We skeptics enjoyed immensely the expert satire of Yes Prime Minister directed at the foibles of climate hysteria. That clip was available at my post Laughing at Climate Change.
Now we find there was another even more skewering into the soft underbelly of the beast. H/T Global Warming Policy Foundation (here).
“Computer models are no different from fashion models: seductive, unreliable, easily corrupted, and they lead sensible people to make fools of themselves.” –Jim Hacker, Yes, Prime Minister
The video was blocked by BBC in my country (Canada), but GWPF helpfully provides the transcript of the juicy bits:
Later in Act One, Scene Two
The phone rings. They all look at it.
Claire Hello? It’s the BBC again. I see. Thanks. (She hangs up.) Piling on the agony. A big new story about global warming has just broken, they’re adding that to the Sunday programme too. Global…
View original post 878 more words
“The story only gets worse if you try to find any benefits from all this spending. Ontario doesn’t get more electricity than before, it gets less.”
The guy who broke the “hockey-stick” scam breaks down the resulting wind energy scam…
One of the favourite smoke-and-mirrors lines pulled by the wind industry, its parasites and spruikers is that wind power lowers power prices.
Among the ‘tiny’ little omissions in that pitch are that:
1) they’re only ever talking about spot prices when the wind is blowing; and
2) they skate over the massive subsidies that get tacked on top of the price paid by retailers for the power delivered; and
3) they run a mile from the unnecessary cost of base-load plants holding additional ‘spinning reserve’ and the insane and otherwise unnecessary cost of running highly inefficient Open Cycle Gas Turbines, that are critical to keep a grid up and running when wind power output collapses on a total and totally unpredictable basis.
That little trick lasts about as long as it takes Joe the Power Punter to open his power bill; because all of the above is helpfully collected in…
View original post 944 more words
“In the end, it will just melt away quite suddenly. It might not be as early as 2013 but it will be soon…” – Prof. Paul Wadhams 2007 (‘Arctic will be ice free by 2013’ – BBC)
“greater than even chance” that the North Pole could be ice-free for the first time next month. – Prof. Paul Wadhams 2016 (‘A Farewell to Ice‘)
Arctic ice “may well disappear” this September – Prof. Paul Wadhams 2016
A Cambridge University professor has been accused of “crying wolf” by predicting the imminent disappearance of Arctic ice.
Peter Wadhams has been criticised by scientists who fear that he could undermine the credibility of climate science by making doom-laden forecasts.
He repeatedly predicted that the Arctic would be “ice-free” by last summer, by which he meant it would have less than one million sq km of ice. His forecasts, reported around the world, turned out to be wrong.
Satellite measurements revealed there was a minimum of 4.6 million sq km of Arctic ice last summer, well below the long-term average but above the record low in 2012 of 3.6 million sq km.
In June this year, Professor Wadhams, head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at Cambridge, predicted that Arctic ice “may well disappear” this September. He added: “Even if the ice doesn’t completely disappear, it is very likely that this will be a record low year.”
A recent press release promoting his new book, Farewell to Ice, claimed that there was a “greater than even chance” that the North Pole could be ice-free for the first time next month.
The US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which monitors Arctic ice, said last week: “It is unlikely that Arctic sea ice extent this September will fall below the record minimum set in 2012.” Ed Hawkins, a climate scientist at the University of Reading, analysed Professor Wadhams’ forecasts on a climate science website and questioned whether they should be taken seriously.
He wrote: “There are very serious risks from continued climatic changes and a melting Arctic but we do not serve the public and policymakers well by exaggerating those risks. We will soon see an ice-free summer in the Arctic but there is a real danger of ‘crying wolf’.”
Dr Hawkins said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN’s climate science advisory body, had forecast that the Arctic would be “reliably ice-free”, meaning more than five consecutive years below one million sq km, by the mid-21st century.
Dr Hawkins said: “Putting a precise date on when we see the first days or weeks that are ‘ice-free’ is unwise because of the chaotic nature of the climate system and uncertainties in future greenhouse gas emissions.”
Richard Betts, head of climate impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre, also expressed concern. Writing on the same climate science website, he said: “When someone talks up imminent catastrophe, they might think they are getting a quick win by getting a scary story out there, but in the long term it will be an own goal.”
Last year, Professor Wadhams claimed that assassins may have murdered three British scientists who were seeking to reveal how rapidly global warming was melting Arctic ice. He complained about a report in The Times on his claims, saying he had been misquoted. The Independent Press Standards Organisation dismissed his complaint, stating “the article had accurately reported his position as he had explained it to the journalist”.
Professor Wadhams declined to comment apart from suggesting that he knew more about the Arctic than Dr Hawkins because he had been there on many research trips.
The Real World
- Arctic sea-ice is tracking 2015 levels at around 4.6 million sq km.
