How To Be A Global Warming Sceptic

[CapelDodger]

In keeping with the OP, I have to report a superb example of the Galileo/Darwin argument in 'The Australian'.

They didn't make the common mistake of saying that it was all about the Flat Earth belief, but every other misrepresentation of the situation is present. Enjoy...

Wow.

Bring me the file on The Australian . (Oops, wrong forum)

"Apostasy", "heresy", "the crucifix", "dissenters" - these guys are seriously anti-Catholic. Which casts grave doubt on their objectivity.

 

[CapelDodger]

Something is unsatisfactory on this?

Well, yes. Have you looked at it?

...what is this partnership between the Institute of Public Affairs and the University of Queensland to support environmental research about? What are we doing it for?


There are two main reasons.


First, to provide a haven for our scholars without ideological or commercial interference and with no prescription as to the end point of their inquiries. If they challenge orthodoxies and assumptions, particularly mine, then that's good. If they find that conventional wisdom is correct, then that's good, too.


The only criterion is to seek empirical evidence.


Second, it is important that any research that our scholars undertake is made available to aid the development of better, more rational public policy.
​

Look at it. And then look up "Queensland Australia" on Google. (It's Australia's Alabama, and always has been.)

Then wonder about what empirical evidence is being gathered by the shiny-hat brigade offered a haven (and income) at QU, funded by the "Institute of Public Affairs" (shiny name). So WTF are they?

To you, every "rebel" is a potential Galileo. To the rest of us, they're the shiny-hat brigade, hunched over laptops trying desperately to wring statistical hope from an unforgiving reality.

 

[mhaze]

Well, yes. Have you looked at it?



Look at it. And then look up "Queensland Australia" on Google. (It's Australia's Alabama, and always has been.)

Then wonder about what empirical evidence is being gathered by the shiny-hat brigade offered a haven (and income) at QU, funded by the "Institute of Public Affairs" (shiny name). So WTF are they?

To you, every "rebel" is a potential Galileo. To the rest of us, they're the shiny-hat brigade, hunched over laptops trying desperately to wring statistical hope from an unforgiving reality.

I have no idea what that rambling monologue means, if anything. Asking leading questions, smears, etc.

Queensland? Yep, driven around there quite a bit. Don't need to google and certainly don't need your idiotic concept of what it is, which would have about as much merit as my concept of South Wales. Get it?

Institute of Public Affairs? Here you are indirectly smearing and insulting a foundation that promotes free enterprise and capitalism - yet agin. Never directly, never saying exactly what you mean.

Why not just come out with it?

Institute of Public Affairs?

Publications by Category
Search by: Author | Category
Select Category

Culture
Deregulation
Economics
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign Policy
Gm Crops
Governance
Health Policy
Housing
Human Rights
Indigenous Affairs
Industrial Relations
Media
Misc.
NGOs
Political Parties
Political Process
Social Policy
Telecommunications
Trade & Intellectual Property
Welfare
Wheat

 

[CapelDodger]

I have no idea what that rambling monologue means, if anything. Asking leading questions, smears, etc.

You're right, you clearly have no idea. (How could a post not be a monologue, by the way?)

Queensland? Yep, driven around there quite a bit. Don't need to google and certainly don't need your idiotic concept of what it is, which would have about as much merit as my concept of South Wales. Get it?

My concept of Queensland is an informed one. Its reputation amongst Australians is surely not unwarranted, and I've had confirmation from Brits that have visited. And by "visited" I don't mean "drove around a bit", I mean people that lived there. It wasn't I who coined "Australia's Alabama"; I've even heard Queenslanders described as "Australia's Boers".

Institute of Public Affairs? Here you are indirectly smearing and insulting a foundation that promotes free enterprise and capitalism - yet agin. Never directly, never saying exactly what you mean.

Another extreme right-wing loon-sack which finds AGW ideologically unaccceptable. The home-waters of a GWSceptic.

I notice Jennifer Marohasy is prominent in the Environment section. That name is familiar, but I can't quite place her.

Why not just come out with it?

The "Institute of Public Afairs" is an extreme right-wing loon-sack. Privatisation, lower taxes and deregulation are the solutions for any problem, and no problem which is not susceptible to them really exists.

So anyway, out of all those references, which ones involve "gathering empirical evidence"?


I chanced upon this http://www.ipa.org.au/files/59-4_MAROHASY_CLIMATE.pdf by the aforementioned Jeniifer Marohasy :

"But then again, when it comes to climate change, the hysteria appears to continually trump substance. In the same way that many people are thrilled by a good doomsday film, we seem to have become caught up in the drama of an imaginary climate crisis."

