold. Maybe a slight exaggeration, but IT IS COLD.
The alarmists will never – read that again – never admit that they are wrong, think of the clamor for a refund in green taxes.
Please do not expect the Bastard BBC to ever denounce this either :
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2011/06/green-jackboots-and-pension-funds.html
BBC have missed the boat with their pension fund. They can’t get out of green investments without giving the game away. And if they stay in, their pension fund becomes worth less by the day.
That’s the only thing I’m enjoying about the BBC these days.
Surely it’s a defined benefit scheme, so the investment returns are irrelevant.
Any shortfall will be made up by adjusting the Licence Fee and cutbacks to programs such as Top Gear, The Sky at Night, The Daily Politics and This Week.
Catch one in a corner and they’ll admit the licence fee is doomed over a five to ten year timescale. Technological advances will impose a pay-per-view model on them.
The pound signs will spin in their eyes once they realise how many people are willing to make micropayments to watch soaps and quizzes: they will scramble to ditch the licence fee in exchange for all the extra income.
I”ve had to put the heating on this morning.
Man-made climate change on a global scale has been happening for thousands of years due to farming and agriculture. Deserts are continuing to expand as forests are torn down and the soil then is blown or washed away. The added issue of population expansion with the resulting need for more roads, shops, factories and houses only adds to this pressure. CO2 being the cause of a world-wide catastrophe is an irrelevance. CO2 has been changing up and down for millions of years.
So, the problem is simply too much sex. Now just stop it, and save the world lads.
Fighting wars over debatable land doesn’t help. Most of the desertification of the Horn of Africa is a result of 40 years of fighting totally destroying the already fragile environment.
Actually the Sahara desert is in retreat.
Some eco-nut will be along soon to protect this “natural habitat”.
That’s because we bombed it.
Here’s another Alarmist “prediction”. There will be 4.5 billion dead from global warming. Only123 days left. No wonder the eco-loons are trying to pin 40 deaths on Hurricane Irene.
Pope Al Gore, head of the Church of climate crisis, reckons that the North Polar Icecap will be gone in another 1019 days. (H/T the Daily Bayonet)
BTW. Alarmist climate science has been so burnt by failed predictions, they now do “projections” instead, sort of like the Book of Revelations of the Climate Bible
Typical leftie fuckwit suffering from rectal cranial inversion.
There people are realising what a crock of shit climate alarmism is.
What is really futile is that now that China (now the world’s biggest emitter of CO2), Japan, Russia, Brazil, India and the USA (amongst others) are refusing to agree to continue or replace the Kyoto accords, then our attempts to ‘tackle climate change’ are guaranteed to be doomed to complete failure.
We could literally destroy our entire industrial economy, take the UK in a literal sense back to a technological equivalent of the stone age by stopping ALL our CO2 emissions, (which would have millions of our people starve and/or freeze to death), and yet it will not change the global temperature by ANY significant amount whatsoever.
To continue along this path is national suicide and is literally, in every meaning and connotation of the word INSANE.
Why do we have a minister devoted to Climate Change? Something that can’t be proven.
Is there a minister for Ghosts? Or maybe a Secretary of State for Wizards?
http://www.climatechangepledge.co.uk/
Ed Miliband attacks Mayor of Doncaster’s claim global warming is a scam
By Labour Matters ⋅ September 2, 2009 ⋅
http://www.labourmatters.com/Editor/ed-miliband-attacks-mayor-of-doncasters-claim-global-warming-is-a-scam/
Ed Miliband MP has attacked the Mayor of Doncaster’s claim that global warming is a “scam”:
“I am shocked and appalled that the Mayor of Doncaster is describing global warming as a scam. We should trust science not prejudice and the science tells us that climate change is man-made. If left unchecked, it will have severe effects on future generations in Doncaster, and we know from the flooding of 2007 the misery it will cause. It is incredible that Doncaster’s elected Mayor can describe the single biggest threat to our planet in this way.
“Because we need to tackle climate change, it is right that we use renewable energy, including wind farms. Already they are providing the electricity for 2 million UK households, so the Mayor is just plain wrong that about wind energy. While of course there can be legitimate objections to wind turbines, the biggest threat to the English countryside is not the wind turbine but climate change.
—–
Mr Milliband, you are a complete and utter cocksucking wanker. No harm to you and your nose.
Keep up. That is part of my portfolio.
Meanwhile, on planet Earth:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.gif
You’re taking GISS temperature reconstructions at face value? ROFL!!! You deluded fool. Even my engineering colleagues as NASA do not take that pile of shit seriously!
