Friday, June 23, 2017

   TV WEATHERMAN'S  FALL  INTO  BLACK  HOLE  CONTINUES

     SO-CALLED "THEORY OF GRAVITATION CONSENSUS"  SUSPECTED  AS  HIGH
     DISINFORMATION  DENSITY  DRIVES BLOG  PAST  CHANDRASEKHAR LIMIT

 "... It only takes one finding in science to refute consensus, no matter whether it’s 97%, 99%, or 100%.  Science is not infallible.
                                                              Anthony Watts
Note: about ten minutes after publication the article was updated to correct a spelling error, add an omitted phrase, and add references"

                           HANG  ON  TO  YOUR  SCALP

Rick Perry's DOE has named a new Director  of  Indian  Energy, former Chiricahua Apache Nation Attorney General Brute Bradford. One whose Tweeting  habits  recall  those of the Great White Chief:

The Washington Post says the former :
"faculty member... at the United  Arab Emirates  National  Defense  College , Bradford  has  been  at  the center of controversies  in the past, these missives sent from his now-deleted Twitter account have not been previously reported. In an email on Thursday, Bradford acknowledged the Twitter account and apologized for his comments.
“As a minority and member of the Jewish faith, I sincerely apologize for my disrespectful and offensive comments,” he wrote to The Post. “These comments are inexcusable and I do not stand by them... 
In 2015, he resigned from his post at West Point after writing an academic paper arguing  the United States  should  threaten  to destroy  Muslim  holy sites in war
 “even if it means great destruction, innumerable enemy casualties, and     civilian collateral damage.”
Bradford  also  called  for  legal  scholars  “sympathetic to  Islamist aims”  to  be imprisoned  or  “attacked.”  He dubbed  such  academics  “critical  law of armed conflict academy,” or  CLOACA,  which is also a term for  the orifice out of which some animals defecate... 
 “I stand by my article,"
 he  wrote  in an email to The Post at the time."

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

HIS HORSE  DOESN'T READ PEER REVIEWED PAPERS  EITHER

“It is not my job to sit down and read peer-reviewed papers because I simply haven't got the time..."
James Delingpole, BBC 2011

"Then, of course, there is the great Anthony Watts – founder of the most widely read and important sceptical website of the lot... I owe Wattsy an enormous amount..."
James Delingpole The Daily Telegraph 2013

"Willie Soon, Pat Michaels and Tim Ball...drive the Greenies apopleptic... I’m against Ocean Acidification theory because I’ve done loads and loads of background reading... about the lack of credible scientific evidence that it represents any kind of problem... in the eyes of all those undecideds who can’t make up their mind whether they agree with me on climate science or whether I’m talking bollocks..."

James Delingpole,   Breitbart   2017

As a matter of fact, Willie Soon,Pat Michaels & Tim Ball are no more oceanographers that Watts or Delingpole, and none of the above, the horse included, has published a peer-reviewed word on how the oceans  acidify as they dissolve ever more man made CO2.

                          IS  THIS  IS  THE  PAUSE  THAT  WAS?

Monday, June 19, 2017

                                         BUT  ON  REFLECTION...

                 AN INTERESTING MAP PAIR FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES  SUGGESTS 
       CLIMATE COMMUNICATION'S STRONGEST SUIT MAY BE  SCHIZOPHRENIA:

                                             GREEN  FIRE ?

WHILE   FLAMMABLE  INSULATION ,  RETROFITTED  IN  THE  NAME OF  ENERGY  EFFICIENCY,  FED LONDON'S  TRAGIC APARTMENT FIRE,  AND  CORRIDOR  BLOCKAGE BY A NEW  ENERGY EFFICIENT HEATING  SYSTEM  MAY  HAVE ADDED TO THE  DEATH  TOLl, .  A TENANT  WHO ESCAPED   SAYS THE  BLAZE STARTED  WHEN  THE  OZONE FRIENDLY , BUT  REGRETABLY FLAMMABLE,  HYDROCARBON  COOLANT  IN HIS  EU- APPROVED  'GREEN'  REFRIGERATOR   EXPLODED  
The Coroner's verdict may be Death By Energy Efficiency

Sunday, June 18, 2017

   BREITBART MOVES FORWARD WITH NEW  11th CENTURY
                           CLIMATE  JOURNALISM  TALENT

The article below was contributed by Istvan Marko, J. Scott Armstrong, William M. Briggs, Kesten Green, Hermann Harde, David R. Legates, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, and Willie Soon.


On June 2, 2017, in a Letter regarding US withdrawal from Paris climate agreement addressed to the MIT community, Professor Rafael Reif, president of MIT, criticized President Trump’s decision to exit the Paris Climate Accords. In this refutation, we propose to clarify the scientific understanding of the Earth’s climate and to dispel the expensively fostered popular delusion that man-made global warming will be dangerous and that, therefore, the Paris Agreement would be beneficial...
There is no science unambiguously establishing that CO2 is the chief cause of the warming observed since the end of the Little Ice Age. The opposite has been repeatedly demonstrated.
... Professor Reif writes, “The scientific consensus is overwhelming.”
The late author Michael Crichton, in his Caltech Michelin Lecture 2003, said, “In science consensus is irrelevant. … ” Doubt is the seedcorn of science. Consensus is a political notion which, when pleaded, indicates that the pleader is totalitarian. As Abu Ali ibn al-Haytham said in the eleventh century:
The seeker after truth [his splendid definition of the scientist] does not place his faith in any mere consensus, however venerable or widespread. Instead, he subjects what he has learned of it to his hard-won scientific knowledge, and to investigation, inspection, inquiry, checking, checking and checking again. The road to the truth is long and hard, but that is the road we must follow...
EXTENDING  ITS CLIMATE TALENT SEARCH TO THE SUNBELT, BREITBART HAS FOUND 
A NEW COLLEAGUE  FOR ET AL. & SOON 

Saturday, June 17, 2017

       THE  CLOSING  OF  THE OPEN  ATMOSPHERIC  SOCIETY

In 2014  Watts decided to lengthen the shadow of his treehouse by founding  The  Open  Atmospheric  Society,  a  climate  contrarian organization with all the academic bells and whistles of the decidely un-contrarian American Meterological Society & AGU.  Trouble is that these rely on acumen for their gravitas, and boards top heavy with academic department heads and scientific medalists for their street cred and media clout.

Sou relates that  years of trying  failed to produce anybody with such credentials willing to join the OAS board, collected a grand total of $330 from prospective dues paying members, and produced no journal She reports its website fell silent as  a Norwegian Blue  two years ago.

ANNALS OF  CLIMATE COMMUNICATION: FLYING POPSICLES

THIS POPULARIZATION SEEMS TO HAVE LOST SOMETHING IN TRANSLATION FROM JGR





Thursday, June 15, 2017

AN  HONEST BROKER IS NOT AFRAID TO SAY: 'DON'T TRADE'


Dealing with Climate Change: A Conversation with Paul N. Edwards and Oliver Geden

Authors


Edwards:...
The technocratic character of the IPCC has tended to center the debate on technological solutions, especially renewable energy. I'm not against technocracy; in fact I think it's absolutely necessary, more now than ever. So long as the subject is breaking our addiction to fossil fuels, I think the technocratic approach is really the right one, and the IPCC has played a major role in promoting that.

Yet agricultural practices, meat-based diets, and deforestation are at least equally important causes of climate change. In many respects, those are much harder problems than energy, where real and successful solutions are well along. Mike Hulme's great book Why We Disagree about Climate Change points to the deep connections between climate and culture, from religion and housing to clothing and food.

Eco-modernist techno-solutionism barely touches the holistic kinds of social change that would really be needed for drastic emissions reductions. Naomi Klein's This Changes Everything does a better job of sketching those solutions than the IPCC, but as Oliver points out, her vision – like those of many others searching for ways to move us off the path of self-destruction we are currently walking – would require revolutionary and extremely widespread social change of a kind that seems depressingly unlikely at present.

The dilemma is clear. Scientists’ greatest asset is the high degree of trust invested in them by the public, at least in much of the developed world. To participate effectively in building climate solutions, they must maintain that. Yet this trust depends on the perception that science seeks truth, not power. To the degree that scientists advocate particular solutions over others, they may be seen as partisans. The challenge for scientists is to retain what Roger Pielke Jr. calls the “honest broker” position: proposing as many solution paths as they can find, evaluating their effects from a neutral point of view, while never advocating any particular path over others.








Wednesday, June 14, 2017

       WHY  WOULD  A  BLOG  WITH  300,000,000  AUTHENTIC
             PAGEVIEWS  BE  RUNNING A   BEGGING  LETTER ?

