Climate change - the POLITICAL debate.
Discussion
Nice, sort of! We can all look honestly in the mirror and laugh at ourselves when it's justified, but I have to say that the first cartoon is stretching reality to breaking point and beyond. The suggestion that forensic analysis of what passes for 'evidence' reveals only grammatical errors is bizarre. Still it's only humour so nothing too problematic.
turbobloke said:
Nice, sort of! We can all look honestly in the mirror and laugh at ourselves when it's justified, but I have to say that the first cartoon is stretching reality to breaking point and beyond. The suggestion that forensic analysis of what passes for 'evidence' reveals only grammatical errors is bizarre. Still it's only humour so nothing too problematic.
Worry ye not kind Sir! It was merely an observation based on this...WUWT said:
There is a lovely cartoon over at Roger Pielke Jr’s which, delightful though it is, helps perpetuate the myth that Global Warming is somehow an issue for climate skeptics. It isn’t. The issue is Catastrophic Anthropogenic, and specifically that singularly caused by CO2, Global Warming and the alarmist hype surrounding the lack of science and the punitive energy policies that have been pursued in response to a non problem.
You know I am firmly in the 'against' camp, but it does amuse and disturb me in equal measure how the 'Pro' lobby actually see anyone who doesn't agree with their catastrophic view of the future.Same as it ever was eh?
They just cannot help themselves, can they? Why are these morons still given public (OUR) money to help destroy our society and way of life?
WUWT said:
“Death threats” against Australian climate scientists turn out to be nothing but hype and hot air
WUWT readers may recall the uproar in the alarmosphere and media over this…well, just like Peter Gleick and Fakegate, this was another “manufactured” claim against skeptics with not a single document to back it up then. An adjudicate looking at the actual documents, has ruled they “do not contain threats to kill”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/02/breaking-dea...
Projectionism, perhaps?WUWT readers may recall the uproar in the alarmosphere and media over this…well, just like Peter Gleick and Fakegate, this was another “manufactured” claim against skeptics with not a single document to back it up then. An adjudicate looking at the actual documents, has ruled they “do not contain threats to kill”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/02/breaking-dea...
chris watton said:
Projectionism, perhaps?
My spidey sense was tingling back last year when it happened:Jinx last June said:
Death threats
This has just hit the press. Now a quick search shows that some news outlets are saying the threats have been reported others saying the Federal Police have not been notified by the University but are aware of the situation?
The cynic in me is viewing this as a PH "brake" incident - anyone out there closer to the truth?
This has just hit the press. Now a quick search shows that some news outlets are saying the threats have been reported others saying the Federal Police have not been notified by the University but are aware of the situation?
The cynic in me is viewing this as a PH "brake" incident - anyone out there closer to the truth?
This is for ooop north mostly but you have to ask where the catastrophic global warming has gone, we really should be worried about our blood boiling from the external temperature by now, rather than from the total lunacy of junkscience in the hands of daft politicians.
Winter will return this weekend as an Arctic blast threatens to send temperatures plunging to -9 deg C
Did somebody mention the possiblity of Dalton or Maunder Minimum conditions returning?
Winter will return this weekend as an Arctic blast threatens to send temperatures plunging to -9 deg C
Did somebody mention the possiblity of Dalton or Maunder Minimum conditions returning?
It's not looking too warm for Sunday... clicky
turbobloke said:
Did somebody mention the possiblity of Dalton or Maunder Minimum conditions returning?
They certainly did...turbobloke said:
This is for ooop north mostly but you have to ask where the catastrophic global warming has gone, we really should be worried about our blood boiling from the external temperature by now, rather than from the total lunacy of junkscience in the hands of daft politicians.
Winter will return this weekend as an Arctic blast threatens to send temperatures plunging to -9 deg C
Did somebody mention the possiblity of Dalton or Maunder Minimum conditions returning?
It's May, and I am sat at home (working..), and outside it is pissing down for about the 10th day running - have just switched the heating back on......Winter will return this weekend as an Arctic blast threatens to send temperatures plunging to -9 deg C
Did somebody mention the possiblity of Dalton or Maunder Minimum conditions returning?
I thought that the reason bills could go higher was because we'd have less need for heating, due to rising temps?