Which gives us the flavour of the piece right up front, reinforced by the reference to Al Gore immediately following.

On "Rainfall", she has this to say :

"So there is a severe water shortage, although it is partly demand-driven, and it may get much worse if it doesn’t rain soon. But the long-term rainfall record for the basin shows no sudden downturn. Rather, we are going through a very dry patch. "

I bet that goes down a storm in the Murray-Darling Basin. "Just a very dry patch, chaps. Chin up. It's partly demand-driven, so you've only yourselves to blame anyway." She should do a road-show.

She supports this with Figure 2, a bar chart of M-D Rainfall from 1990-2006 with an unexplained black line across it that ends at about 2002. there's already a decline in sight at that point, which clearly goes on in the years following (as it did in 2007). I guess that's the best she could do with the empirical evidence.

 

[mhaze]

You have an "informed opinion". Let me know about that after you've sat down and had some beers with them. No, you don't have an "informed opinion". That's ridiculous. Which subcultures? Which areas? Which languages? Ya-da-yada-yada.

Don't like right wing organizations and free market, free enterprise stuff?

I've got no problem at all with that, of course we disagree.

None of that makes this true (not that you've a clue what Alabama is, either):

Look at it. And then look up "Queensland Australia" on Google. (It's Australia's Alabama, and always has been.)

Then wonder about what empirical evidence is being gathered by the shiny-hat brigade offered a haven (and income) at QU, funded by the "Institute of Public Affairs" (shiny name). So WTF are they?

To you, every "rebel" is a potential Galileo. To the rest of us, they're the shiny-hat brigade, hunched over laptops trying desperately to wring statistical hope from an unforgiving reality.
​

Where is the shiny-hat brigade?

What is wrong with a non profit giving money to a university?

WTF are you talking about?

 

[a_unique_person]

In keeping with the OP, I have to report a superb example of the Galileo/Darwin argument in 'The Australian'.

They didn't make the common mistake of saying that it was all about the Flat Earth belief, but every other misrepresentation of the situation is present. Enjoy...

The funny thing about this is that it was the scientists researching AGW and CO2 who played the Galileo role, because the orthodox view up till then was that CO2 was not an issue.

 

[mhaze]

The funny thing about this is that it was the scientists researching AGW and CO2 who played the Galileo role, because the orthodox view up till then was that CO2 was not an issue.

Indeed, and nobody cared one way or the other.

Quoting from the article -

.....to provide a haven for our scholars without ideological or commercial interference and with no prescription as to the end point of their inquiries. If they challenge orthodoxies and assumptions, particularly mine, then that's good. If they find that conventional wisdom is correct, then that's good, too.
The only criterion is to seek empirical evidence.

​

Truesceptic and CD apparently would ridicule such a platform, at least when it came from a pro capitalist philanthropy foundation. Well, that's expected.

 

[TrueSceptic]

The funny thing about this is that it was the scientists researching AGW and CO2 who played the Galileo role, because the orthodox view up till then was that CO2 was not an issue.

Quite so, which is why the article is so funny, and why I posted the link. Mhaze, of course, is ignoring that.

Once more:-
The "sceptics" are not the Galileos in this; they are the religious dogmatists pointing at the sun and shouting "see, it moves, anyone can see that.".

 

[TrueSceptic]

Indeed, and nobody cared one way or the other.

Quoting from the article -

.....to provide a haven for our scholars without ideological or commercial interference and with no prescription as to the end point of their inquiries. If they challenge orthodoxies and assumptions, particularly mine, then that's good. If they find that conventional wisdom is correct, then that's good, too.
The only criterion is to seek empirical evidence.

​

Truesceptic and CD apparently would ridicule such a platform, at least when it came from a pro capitalist philanthropy foundation. Well, that's expected.

No, but what's new about this, and what would they do that's not being done already? What empirical evidence?

Anyway, this is about the Galileo comparison. Why the need to make that fatuous claim when setting up some sort of research unit?

 

[Alric]

The evolution and global warming contrarians share many strategies. Faux lists of supporters are included. From Pharyngula:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/05/even_sleazier_than_the_di.php

Climate change denialists have something in common with evolution denialists: they have a list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares," just like the Discovery Institute's list of hundreds of 'scientists' who "Dissent from Darwinism". There is a difference, though: the DI got it's list by asking crackpots and specialists in irrelevant disciplines to volunteer to sign on, so it is a real (but silly) list that exposes the existence of a tiny minority of loons within science.

