IN HOCKEY STICKNO VINCES

The semiotic intersection of the Drug War and the Climate Wars has turned 2013 into an annus horribilis of hockey stick abuse.

After the steroid propelled ravings of Joe Bastardi, came the news that Lord Lawson's daughter Nigella, resident Domestic Goddess of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, owed her on-camera brio to scarfing Bolivian marching powder backstage at the BBC.

As Nigella's brother's brother in law, Viscount Monckton is a walking advertisment for his own home brew pharmaceuticals, this may put climate denial's holiest relic at risk.

One of WUWT's favorite learned journals, The Daily Mail, reports the Holy Hockey Stick of Cisco, long venerated by Watt's acolytes, now figures as an instrument of martyrdom in a case involving either too much of one drug, or not enough of another.

A CHRISTMAS MESSAGE FROM...

THE GREATEST SCIENTIST SINCE G.K.CHESTERTON !     OR POSSIBLY BEN STEIN, OR NIGELLA LAWSON

Monckton: Of meteorology and morality

Posted on December 24, 2013 by Guest Blogger

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

To those of us who have dared to question on scientific and economic grounds the official story on global warming, it is a continuing surprise that there is so little concern about whether or not that story is objectively true ... The herd and the hive do not care. Or, rather, they do care. They care very much if anyone dares to ask the question “But is it true?” They are offended, shocked, outraged. They vent their venom and their spleen and their fury on those of us who ask, however politely, “But is it true?”

Their reaction is scarcely distinguishable from the behavior of the adherents of some primitive superstitious cult on learning that someone has questioned some egregiously, self-evidently barmy aspect of the dogma that the high priests have handed down...

they have not gotten the point of religion, which, like the point of science, is objective truth...

they are lying, and are profiteering by lying, and are doing so at your expense and mine, and are bidding fair to bring down the Age of Enlightenment and Reason, flinging us back into the dumb, inspissate cheerlessness of a new Dark Age."

IS THIS REALLY WHAT HENRY HUDSON HAD IN MIND ?

It bodes ill for the future of polar albedo that 

AGU MEETING SHOCK HORROR

Daring Ukrainian experiment confirms Uniformitarian hypothesis

Heartland & Discovery Institutes declare victory in the Climate & Culture Wars  

                 Stanford 1906                                        Kiev 2013

The Queen Of Watts

Here's Christmas cheer to Watts for rising to a height of self-parody that brings joy to the world like a short beer line at an AGU meeting.

His subject is the Misuse Warm Period - the idea of a little anti-ice age warming Northern seas from the turn of the 1st Millennium through the High Misuse Ages, allowing Misuseval mariners to voyage at will.

The trick Watts uses to hide the decline of commonsense in this matter is  to insist that words mean whatever he wants them to mean, neither more, nor less:

The truth about ‘We have to get rid of the medieval warm period’Posted on December 8, 2013 by Anthony Watts

In the thread Intelligence and the hockey stick commenter “Robert” challenged a well known quote about the MWP from 2006 by Dr. David Deming in his statement before the Senate EPW committee which is the title of this post. I thought it was worth spending some time setting the record straight on what the original quote actually was and point out that it has been paraphrased, but the meaning remains the same.

 Robert says: December 8, 2013 at 9:50 am

The quote is a fabrication.

Jonathan Overpeck’s exact words are:
“I get the sense that I’m not the only one who would like to deal a mortal blow to the misuse of supposed warm period terms and myths in the literature.” 

Christopher Monckton, like Andrew Montford before him, alters the text to instead read: 

“We have to abolish the medieval warm period.”

My reply: 

I checked for a citation, and the quote you state is correct:  http://di2.nu/foia/1105670738.txt

As to this being a fabrication (as Robert claims), no, it’s a summation or a paraphrase of a long quote, something that happens a lot in history.

Monckton and Montford aren’t specifically at fault in this, as the summed up quote has been around for a long, long....The conversion to a paraphrase maintains the meaning.

“Mortal blow” certainly equates to “get rid of” (as it is often said) or “abolish” as you (and Monckton / Montford ) state it, and “we” equates to “I’m not the only one”.

The most important point is that Overpeck thinks the MWP (misuse) should be gotten rid of so that people that don’t agree with his view can’t use it (as citations). 

And that, is the real travesty.

HIS HEART BELONGS TO DADA

The latest surrealist to grace Willard Watts'
salon des refusees is one 
Christopher Bowring, whom WUWT oddly fails to identify as former mayor of wannabe tar sand export port, S. Portland, ME.

Not content with seeing WUWT invoke the authority of Richard Feynman, Maine PR artiste and pipeline speculator Bowring imagines himself reading the riot act to the doyen of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warmists, Sir Isaac Newton.

As Sir Isaac is not available for comment, here's Stoat's Dada take on Bowring's ga-ga manifesto:

A a a a a a a a a agitated alarmists am an an And and and any apart apple apple argue ask at back bodies Bowring but But by call Cambridge can can century change Christopher climate climate climatology dare dare day denier discovery distance does drop each England enquire It experience expert explodes field force from global global global global Grantham Gravitation greatest greet have have he He head him How I I I I I I I I I in in in in in in invalidates inversely is is is is is is is is Isaac Isaac Isaac’s it it It It Law law lay Let Lincolnshire living looking looks Lucasian made man masses Mathematics me mind models my my Newton Newton no nobody nonentity nonsense Nonsense Nonsense "

This ululation was soon upstaged by a WUWT commenter's epiphany on how normative climatology differs from Watt's cargo cult:

"The reason the AGW people are so hard to argue with 

is that what they believe ISN’T a mistake."