January 13th 2007
Snowdon will be snowless by 2020
SNOWDON will lose its snow cover by 2020 as a result of climate change, Welsh academics warned today.
10 June 2011
Summer snow falls on summit of Snowdon
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-13731216
I’ve got my snow back.
Oh dear, no more vids like this by 2020.
One of the benefits of writing for the Guardian is that the majority of readers are clever enough to spot a story written with tongue firmly in cheek. But not all. Especially when traffic arrives from Matt Drudge’s website. A recent email on the aliens scenario story – the paper behind which was written in the researchers’ spare time – hammered me for taking global warming seriously, but raised no eyebrow over the exceptionally speculative prospect of the odd human being squished by the careless manoeuvre of an alien spaceship that reached Earth after successfully traversing the galaxy. The study was a fun piece of unfunded work that sparked some interesting discussions. On some sites, it also raised dull and spurious debates about climate change and NASA. Here’s a thought: cheer up.
Er. you’re not very clear on whether we should be pissed off about shelling out our hard earned tax money for a fiction thought up by unscrupulous shysters…..is all I’m saying.
Additionally, the fact that it was published as PEER REVIEWED science really takes the piss! Now that there has been a bit of a backlash against “peer reviewed climate science” on the back of this ridiculous assertion that climate change poses a threat of alien invasion, and everyone is waking up to how shitty the alarmist’s evidence, and scientific standards, are, they are back-peddling for all they are worth!
Any serious scientific paper which challenges the CAGW gravy train has to battle against years of hostile reviews, regardless of the actual evidence presented, before it might be published.
Any paper supportive of the CAGW gravy train is published easily regardless of the actual evidence provided.
This “alien threat” paper is proof of the meaningless joke which peer-review science has sunk to in relation to “climatology”
It’s an ‘ology so it must be true.
Remember that hysterical video they made advocating the genocide of anyone who didnt follow the party line on man made global warming. That was just a laf as well , innit !
Yes I remember the sick 10:10 ‘no pressure’ campaign where they thought it was funny and edgy to show sceptical children being blown to pieces.
It takes a truly sick mind to come up with that sort of propaganda.
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.
Thanks for that Ian but actually I thought ALL of the Guardian contained stories and opinion pieces which were tongue in cheek particularly the writings of Polly Toynbee and most of the political and economic comment.
Are you seriously suggesting that some of that is for real ???!!!
So you’re saying the majority of Grauniad readers think it’s April 1 every day?
Grauniad readers. Think ? Uh ??
And this Fire or Ice nonsense has a long history…
Ice 1895, New York Times
Geologists Think the World May be Frozen Up Again.
Fire 1922, Associated Press
…the Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the waters too hot.”
Ice1923, Chicago Tribune
Scientist Says Arctic Ice Will Wipe Out Canada.
Fire 1930, New York Times
Alpine glaciers are in full retreat.
Ice1974, New York Times
And unless government officials reacted to the coming [cooling] catastrophe, “mass deaths by starvation and probably in anarchy and violence” would result.
Climate modellers shoud be conCERNed because their models are wrong:
http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2011/downloads/CLOUD_SI_press-briefing_29JUL11.pdf
Heads in the clouds…
P.S. Roger Harrabin and Roger Black: READ IT and REPORT ON IT
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100102296/sun-causes-climate-change-shock/
The BBC will just ignore anything that does not fit their agenda…..
From the blog…
Still, as you’d expect, the BBC remains dutifully on-message. Read this report by its science correspondent Pallab Ghosh and you’ll be left in little doubt that a) the latest results are dull beyond measure and b) that if they do mean anything at all, it’s that global warming is still very much man-made. Here’s their tame expert, Reading University’s Dr Mike Lockwood, on hand to provide them the perfect pull-quote:
Does this mean that cosmic rays can produce cloud? – No”
Radio 4 as I am type is blaming “Climate Change” and “warmer winters” on an increase in clothes moths.
They may not have noticed that winters have been rather cold of late – but they have found something that will strike terror into middle Britain. Clothes Moths.
Reminds me…
The BBC are true believers, nothing will shake their faith.
Classic episode of South Park mocking the global warming lobby. A spokesman tries to hypnotize the kids: “Global warming is real. Global warming. Don’t trust the Republicans. Republicans want to destroy the world. Republicans are evil.”
+1
Two points.
Global warming is real. Average world temperatues have risen in the last twenty years. Personally, I am not convinced that it is caused by human action rather than natural solar cycles.