Oh come on. This weather is perfectly normal for the British Isles, especially this time of year. You do your own credibility no good when using the natural variability of the British Weather in the same argument as 'climate change', just as silly as 'the consensus' and their finger pointing to weather events.
Hard frosts this time of year are less common, but perfectly normal. To suggest it is the dawning of a new Ice Age FFS. Come on.
A chilly spell in Spring - wow!
"A trawl through the archives reveals that on 17th May 1955 was probably the most notable May snowfall on record. Much of England and Wales was affected by several hours of snow (Eden 1995), including two to three hours’ worth in the London area (Brazell, 1968).
Coincidentally, the same date twenty years earlier in 1935 also saw England and Wales affected by widespread snow with some places, including theWirral and parts of Devon recording several inches of snow (Eden 1995). Incidentally, on 17th May 1935 snow also fell in the central Netherlands (Zwart 1985) and this is the latest in the season that snow has been observed here.
May 8th 1943 saw snow falling over parts of northern Britain as a depression tracked eastwards across north Wales. The Isle of Man was among the worst hit places and in Douglas 15cms snow lay on the ground by the morning of the 9th (Pritchard 1997?), whilst virtually the whole of Scotland was affected, including falls of 7cms at Duntulm, Isle of Skye (Stirling 1997). Such is the fickleness of May weather that just a few days later temperatures reached 30C in Kent.
Other notable instances of May snowfall include that of mid-May 1923, Scotland’s coldest May of the 20th century and the century’s second coldest May in England and Wales, whilst May 18th 1968 saw snow falling as far south as the Midlands. Meanwhile, a little more recently the Mays of 1979, 1981 and 1982 started with widespread wintry showers whilst May 13th 1993 saw several centimetres of snow settling over the higher ground in central Britain (Pritchard 1997?), including a fall of 30cm at Moor House in County Durham by the 14th (Stirling 1997).
Stepping back into the nineteenth century Eden (1995) and Stirling (997) report widespread snow England between the 16th and 18th May 1891. Snow fell to depths of several inches in some places, including falls measured at 15cms deep in parts of the Midlands and East Anglia. A few days earlier on the 10th snow had fallen as far south as Bath and London (Stirling 1997).
Meanwhile, Gordon Manley, writing in Weather in 1975 tells of snowfall in southern Britain on 22nd May 1867 and 27th May 1821 whilst Brazell (1968) mentions snow as having fallen in or close to the London area on 12th May 1816, ‘the year without a summer’.
Moving into the eighteenth and late seventeenth centuries Manley (1975) raises the possibility of snow being observed on parts of the higher ground in Sussex on 12th June 1791. Early May snowfall was recorded in parts of the London area in 1770 whilst in 1698 a widespread deep snow was reported all over England on 3rd May (Brazell 1968).
Inevitably June snowfall is a much rarer creature, but widespread sleet and snow showers did manage to affect the United Kingdom on 2nd June 1975, rudely and infamously affecting a cricket match between Derbyshire and Lancashire at Buxton where early afternoon snow covered the pitch with around an inch of snow (Markham, 1994, Eden 1995). Elsewhere, snow settled on hills just south of Birmingham (Eden 1995), whilst to the south and east Manley (1975) reports snow being observed in both Cambridge and London and another county cricket match, this time featuring Essex and Kent, being played in Colchester was interrupted by snow (Ogley et al. 1993). Meanwhile, sleet showers were observed in RAF Manston in eastern Kent, Hassocks, Sussex and Totton and Portsmouth in Hampshire (COL Bulletin 1975, Eden 1995, Ogley en al 1995).
In his book Weatherwise, Philip Eden (1995) wonderfully describes this June snowfall as, "surely the most outrageous thing that June has ever done to us, meteorologically speaking". It also seems that in recent times at least this is the latest in the season that such widespread snow has managed to affect southern Britain (Manley 1975, Eden 1995) and Manley (1975) suggests that the June 1975 snowfall was probably southern Britain’s latest snowfall since the turn of the nineteenth century.
A little more recently, a sleet shower was reported at Birmingham Airport during the morning of 7th June 1985, whilst in the evening snow fell at Eskdalemuir in southern Scotland (Burt 1985, COL Bulletin 1985). However, it would see, that this does of wintry weather was much more localised than the snowfall of 2nd June 1975.