The Heartland Institute, a think-tank for right-wing denialists, isn't even that honest. They put their list together without consulting any of the authors they added to it — basically, anyone who published anything discussing the complexities or problems of climate analysis found their name added on to this list.

 

[TrueSceptic]

The evolution and global warming contrarians share many strategies. Faux lists of supporters are included. From Pharyngula:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/05/even_sleazier_than_the_di.php

Interesting that the usual suspects haven't been crowing about this list, isn't it? I suppose that even they can see what a scumbag job it is, a truly shameless stunt. Of course, they have moved onto other, less obviously dishonest, ground.

Thanks, the 'Heartland 500' is a nice example of GWS behaviour and a generalised version belongs in the list!

Hundreds of scientists have doubts about the global warming consensus, and to prove it here's a list of names. Any who claim that they didn't agree to be on the list are just afraid of losing favour with the AGW priesthood.

 

[varwoche]

I'm suggesting that if you were to do this experiment appropriately, you could very easily figure out the magnitude of energy asorption and re-radiation directly attritubable to CO2 in the lab.

Again, again, and again. IT'S VERY SIMPLE!

I'm remorseful that the Dr. Imago Box initiative lost steam. The experiment is "VERY SIMPLE" after all. According to the good doctor, climate scientists are bumbling buffoons and/or rank propagandists. (They're not even real scientists suggests Dr. I, who scare quotes them as climate "scientists".) One would think that if a simple experiment could show this to be true, that the proponent of said experiment would simply conduct the damn thing.

Here are some other home experiments concerning the greenhouse gas effect that I stumbled on...
http://atmoz.org/blog/2007/08/15/greenhouse-gas-experiment/
http://www.espere.net/Unitedkingdom/water/uk_watexpgreenhouse.htm

What about a team effort? Maybe Dr. I can lay out a basic design, and if it makes sense we could take inventory of the resources at our joint disposal and see if we can pull it off.

(Sidebar: Hopefully readers know that when I call it the Dr. Imago Box it is with a tip of the hat to CapelDodger. )

 

[CapelDodger]

(Sidebar: Hopefully readers know that when I call it the Dr. Imago Box it is with a tip of the hat to CapelDodger. )

It even took me a moment to recall that Very Simple Box constraining the ground-to-space pressure gradient .

Of course, what we need is more and better satellites in orbit. Not just in storage or concept, actually up there. A billion dollar climate model (which has been suggested by some interested parties) is blatant gold-bricking. We're in the course of an impromptu climate experiment; it behooves us to observe it as closely as possible.

 

[TrueSceptic]

More Scumbag Behaviour

Not only does Roy Spencer repeat the disgusting lie about DDT but he even has the nerve to accuse anyone who refutes that lie of the equivalent of holocaust denial.

While most environmentalists continue to insist that there is no connection between international bans on DDT and human deaths, such protestations really are like denying that the Holocaust ever happened.

 

[mhaze]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Inhofe blog reference here.

[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] Pretty funny, really - gloom and doomers trying to push higher gas prices right now - Dumber than dumbest, Warmlogy hitting the Senate floor.

Click Here For Senator Inhofe's Statement on Demise of Climate Tax Bill:
[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]WSJ – Climate Change Collapse – June 06, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: Environmentalists are stunned that their global warming agenda is in collapse. Senator Harry Reid has all but conceded he lacks the vote for passage.....[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]The Politico: Dems yank global warming bill – June 6, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: Apparently three days of debate was enough for what many senators called "the most important issue facing the planet." With little chance of winning passage ....[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Global Warming Politics: - The ‘Global Warming’ Mad House - By UK Professor Philip Stott – June 6, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: .....bizarre spectacle of Republicans trying to prolong the debate in order to embarrass Democrats even further. […] ...When faced with the inconvenient truth of the bill’s impact on skyrocketing gas prices, very few Senators were willing to even debate this bill.’” […] Indeed. ‘Global warming’ is thus off track on every front, from the railways of the UK to the floor of the U.S. Senate.....[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Associated Press - $45 trillion needed to combat warming – June 06, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: The world needs to invest $45 trillion in energy in coming decades, build some 1,400 nuclear power plants and vastly expand wind power in order to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050...[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]The Washington Independent: Senate Kills Climate Change Bill - June 6, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: The Senate this morning brought an early if expected end to the chamber's global warming debate, falling 12 votes shy of the 60 needed to kill a GOP filibuster. Sixteen senators were absent during the vote, including likely presidential nominees John McCain, who opposes the bill for what he considers a dearth of nuclear power provisions....