Secondly, paradoxically, the snow and cold of last winter could actually have been caused by global warming. Britain’s weather in winter is essentially controlled by two weather systems: a warm high pressure zone over the Azores and a cold low high pressure zone over Iceland. Normally the high is high enough and the low low enough that the winde patterns ar south to north: thus the UK gets warm wet winters. During last year’s cold snap, the Iceland low was warmer (and hence higher in pressure), thus the south-north warm winds were less strong, and the cold winds from the north penetrated further south: covering Britain in snow. On average, the Northern winter was warmer than average: we just copped the excep[tion.
Yep, what we’re griping about is the sinister attempt to hijack these ‘facts’ to promote a marxist/green, anti-humanity agenda.
This is a load of shite.
I will save the planet when I become Prime Minister.
The Warmistas are getting desperate. Their gravy train is in danger of drying up……… OMG! A gravy drought!
Meanwhile NASA OBSERVATIONS indicate higher IR radiation from our planet than the AGW Mob would like……….. and then a new revelation:
IF CO2 LEVELS WERE TO INCREASE, SO WOULD THE RATE AND SIZE OF PLANT LIFE!!!!!!!!!
To demonstrate this, take a look at the UK’s largest Tomato Producer! What is the secret of their success?
CO2 ENHANCEMENT!
They use the CO2 output of the local Sugar Production Unit to provide a CO2-rich environment for their tomato plants…………and they are HUGE!……..as well as amazingly productive………….
……….. a pity the rest of our crops are not doing so well………
sweet jesus christ on a tricycle. if that is the level of debate in this country, we are truly fucked. what next, prize marrows?
I know, it is simply terrible that the truth that CO2 is an excellent plant food and warmer temperatures with more CO2 will increase bio-diversity leading to increased crop yields and and more diverse life forms and a rich abundance of life in all its wondrous glory, on this planet, should be allowed to interfere in climate alarmism. Oh for shame!
Let me tell you where I am…
…..on the one hand the evidence for Man made global warming is pretty sketchy to say the least and their is plenty of evidence of systematic abuse and falsehood by those advocating this theory. On top of that some of the biggest tossers on the planet are at the forefront of this hysteria.
On the other hand theres loads of money to be made so for that reason I’m most definitely in !!!!!!!
And on the other hand there’s even more money to be made by keeping things going just the way they are by the people who keep things going just the way they are.
Dangerous for the UK right wing to go down the same anti-science route as the US right-wing… what next creationism being equal to evolution?
Climate change science is anti-science you twat. It’s like voodoo economics, only for science.
Anti-science??? Lots of data analysis, founded statistical methods. Endless peer review. Does not give a 100% answer, but lots of science is like that. Certainly open for dispute and debate, but that is only relevant if it is done with the same rigour, rather than “ooh, it’s a bit parky this year” level approaches.
Anti-science is believing that an invisible man in the sky made the earth in seven days, for which the only proof is a translation of something someone wrote down a few thousand years ago with no evidence.
That is why the Hockey stick has been totally ripped apart by real statisticians is it? Why it was accepted that the Antarctic had not warmed during the last century, until alarmists had to “invent” a new statistical analysis technique, (which amounted to crude cherry picking) to show that it ‘could have’ warmed, and a paper which received front page coverage world-wide and top news on the BBC. The subsequent papers disproving this did not receive the same coverage.
Climate alarmism is the worst form of pseudo science crap!
Anti-science is believing that climate scientists (of all people) can foretell the future by drawing imaginary lines on graphs, even though their entire past history proves they can do nothing of the kind.
SKWAAAAWWWKK!!! (hump) (chew) (p-too)
Oh dear. A budgie on the site. There’s going to be inter-species strife, I can tell!
I don’t do sky fairies, I don’t do creationist fantasies, I don’t do AGW science fiction, but I make Genghis Khan look like a liberal…
Guido. Yawn.
Quiet day on anything interesting or sensible, is it?
Is it just me or is it getting hot in here ??? Phewww
The car I was travelling in just went over a bridge.
It made my tummy tickle like there were real butterflies in there.
I laughed!
Sssh don’t tell anyone, a little bit of wee came out.
There is an interesting article over at Real Science which lists all the extreme weather in 1971.
Extreme weather is nothing new!!
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/08/03/essay-by-reader-paul-h-is-our-climate-becoming-more-extreme/
Great post Guido.