Finally, the 20th century's earliest low level snowfall on the ground in England would appear to be that of 31st October 1934 when 5cms snow fell as far south as Belvoir Castle in Leicestershire whilst 1st November 1942 saw a light covering of snow fall over the Cotswolds (Stirling 1997)."
Hard frosts this time of year are less common, but perfectly normal. To suggest it is the dawning of a new Ice Age FFS. Come on.
A chilly spell in Spring - wow!
"A trawl through the archives reveals that on 17th May 1955 was probably the most notable May snowfall on record. Much of England and Wales was affected by several hours of snow (Eden 1995), including two to three hours’ worth in the London area (Brazell, 1968).
Coincidentally, the same date twenty years earlier in 1935 also saw England and Wales affected by widespread snow with some places, including theWirral and parts of Devon recording several inches of snow (Eden 1995). Incidentally, on 17th May 1935 snow also fell in the central Netherlands (Zwart 1985) and this is the latest in the season that snow has been observed here.
May 8th 1943 saw snow falling over parts of northern Britain as a depression tracked eastwards across north Wales. The Isle of Man was among the worst hit places and in Douglas 15cms snow lay on the ground by the morning of the 9th (Pritchard 1997?), whilst virtually the whole of Scotland was affected, including falls of 7cms at Duntulm, Isle of Skye (Stirling 1997). Such is the fickleness of May weather that just a few days later temperatures reached 30C in Kent.
Other notable instances of May snowfall include that of mid-May 1923, Scotland’s coldest May of the 20th century and the century’s second coldest May in England and Wales, whilst May 18th 1968 saw snow falling as far south as the Midlands. Meanwhile, a little more recently the Mays of 1979, 1981 and 1982 started with widespread wintry showers whilst May 13th 1993 saw several centimetres of snow settling over the higher ground in central Britain (Pritchard 1997?), including a fall of 30cm at Moor House in County Durham by the 14th (Stirling 1997).
Stepping back into the nineteenth century Eden (1995) and Stirling (997) report widespread snow England between the 16th and 18th May 1891. Snow fell to depths of several inches in some places, including falls measured at 15cms deep in parts of the Midlands and East Anglia. A few days earlier on the 10th snow had fallen as far south as Bath and London (Stirling 1997).
Meanwhile, Gordon Manley, writing in Weather in 1975 tells of snowfall in southern Britain on 22nd May 1867 and 27th May 1821 whilst Brazell (1968) mentions snow as having fallen in or close to the London area on 12th May 1816, ‘the year without a summer’.
Moving into the eighteenth and late seventeenth centuries Manley (1975) raises the possibility of snow being observed on parts of the higher ground in Sussex on 12th June 1791. Early May snowfall was recorded in parts of the London area in 1770 whilst in 1698 a widespread deep snow was reported all over England on 3rd May (Brazell 1968).
Inevitably June snowfall is a much rarer creature, but widespread sleet and snow showers did manage to affect the United Kingdom on 2nd June 1975, rudely and infamously affecting a cricket match between Derbyshire and Lancashire at Buxton where early afternoon snow covered the pitch with around an inch of snow (Markham, 1994, Eden 1995). Elsewhere, snow settled on hills just south of Birmingham (Eden 1995), whilst to the south and east Manley (1975) reports snow being observed in both Cambridge and London and another county cricket match, this time featuring Essex and Kent, being played in Colchester was interrupted by snow (Ogley et al. 1993). Meanwhile, sleet showers were observed in RAF Manston in eastern Kent, Hassocks, Sussex and Totton and Portsmouth in Hampshire (COL Bulletin 1975, Eden 1995, Ogley en al 1995).
In his book Weatherwise, Philip Eden (1995) wonderfully describes this June snowfall as, "surely the most outrageous thing that June has ever done to us, meteorologically speaking". It also seems that in recent times at least this is the latest in the season that such widespread snow has managed to affect southern Britain (Manley 1975, Eden 1995) and Manley (1975) suggests that the June 1975 snowfall was probably southern Britain’s latest snowfall since the turn of the nineteenth century.
A little more recently, a sleet shower was reported at Birmingham Airport during the morning of 7th June 1985, whilst in the evening snow fell at Eskdalemuir in southern Scotland (Burt 1985, COL Bulletin 1985). However, it would see, that this does of wintry weather was much more localised than the snowfall of 2nd June 1975.
