More Arctic & sea level “worse than we thought” scare stories

More Arctic & sea level “worse than we thought” scare stories (May 4, 2011). Steven Goddard, alternately an embarrassment to even Anthony Watts and then the next great thinker, is back in the limelight. Steven, just like Bob Tisdale a few days ago, thinks that straight lines are the best way to describe environmental changes. Pick two useful points and connect ’em. Job done.

Anthony’s deep insight into the the Lund University report, Effects of climate change in the Arctic more extensive than expectedis that this is “nothing more than recycled alarm” but the report is confirmation of Arctic climate change, not newly invented fears. Perhaps Anthony wants to frame the report so his readers won’t, well, read it. They could encounter facts there.

Who said that sea-level rise will be linear? Even the Steven Goddard chart above that Anthony thinks is so “telling” shows it’s clearly happening. That’s the recycling here, of  a denialist straw-man. Beyond this misrepresentation Anthony and Steven make no further argument.

From the report:

A much reduced covering of snow, shorter winter season and thawing tundra. The effects of climate change in the Arctic are already here. And the changes are taking place significantly faster than previously thought.

“The changes we see are dramatic. And they are not coincidental. The trends are unequivocal and deviate from the norm when compared with a longer term perspective”, she says.

“It is clear that great changes are at hand. It is all happening in the Arctic right now. And what is happening there affects us all”, says Margareta Johansson.

Perhaps Anthony and Steven think that the climate scientists here are deliberately lying to us in order to collect their 200 secret alarmist pay cheques from Maurice Strong?

5 thoughts on “More Arctic & sea level “worse than we thought” scare stories

  1. Pingback: The Silliest Rebuttal Yet From Ben At Wott’sUpWithThat | Bob Tisdale – Climate Observations

  2. Ben:

    Thanks for your efforts that spare me from reading WUWT. I normally have healthy blood pressure, but reading WUWT isn’t good for my health.

  3. Hmm, I wonder how long this reply stands before Anthony’s snipping wit-free censors go to work on it?

    “This post is based on actual data. Your conclusion that it is alarmist is a strawman claim. The facts are what they are, and they can not be dismissed out-of-hand. There is ample supportive evidence available to lead to the conclusion that sea level rise will be a problem sooner, rather than later.”

    More insane illogical mathturbations from Anthony, who is ever willing to distort reality to fit his imaginary carbon pollution is good for you world. Makes you wonder if he has hired Marc Morano, as one of many ghost writers?

  4. c’mon Tisdale, calling a scientific report “recycled alarm” is weak and dishonest and you know it. Why do you defend it?

    [To be fair, it’s Anthony who makes the dismissive remark. But leaping to Steven Goddard’s defense has proven to be foolhardy! – Ben]

  5. In a recent post Watts puts an end to one of the biggest denier furphies… it’s the el Nino! ‘Tree rings as a proxy for historical ENSO reconstruction’ shows el Nino’s stronger back in the dreaded ‘LIA’.. Oops.. It’s great when his gish-gallop shoots them in the foot.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s