- Current sea-ice level is higher than the 2007 summer of 4.13 million sq km, when Wadhams made his dire forecast in the BBC article “Arctic will be ice free by 2013“
- 2016 sea-ice levels are a mile away from Wadhams’ 1,000,000 million sq km “ice free” tipping point.
- Current Arctic sea-ice levels are well above the record low set in 2012 of 3.6 million sq km.
There has been a massive expansion of thick Arctic Sea ice since 2012
Arctic summer melt season ended a week early
Arctic Sea-Ice related
- You Were Lied To About Arctic Sea Ice Disappearing | Climatism
- “Science Is The Belief In The Ignorance Of The Experts” | Real Science
- Climate Science Falls To A Record Low In 2016 | Real Science
- The ‘Great Arctic Cyclone of 2016’ turned out to be not so great for sea ice doomsters | Climatism
This latest dose of Great Barrier Reef fear-mongering recently beamed across the world, care of climate activist groups and their complicit media, has no doubt done untold damage to Australia’s international reputation. Most critically and sadly to its tourist industry, endangering the livelihoods of the good people who are employed in the region.
Who will be made accountable or held responsible for the blatant lies, exaggeration of data and wreckless alarmism trotted out in order to forward their climate agenda? Falsehoods that do far more harm than good.
Of course, no one will be held accountable. Because again, the worst any reef or climate change alarmist can ever be accused of is an excess of “save the planet” virtue.
By Paul Homewood
From Cairns News:
View original post 662 more words
Dear climate change alarmist media, politicians and the warming faithful,
*Extreme weather is NOT getting worse*
The inconvenient data laid out here on one the favoured weapons of mass climate hysteria – “Extreme Weather”, by climate change disaster expert – Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., a Professor in the Environmental Studies Program at the University of Colorado…
“Floods suck when they occur. The good news is U.S. flood damage is sharply down over 70 years,”
In a message aimed at climate activists and many in the media, Pielke cautioned:
“Remember, disasters can happen any time and they suck. But it is also good to understand long-term trends based on data, not hype.”
Pielke also pointed to the hard scientific data that shows other types of extreme weather are *not getting worse and may in fact be improving*.
“Is U.S. drought getting worse? No,” Pielke wrote
Read on for more hard scientific data that completely contradicts warming alarmist dogma that your CO2 emissions cause “extreme weather”…
NB, the next time you view, read or hear your favoured media hyperventilating over an ‘Extreme Weather’ event, remember that there weren’t as many smart phones last century, and keep in mind the old saying “if it bleeds, it leads.”
By Paul Homewood
From Climate Depot:
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., a Professor in the Environmental Studies Program at the University of Colorado and a Fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), slammed the linkage of global warming to the recent Louisiana floods and other types of extreme weather. (See: Bill Nye: Climate change is reason for Louisiana floods)
Pielke authored the 2014 book “The Rightful Place of Science: Disasters and Climate Change.”
“Flood disasters are sharply down. U.S. floods not increasing either,” Pielke Jr. declared on August 23. Pielke rebuked New York Times columnist Paul Krugman for linking floods to climate change. Krugman blamed “climate change” for ‘a proliferation of disasters like the one in Louisiana.’
“Floods suck when they occur. The good news is U.S. flood damage…
View original post 189 more words
“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for
Physics, Ivar Giaever.
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.“
– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
Via Green Jihad:
Piers Corbyn, a meteorologist (and brother to Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn), says the religion of climate change is a con. Much of it is being pushed by big money, and politicians that are twi…
Evangelical climate change orgs, experts and mainstream CAGW-sympathetic media: BBC, National Geographic, Sierra Club, ABC, The Guardian, Whadam and Al Gore et al., assured us (prayed for) that Arctic summer sea-ice would have disappeared by 2014.
Despite record and increasing CO2 emissions, sea-ice levels in the Arctic have remained largely the same for nearly a decade.
Just don’t mention the other pole, the Antarctic, which continues to expand at record levels, setting record low temps as it grows. Inconvenient realities contradictory to what climate ‘experts’ and those billion dollar computer models predicted. Sshhhh.
Last week I mentioned how WeatherUnderground was touting the ‘Great Arctic Cyclone of 2016’ as being a repeat of the ice crusher cyclone in the summer of 2012. People that want to see Arctic sea ice reach new lows, so that they can shout things like “See, told you! Climate change!” were banking on it to bring sea ice extent to new record scarcity, accompanied by much wailing and gnashing of teeth, while secretly grinning to themselves “take that, deniers”. It’s a strange bunch of people, in my view, that rally around wanting to see such things happen.
So far, NSIDC hasn’t shown much of an impact from the GAC16, and in the last couple of days, ice has upticked slightly as it regrouped (magnified inset mine):
The storm last week, if it had major impact, would have put the plot closer to the green 2012 line. We…
View original post 404 more words