Finally, the 20th century's earliest low level snowfall on the ground in England would appear to be that of 31st October 1934 when 5cms snow fell as far south as Belvoir Castle in Leicestershire whilst 1st November 1942 saw a light covering of snow fall over the Cotswolds (Stirling 1997)."
This made me smile from the WUWT site, regarding the nimber of hits between them and the Real Climate website:
"Seems like an order of magnitude slam dunk to me, RC can’t even get out of the grass at greater than 100,000 traffic rank…they aren’t even being tracked anymore. Here’s the last 6 months:"
"they aren’t even being tracked anymore"
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/03/one-could-ev...
"Seems like an order of magnitude slam dunk to me, RC can’t even get out of the grass at greater than 100,000 traffic rank…they aren’t even being tracked anymore. Here’s the last 6 months:"
"they aren’t even being tracked anymore"
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/03/one-could-ev...
Jinx said:
not read much on here, but i was sent this; from the same paper i think; by a family member who lives in oz. opened my eyes to wind turbines."ONE of the great popular misconceptions about climate-change sceptics such as Ian Plimer, Bob Carter, Cardinal George Pell and me is that we're all Big-Oil-funded, Gaia-ravaging, nature-hating emissaries of Satan. We can't look at a lovely pristine beach, apparently, without praying for a nice, juicy oil slick to turn up and wipe out all the pelicans and turtles and sea otters.
But this isn't actually true. I love our beautiful planet at least as much as your $180,000-a-year (for a three-day week) climate commissioner Tim Flannery does. One of my great heroes is Patrick Moore, the Canadian co-founder of Greenpeace with whose sensible, rational approach to environmental issues I agree 100 per cent. Another of my heroes, after an article headlined "Where eagles dare not fly" in The Weekend Australian on April 21, is this newspaper's environment editor Graham Lloyd.
It took great courage for Lloyd to write up his expose of the tremendous damage being caused by a wind farm to a small community in Waterloo, north of Adelaide. Most newspaper environment editors -- from Australia to Britain and the US -- tend, unfortunately, to be so ideologically wedded to the supposed virtues of renewable energy they find it all but impossible to criticise it.
Lloyd interviewed a number of victims whose lives had been ruined by the vast, swooshing wind towers looking over their homes. They found sleep almost impossible; they couldn't concentrate; they had night sweats, headaches, palpitations, heart trouble. Their chickens were laying eggs without yolks; their ewes were giving birth to deformed lambs; their once-active dogs spent their days staring blankly at the wall. The damage, it seems, is caused not so much by the noise you can hear but by what you can't hear: the infrasonic waves that attack the balance mechanism in the ear and against which not even home insulation can defend you. Its effects can be felt more than 10km away.
Inspired by Lloyd's article, I went to investigate and was heartbroken by what I found. Until you've seen what it can do to people, it's easy to dismiss wind turbine syndrome as a hypochondriac's charter or an urban myth. But it's real all right. Waterloo felt like a ghost town: shuttered houses and a dust-blown aura of sinister unease, as in a horror movie when something dreadful has happened to a previously ordinary, happy settlement and at first you're not sure what. Then you look up on to the horizon and see them, turning slowly in the breeze . . .
Even more shocking than this, though, were my discoveries about the finance arrangements and behaviour of the wind farm companies. What we have here, I believe, is the biggest and most outrageous public affairs scandal of the 21st century -- one in which the Gillard government is implicated and that far exceeds in seriousness and scope of the Slipper or Thomson sideshows.
At the heart of this scandal are the union superannuation funds that are using the wind farm scam as a kind of government-endorsed Ponzi scheme to fill their coffers at public expense. One of the biggest wind farm developers -- Pacific Hydro -- is owned by the union superfund Members Equity Bank. To meet its carbon reduction quotas, we're told, Australia needs to build about 10,000 new wind turbines like the ones that have destroyed Waterloo (and dozens of communities like it from NSW to South Australia).
The figures are mind-boggling. Each of those turbines will cost about $3 million, which means $30 billion even before you've started building the power lines. And where's this money coming from? The consumer, of course -- mostly via tariffs whacked on to the price of conventional, fossil-fuel energy prices, in the form of payouts called Renewable Energy Certificates.