What we have with th BBC / Guardianista axis is not science, but a faith based pseudo-religious movements backed by good looking computer graphics. Anyone that claims the road to redemption is in some climate model or some pamphlet they’re waving around is at best an asshole, at worst a fanatic. They are all trying to sell you something. This is the kind of science fiction I can do without.
As a software engineer I have done some work in the simulation area. I know how easy it is to give people the impression that everything is fully understood and predictable. Generally it isn’t.
Correct.
There are big problems with the 19 IPCC climate models, including the initial assumptions, no longer being borne out by observation, the coding of the models allowing ample opportunity for the model to throw out any pre-designed outcome that those who pay for the model want to see, to their being insufficient data to include in the model, to the data that do have being weak and not a good fit with reality.
It has got to the stage where for some people, the models actually falsify reality, instead of the other way round.
Have you ever been outside on a really hot sunny day, then had a bank of cloud roll in? What happens to the temperature?
NONE of the climate models have an accurate reproduction of clouds, because when these models were coded, the scientists, who were instructing the computer engineers, did not actually know how clouds work, why they form and most importantly what input or output parameters to use to model accurate cloud behaviour. How can the engineers model the climate when they do not know how clouds work? Answer? THEY CAN’T! Implication? THE MODELS SUCK!
The scientists fudged it and instead of using actual real known data for clouds, they used their assumptions that water vapour is always a positive feedback and ensured that temperature related increases in water vapour in their models always produce high level clearer stratus clouds which leads to a positive temperature feedback in the atmosphere. Added to this is the fact that the models do not include Svensmark’s still valid hypothesis. A hypothesis which was not disproven by the CLOUD experiment at CERN.
Computer models should ONLY be used as a rough guide. They should never replace actual reality as a method for projecting anything.
I will trust reality over models any day of the week. It is the climate alarmists who are denying reality, physics, oceanography, history, geology, global historical politics, anthropology and so many other science and human historical evidence to create a false reality in which they need to control and tax everyone to save the planet.
I have resisted the temptation to copy and paste this to Anthony Watts’ excellentWatts Up With That? website, as that honour belongs to its author.
As a statement of principle, I’m reminded of the moment that Martin Luther nailed his ’39 Theses’ to a German church’s door. These, however, are rooted not in faith but in rationalism, sound observation and logic.
Bravo!
All great scientists constantly challenge their own findings, looking for ways to make them fall over. If Darwin was around today and saw the latest scientific advances, he would almost certainly ditch his evolution theory in the face of overwhelming evidence against it.
What overwhelming evidence against it?
Don’t post crap. Fuck off back to the Grauniad.
So Guido is mocking someone for an inaccurate prediction?
Global warming was old hat two years ago. Climate change is fast showing itself to be a busted flush. The up-and-coming enviro-scam is biodiversity. Expect lots more headlines about how many thousands and millions of species are becoming extinct every year. The solutions will be the same of course: more tax, more regulation, plenty of dosh and market entrenchment for established players, plenty more opportunities for the banksters to conjure money out of nothing. Cameron was already thinking along these lines in 2009: http://www.environmental-finance.com/news/view/802
The other one that they are now using to scare the bejisis out of people is the utterly ridiculous “local extinction”.
If a local population of any animal naturally moves to a new habitat, leaving none of the original group in that arbitrarily decided location, then they are considered “locally extinct” and included in all sorts of extinction and threat databases. It matters not that the actual numbers of such a species are on the increase in their new habitat, or if the local humans in the new habitat are forced to hunt these new incomers in that area, They are considered extinct in the area they used to live in, and a climate change related threat in the new area.
It does not matter also that animals have changed habitats, and adapted to new habitats since animals first crawled on land some 600 million or so years ago.
Alarmists will exploit any behaviour as an example of mankind’s wickedness. And if they cannot see a change in behaviour, then the behavioural stasis means that the animal is no longer adapting to change and is threatened all the more.
They have this scam all sewn up from all angles.
It’s good to see someone other than Darcus telling me I’m a racist because I disagree with them.
Even if climate change does happen (and whether it’s caused by humans or occurs naturally) the best chance people have of coping with it is economic development.
It’s actually the zero-carbon wallahs and Al Gore condemning millions of people to death, if their own predictions come true, because they seek to prevent countries developing to the point where they aren’t as suscpetible to drought, famine, flooding, etc.
Global warming is the new millenialist secular religion. Rather than treat is as a possible problem and plan contingencies for it accordingly, they run around trying to make everyone shit-scared and brainwashed, and produce TV adverts of people who are sceptical of their new religion being blown apart by the righteous. They deserve Dawkins et al to tear them a new one.
Guido is wrong.
If you look at a map showing increase or decrease in temperature over the past 20 years you will see that the UK has stayed about the same and some parts of the world have got colder, BUT temperatures in Africa and some other areas have increased dramatically. This has reduced growing seasons. Overall temperatures ARE increasing and this IS affecting some of the poorest people in the world.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/images/map-blended-mntp-201007.png
Pointing to snow here as a way of denying climate change is cold comfort to subsistence farmers living in these areas.
I think the argument is that differentiating between weather and climate is part of the scam. The dictionaries are in on it.
Gordon – bollards. Did he even look at the graph he posted?
Warming is greatest around the arctic.
Check the graphs at the GISS website.
Of course the self-righteous PC lefties want to believe that GW is worst in Africa and it’s all the developed worlds fault, so we have to pay them loadsamoney in compensation.
The Climate Change Stazi are now trying to rubbish the results of the CERN CLOUD research which has demonstrated that the atmospheric effects claimed to be from Global Warming and in fact better accounted for by cosmic rays promoting cloud formation in the atmosphere. Whoops. It aint us. Its God wot done it.
Then there are the NASA experiments that show that earth is radiating far more heat into space that the climate change alarmists models allow. So the earth doesn’t heat up – it radiates the heat away.
To summarise the science – climate change is bollocks
By falling for this crap you destroy your credibility where it is really needed. It’s too easy for the people you, rightly, attack to dismiss you as a knuckle dragging know nothing. Of course all the dead beats who applaud dotty Delingpole will cheer you on, but do you really want that kind of claque?
CO2 – is plant food.
Get a f*cking grip
The vast majority of scientists are clearly bonkers, thank goodness we have right wing bloggers to bring a bit of rationality to the debate!
There’s a great website called numberwatch that has a long list of all things that have been ’caused’ by global warming.
Many of these are mutually contradictory (trees less colourful, trees more colourful, fog increase, fog decrease, etc).
I suggest you also read Climatedepot.com, Junkscience.com, Greeniewatch (http://antigreen.blogspot.com/) for starters.
… it’s the next Ice Age we want to be really worried about…
AGW = a scam, pure and simple.
Assuming the current rate of ice shrinkage and accompanying weight loss in the Hudson Bay region, bears there could become so thin by 2012 they may no longer be able to reproduce. (2004)
It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.
We routinely wrote scare stories…Our press reports were more or less true…We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment.
I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.
Global Warming is sooooooo last year!
Population growth is the new scarce. See….
http://populationmatters.org/
Eugenics, any one?
Interesting how the same people who base their world view on hysterical statements on immigration discount hysterical statements on global warming (and vice versa).
You probably wouldn’t be finding it so funny if you lived in the South Pacific or central Africa. Just saying.
I love these yokels who think that the whole world is like where their own ass is at. Never mind the spectacular heatwave that affected most of the US this year – that’s not global, is it?
As Darwin said, “Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge…”
There is a difference between physics and politics.
In politics you can use strawman arguments and false statements. You can use these to mock your opponents, bring them down in the estimation of your supporters and try to block their actions. Exactly as Guido is doing in this article.
In physics (of which climate science is essentially a subset) you are dealing with matter and energy. These remain totally unaffected by ridicule and debating tricks and just go on doing what they do. Unfortunately, understanding what they do requires hard work and study, not straw men.
Physicists have been pretty good at understanding what matter and energy do – without quantum theory, for example, no one could read this. They’ve also been pretty good at understanding the processes involved in climate. So before commenting on ‘climate science’ it’s a good idea to find out what the science actually says – both theory and observations – before you judge whether it’s true or not.
The original idea, that aliens will destroy humanity because we’re a menace to the galaxy, goes back to pre-Golden Age science fiction. Maybe that’s where they got the idea for global warming too.
there are fairies living at the bottom of my garden
Climate change is one of our more naive trains of thoughts. Remember that people previously used think that there was no harm in asbestos, swallowing arsenic and that tobacco was good for your lungs.
The ones that are chasing this with zeal are the ones that have been politically indoctrinated to it or have money invested in it. A close friend of mine (bless his left worshiping heart) was a home pack inspector and argued the merit of them until he was blue in the face because he was losing out on extra pay.
what caused the last ice age to melt,and what caused it to freeze in the first place?
Al Gore’s smug fumes and the heat from his 4 Apple desktops.