Disinformation doyen seeks  financial help  to 
lower  signal-to-noise ratio  of  climate  policy  debate :

WUWT at 10+ years – I need some help, please
 / 

UPDATE 6/14/17: Michael E. Mann just can’t stand this, see below.
Hello everyone,
I feel like many of you are family, you’ve been with me and this endeavor so long. I started in November of 2006, and I’m approaching my 11th year. In all that time, WUWT has been providing a daily service to readers with original research, commentary, and humor where appropriate.
During this time, we’ve witnessed many great things together: Climategate started here in 2009, and the implosion of the Copenhagen conference as a result. The unmasking of the IPCC, showing that many of the “voodoo science” claims against skeptics made by IPCC chairman Pachauri, were based on fake datashockingly bad science, and even grey literature
Now the tables are turned, and he’s out in disgrace
Then there was the time that I proved without a doubt that both Al Gore and Bill Nye were not just incompetent, but liars too, faking a science experiment. That finding by me was later backed up by a peer reviewed paper in the American Journal of Physics.
Then there was the leaking of the IPCC AR5 documents here, showing how corrupted their thinking is, and how the final product was sanitized. 
Then there’s the Paris Agreement, watching it unfold, shaking our heads at the inanity of it. Even Dr. James Hansen called it a “fraud”. Then, just two weeks ago, watching President Trump remove the U.S. from it. It was truly a great day, with the bonus of watching all those heads explode...
It’s been a great ride. But, to be honest, I’m facing burnout... 
I want to keep contributing, but I need a break to do it. I think I deserve one. Steve McIntyre of ClimateAudit once told me in a face to face conversation that “You and I both have done the work of ten men. I think we’ve given them a good run” (he was referring to the “Hockey Team et al”). Steve has essentially retired [from] blogging, because he has other pursuits. He feels like he’s done his fair share. I’d say his contribution was monumental.
I still have more stories to tell, I still have more research to do, I still have more to contribute.
One of the great things about WUWT is that we’ve had so many guest authors. This keeps it fresh. But I still have to administer it all. I do it from my phone, my laptop, and my home and office PC. I’ve never really been out of touch from it
Here’s the stats over the past 10+ years.
  • 16,496 stories posted
  • 2,075,345 Comments
  • 316,737,166 views
  • 49 reference pages (some of which sorely need work...
________________________________________________________________________

It’s driving them all batshit crazy that:
1. I’ve survived 10 years, even though I’m apparently too stupid to have accomplished anything in that time.

2. People actually like me and want to help.

3. More people read WUWT than all of their blogs combined.
I’m very blessed. Thanks to everyone! – Anthony


Tuesday, June 13, 2017

                   ANOTHER  ECHO  CHAMBER  FALLS  SILENT

CLIMATE DEBATE DAILY, ONCE THE ARTS & LETTERS DAILY'S FORUM FOR COMPARING THE MORE COGENT POLEMICS  OF  THE  CLIMATE WARS,  HAS  CEASED PUBLICATION

UNDER  THE EDITORSHIP  OF NEW ZEALAND ACADEMIC AND CRITIC  DENNIS DUTTON, .ALD  BECAME PART OF  THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

IT BEGAN AS A  SIDE-BY-SIDE  COMPARISON  OF  THE LATEST  CLIMATE  PAPERS, AND THE RESPONSES THEY DREW IN SCHOLARLY JOURNALS, BUT AFTER HIS DEATH,  CLIMATE DEBATE DAILY  CONTRACTED,  FROM A WIDE-RANGING REVIEW, DRAWING ON SCORES OF SOURCES , LEFT AND RIGHT,  TO LITTLE MORE THAN AN ECHO CHAMBER FOR HANDOUTS BY MARK MORANO, JOE BAST AND AN ASSORTMENT OF  CLIMATE CRANKS SO  PREDICTABLE AND  REPETITIOUS THAT ONE DOUBTS  DUTTON  WOULD  MOURN  ITS DISSAPPEARANCE. 
                                                     AS CAN BE SEEN BELOW, ITS EX-EDITORS CERTAINLY DON'T:



CLIMATEDEBATEDAILY.COM24 December 2016 

Dear readers, thanks very much for visiting Climate Debate Daily over the last nine years. We hope it has been interesting! 

Sadly, the time has come to close the website down. Huge thanks to Peter Farrell, the website's funder since its inception. Peter is a climate change sceptic. The acting editors of the website over the years – Doug Campbell, Mick Whittle, and Wei Shao – are not climate change sceptics, but we have, throughout the life of the website, always tried to do our very best to find the strongest and most persuasive essays and articles supporting both sides of the debate.


The aim of Climate Debate Daily has always been to put the two sides next to each other and let readers decide for themselves which side is strongest. 

Has the website been a success? It is hard to be sure, but our impression, based on reader feedback, is that it hasn't. 

Few, if any, minds have been changed, in either direction. 

Confirmation bias is a powerful force, and we think that many people – no matter what their beliefs – simply read what they agree with and ignore or dismiss what they don't. For the record, none of the three editors of the website have been in the least bit persuaded by the climate sceptics' arguments despite the many hundreds of hours we have spent reading them. 

We note that after the website started its life on January 1, 2008, new global temperature records were set in 2010, 2014, 2015, and 2016, and that a new record for the Arctic sea ice area minimum was set in 2012 (and almost matched in 2016). These, however, are not the sorts of facts that will change minds!