Note that wind turbines produce very little power. Because wind is intermittent, they operate at between one-fifth and one-third of their capacity, meaning they are erratic, unreliable and have to be fully backed up by conventional "black" (mostly coal-fuelled) power. Where the money is to be made is through the REC subsidy. A 3MW wind turbine that generates (at most) $150,000 worth of electricity a year is eligible for guaranteed subsidies of $500,000 a year. A ridgeline hosting 20 or 30 turbines generates very little power -- but an awful lot of free cash for those lucky enough to get their snouts in the trough.
If the unions were merely exploiting government environmental legislation to milk the taxpayer it would be bad enough: but what makes the wind farm scam so scandalous are the public health issues. Why aren't we more aware of these? Because there have been cover-ups on an epic scale. The owners on whose land the turbines are built are subject to rigorous gagging orders (from law firms such as Julia Gillard's ex-company, Slater & Gordon); tame experts are paid huge sums to testify that there are no health implications; inquiries are rigged; victims are rehoused and silenced with million-dollar payoffs. The global wind farm industry -- a cash cow for everyone from Labor's unions to the mafia -- is so massive it can afford it.
Meanwhile the rest of us lose. Communities are divided, landscapes blighted, birds and bats sliced and diced, property values destroyed, lives ruined to deal with a "problem" -- anthropogenic CO2 causing "global warming" -- which most current evidence tells us doesn't even exist.
As a NSW sheep farmer fighting tooth and nail to stop a wind farm development near his beloved home told me the other day in trenchant style: "The wind-farm business is bloody well near a pedophile ring. They're f . . king our families and knowingly doing so."
Mr GrimNasty said:
Oh come on. This weather is perfectly normal for the British Isles, especially this time of year. You do your own credibility no good when using the natural variability of the British Weather in the same argument as 'climate change', just as silly as 'the consensus' and their finger pointing to weather events.
Maybe you misunderstand - there's no harm in us joining in to lighen the mood. It happens all the time.Also we all remember the rules very well.
If it's warmer than expected, it's not weather it's climate.
If it's cooler than expected it's weather.
If there's weather anywhere that's different to the previous day/week/month/year then it's climate chaos.
In fact if there is weather anywhere, at any time. it may not be weather as we know it.
On a more scientific note, a dangerous thing for the politics thread, the discontinuity in solar eruptivity which set off the most recent decline in activity was October 2005. Data from several recent decades shows a lag time of between 4 to 8 years from eruptivity forcing to climate.
odyssey2200 said:
Is it going to be worse that previously thought?
Of course, we're at a tipping point In terms of weather, anybody is free to check out these time periods if they have the time and the energy, however watch out for energy prices going up
1610 - 1740 Maunder Minimum
1770 - 1830 Dalton Minimum
1875 - 1935 (minor minimum)
1955 - 1975 (v minor minimum)
2005 - ???? Eddy Minimum
You could have hours of fun looking at UK (not global) weather (not climate) reports with those dates in mind.
The name of the current solar minimum was suggested on WUWT and its identity as e.g. Maunder-like or Dalton-like is as yet unknown.
Edge politics from Business.
Samsung are launching their new mobile phone in London tonightI hust tripped over a blg that uis 'Live' from the event. Seems that having all these journalists converging on London and belching CO2 (or for some such reason) Samsung have decided to give that well known political 'Charity' WWF 100 USD for every single person attending the launch.
Why?
I have just downgraded my personal assessment of Samsung from a previous almost triple A rating to something rather less.
Samsung are launching their new mobile phone in London tonightI hust tripped over a blg that uis 'Live' from the event. Seems that having all these journalists converging on London and belching CO2 (or for some such reason) Samsung have decided to give that well known political 'Charity' WWF 100 USD for every single person attending the launch.
Why?
I have just downgraded my personal assessment of Samsung from a previous almost triple A rating to something rather less.
Edited by LongQ on Friday 4th May 14:16
IainT said:
Pretty smart of them buying off an organisation capable of doing them great harm.
In what way would you contend that WWF would do harm to Samsung (specifically) in ways that it is not already doing harm to the rest of us?And why, having coughed up once, would the blackmailer not expect further returns from the blackmailed? (if that is what you are suggesting could be the case.)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff