Category Archives: Just Goofy

An open letter challenging the EPA on CO2 regulation

Posted on by
1

“An open letter challenging the EPA on CO2 regulation“ (2012-12-28). A line has been drawn in the sand! The environmental gauntlet has been thrown! A fist has been clenched! A steely gaze has been directed! The GIANTS of climatology have been aroused! (Maybe we could have phrased that last one better.) Anthony Watts has added his name to a newspaper opinion piece!!!

So, preeminent 21st century climatologist (Not really. In fact, not even a bit), Joe D’Aleo has written a damning critique (not) of the EPA’s conclusion three years ago that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations will have harmful environmental consequences. And an important newspaper, the Washington Post has printed it! (Err.. the “Examiner”.) The usual denialist travelers like Fred Singer, Tim Ball, Don Easterbrook and Anthony Watts have signed on along with others we will leave unmentioned out of pity.

Here’s the laser-sharp money quote fired, like a diamond bullet, at the very core of the EPA, that Anthony urges his readers to “consider widely republishing”:

“In summary, it is not incorrect to argue that further study of the role GHGs play in climate is in order.”

My mind is spinning! From trying to decipher the meaning. I guess they want the EPA to stop trying to “P” our “E”?

What are Joe & Co. steamed about? Well mainly they hate government regulation on principle. Also they think that the EPA should have spent ten years replicating all the findings of modern climatology instead of just pulling out the relevant peer-reviewed journals. By the way, did you know that some of those journals aren’t American?

In what alternate reality is this proud “Open Letter” anything other than a kick me sign? Have D’Aleo, Watts and pals forgotten that their grade-school assertions were all shot down three years ago? Maybe they’re hoping that we’ve forgotten.

Rabett Run has an amusing sampling of the EPA’s responses to various inept denialist complaints. I wish there was an index to them, but here’s a useful Google search string. Plenty of chuckles in there.

Regulatory Czar wants to use copyright protection mechanisms to shut down rumors and conspiracy theories

Posted on by
13

“Regulatory Czar wants to use copyright protection mechanisms to shut down rumors and conspiracy theories“ (2012-01-20). Anthony Watts loves to give a platform to libertarian crackpots. Wild incendiary ideas get promoted, people Anthony doesn’t like get slandered, but he can stand back with his hands clean.

Here we have Alex Rawls, a climate change denier who’s also obsessed with, for example, the Flight 93 memorial (it is, of course, a “terrorist memorial mosque”), how the Beijing Olympics Closing Ceremony depicted an orgasm, and of course “Republicanism’. He tells us that Obama wants to suppress rumors and conspiracy theories such as claims that global warming is a deliberate fraud or that Barack Obama “pals around with terrorists.”

Strangely, these are precisely the wild claims that Alex, a “simple public-spirited blogger”, likes to shout from the rooftop.

Sorry Anthony, who you pass the megaphone to says a lot about you.

A controversial look at Blackbody radiation and Earth minus GHG’s

Posted on by
50

“A controversial look at Blackbody radiation and Earth minus GHG’s” (2011-12-26). Anthony Watts provides more space for ill-informed attacks on “the Greenhouse Theory”. Here a savant named Reed Coray eagerly proves his wishful thinking, ominously triggered by Lord Monckton’s blithering. Funny how Anthony lets others espouse ideas that he’s officially too embarrassed to defend.

In this case everyone, except Reed, has miscalculated the Earth’s albedo and therefore there is no Man-made Global Warming. I guess the Earth’s albedo must have mysteriously, and naturally, changed in the last century.

Still, when his thesis is peppered with expressions like “I’m not sure what the definition of the ‘Earth’s characteristic-emission temperature’ is”, “If I am correct” and an apparent belief that he’s the first person to notice clouds and oceans, we are forced to conclude that we are dealing with an ill-informed but enthusiastic amateur with the usual opaque motivations.

It’s always entertaining when cranks latch on to black body radiation. If he’d referenced a spherical cow there might have been some redeeming comic value, but I think one of Anthony’s commenters sums it up best: “This is painful to read.”

Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues

Posted on by
3

“Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues” (2011-12-17). Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher stands up and recites the current extended list of stupid denialist arguments (“ice caps on Mars”, ”CO2 is not a pollutant”, “systematic oppression”, ”global elites” hate “meat eaters”, etc.). He holds in his hand a list of fifty communists… scratch that… an editorial from Investor’s Business Daily to prove it.

This is now “a matter of public record” for the approving Anthony Watts, thus ending Global Warming once and for all, again.

Rohrabacher for President! He’ll read whatever we shove under his nose!

The flying Monck

Posted on by
6

“The flying Monck“ (2011-12-06). Isn’t that just like Anthony Watts? Warm is cold, up is down, grimaces are grins. The aging and unfit Lord Monckton is so desperate for attention that he actually sky-dived over the Durban climate conference to ‘draw attention’ to climate change denial skepticism. Anthony declares that Monckton is “grinning” on the way down, but you be the judge. Anthony’s readers are equally enthusiastic in their admiration of this demonstration of Monckton’s intellect.

Hang on to them choppers, M’Lord. And open them eyes.

Actually, this may be Monckton’s primary talent. Oblivious grinning while his arguments are shot down.

Note also that, just like in the climate debate, Monckton’s role is to clown for the camera while someone else pulls the strings.

High level clouds and surface temperature

Posted on by
1

“High level clouds and surface temperature“ (2011-10-06). Anthony Watts thinks that winemaker Erl Happ is S-M-R-T, so he posts his long explanation of why global warming, which isn’t happening, is all because of clouds.

Although tamino has a different opinion of Erl’s science, I’ll just say that I think Erl’s complete quotation of Wordsworth’s poem is the most convincing, and useful, part of his argument.

Next!

Greenhouse Thought Experiment

Posted on by
6

“Greenhouse Thought Experiment“. A Guest Post from Jeff Condon. Denialists go to great lengths to misrepresent the “greenhouse” effect and direct our attention to partisan television commercials telling us that CO2 is “essential for life”. Mr. Dunning–Kruger Derek Alker, inspired by Tim Ball et. al.’s comic novel Slaying the Sky Dragon – Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory, sent Jeff an Excel spreadsheet and a really ugly PDF that “ends the AGW scam” (again).

Apparently Derek received a geometric flash of insight into Earth’s shape. Them dumb physicists are ignoring the “back” half! Only they’re not of course…Science of Doom tries to turn the conversation back to reality on Jeff’s “No Consensus” website (sorry, I can’t write that without quotes around it).

But for us, this is Jeff’s launching point for a thought experiment about “the greenhouse”. He considers two Earths (specifically, a happy 1℃ warmer Republican Earth and a miserable colder Democratic Earth). Which will appear “warmer” to an external observer? After-all, a real greenhouse will appear warmer to an external observer. As any Physics 100 student will tell you, the answer is that the two Earths must exactly balance the radiative energy. In = out.

The interesting question is how could one Earth be 1℃ warmer than the other. Who wants to guess?

The Antithesis

Posted on by
Reply

“The Antithesis”. Christmas Guest pudding from William McClenney, of a particularly turgid variety. If you can trudge through it all, let me know if I got this wrong…

William joins the long list of denialists who think they can argue that slow geological events in the past are equivalent to today’s rapid climate change. Not particularly original, nor particularly interesting.

His entertaining version of the “precautionary principle” is a take on an old denialist delaying tactic. What if, instead of trying to stabilize CO2 at what we think are natural levels, we should be raising it? The fatalist version of denialist “precaution” saves effort at the expense of everything else.

This paragraph particularly annoyed me for its fundamental anti-science:

“An astute reader might have gleaned that even on things which have happened, the science is not that particularly well settled. Which makes consideration of the science being settled on things which have not yet happened dubious at best.”

So every time we are able to improve accuracy of for example, an age estimate, we are in fact proving that science isn’t useful? Dumb.

Kyoto Protocol: Bad Science = Bad Policy

Posted on by
Reply

“Kyoto Protocol: Bad Science = Bad Policy“. Christmas Guest pudding from Ruth Bonnett. Ayn Rand, the novelist and icon of libertarian “thought”, apparently foretold that the Kyoto Protocol would be an attack on Australian farmers. The IPCC is also apparently a tool to “restrict technology” so that we’ll all have to live in caves in the dark and die of starvation.

But what about Nostradamus?

Climate Change and the Corruption of Science: Where did it all go wrong?

Posted on by
1

“Climate Change and the Corruption of Science: Where did it all go wrong?“. Christmas Guest pudding from Bernie Lewin. Apparently Global Warming is just a way to use apocalyptic scenarios to generate social panic and maintain political power. And the scientists all jumped onboard because they like the attention.

So all the denialist rants about conspiracies, lying scientists, and impending secret world governments is just a rational response?

That’s funny, cause I thought the fundamental basis for Global Warming denialism was right-wing interests exploiting paranoia over perceived threats to autonomy to protect their own power.