[/FONT] [FONT=times new roman,times]NYT Blog – James Hansen: Tax C02 Emitters; Pay Citizens – June 06, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: Even as [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Senate Republicans blocked Democrats’ attempt[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] to move forward with global warming legislation today, other approaches to federal climate action have already begun to percolate...[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]India News- Reality Check: 'INDIA WON'T CUT CO2 EMISSIONS AT THE COST OF DEVELOPMENT & POVERTY ALLEVATION' – June 05, 2008[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Courier Mail - WORKERS UNION, BUSINESS LEADERS WARN CLIMATE POLICY MAY CRIPPLE AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIES – June 05, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: AUSTRALIAN industries may be crippled if they are forced to meet ambitious targets for tackling climate change...[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]National Post – As Goes the Economy, So Goes Environmentalism – June 05, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: If truth is the first casualty of war, then environmental concern is the first casualty of economic recession. ....[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]London Evening Standard – CAMERON WARNS BROWN HIS OWN PARTY WILL DITCH HIM IF HE DOES NOT SCRAP GREEN TAX RISES – June 04, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: Car tax hikes for millions of drivers became the latest ticking timebomb under Gordon Brown's leadership....[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Washington Post – Vote on Climate Bill is Blocked in Senate – June 06, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: Republicans have blocked efforts to bring a global warming bill up for a final Senate vote after a bitter debate over its economic costs....[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Washington Post – U.S. Senate Democrats May Pull Climate Bill – June 06, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: If this week's Senate debate on a proposed cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gases was supposed to be a dress rehearsal for climate legislation, things are not looking too good for opening night....
[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]WSJ – Climate Bill Stalls in Senate – June 06, 2008[/FONT]....[FONT=times new roman,times]"It's a huge tax increase," argued Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, a prominent coal-producing state.... allowing widespread trading of carbon emissions allowances would produce "the largest restructuring of the American economy since the New Deal." [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]NewsOK.com – Cost ineffective: Warming bill would hit Oklahoma hard – June 06, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: ....a cap-and-trade system ....[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]means new bureaucracies, new programs — more than 40 by some estimates — and the complications that routinely go with most new government initiatives.....[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]the conservative [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] warns of cumulative losses to the national economy of more than $4.5 trillion by 2030 — even as leading global polluter [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]China[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] lets its economy run unencumbered.
[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Associated Press – Economy First: EU Governments Split on Emissions Target – June 05, 2008[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Excerpt: EU governments were split Thursday over the best way for the 27-nation bloc to cut greenhouse gas emissions.....
[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Peanuts! Tough Climate Goals Only Cost $45 Trillion by 2050 – June 05, 2008[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]
Excerpt: A goal to halve planet-warming carbon emissions by 2050, similar to an aim Japan is urging G8 leaders to agree next month, would add $45 trillion to global energy bills,....
[/FONT]

 

[CapelDodger]

Not only does Roy Spencer repeat the disgusting lie about DDT but he even has the nerve to accuse anyone who refutes that lie of the equivalent of holocaust denial.

What's a crudball like Spencer gonna do? Don't even start him about abortion.

You'll have noticed the mhaze cut-and-paste that zipped by; apparently Inhofe still matters to some people, and of course it's all about 'Murrica. Meanwhile we await the Arctic summer ...

Not even an electoral college can dictate the Arctic summer. I take some comfort in that.

 

[mhaze]

Capel, batting your usual percentages....

Umm....No, it wasn't all about America.

Ye gots yer share of the dumbest of the dumber.

 

[Alric]

Of course we are all watching this movie!

http://www.sizzlethemovie.com/

 

[CapelDodger]

Of course we are all watching this movie!

http://www.sizzlethemovie.com/

"So, as a scientist ... when is all this going to evaporate?" Priceless.

 

[CapelDodger]

Capel, batting your usual percentages....

Umm....No, it wasn't all about America.

Ye gots yer share of the dumbest of the dumber.

The Inhofe reference makes it generically all about 'Murrica. Your personal contribution was explicitly all about 'Murrican politics. No doubt this looms large on your horizons, but you'll understand that TrueSceptic and I (amongst others) have different horizons. Because we're foreigners, or whatever.