Unknown's avatar

About Ben

I trained as a sedimentary geologist at a Canadian University, but have worked in the I.T. field as a programmer and manager for many years.

Fly your flag – Veteran’s Day

“Fly your flag – Veteran’s Day” (2012-11-11). Anthony Watts implies that if you didn’t fly the Stars and Stripes today you’re a traitor. Of course two days ago he was pleased to regard flying the American flag upside down or at half-mast as legitimate political protest over majority vote against Republicans in the Senate, the House of Representatives and for President.

I repeat Samuel Johnson’s observation from a few days ago – “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

For myself, I respect the risks and sacrifices of, in my case, Canadian soldiers year ’round and treat with deep skepticism any efforts to consume them, or our enemies or civilian bystanders, in pursuit of political goals.

A Big Picture Look At “Earth’s Temperature” – “Extreme Weather” Update

A Big Picture Look At “Earth’s Temperature” – “Extreme Weather” Update (2012-11-11). A post “By WUWT regular Just The Facts”. I’m going to assume that JTF is merely another sock-puppet of Anthony’s censors the way that “Smokey”, WUWT’s resident denialist troll that always gets a free pass, is really David B. Stealey (“dbs”).

“Big Picture” is code for step waaaay back, take off your glasses, slap on the blinkers and close your good eye.

Here’s JTF’s nothing-to-see-here preface:

All of these claims and “extreme weather” rhetoric seems to be predicated on the assumption that “Earth’s Temperature” has increased recently, thus causing “extreme weather” to arrive and become the “new normal”. However, does the observational data support this assumption? Let’s take a look…

Just go read Open Mind’s post Extreme Denial to get a somewhat dissenting opinion on JTF’s enthusiastic ignorance:

Under the guise of a “big picture” look, WUWT reader “just the facts” purports to show that climate data don’t support the claim of an increase in extreme weather. But he (she?) doesn’t show evidence about extreme anything, just a bunch of graphs, which he got from other sources, followed by the wrong conclusions. Show a graph of, say, global average temperature, then say “doesn’t look like there’s been much global warming” (even though there has been), and conclude “no increase in extreme weather here.” And of course “he” goes “out of his way” to use “scare quotes” at “every opportunity.”

A post election oddity I’m noticing

“A post election oddity I’m noticing” (2012-11-09). Ah yes, Anthony Watts notices flags flying at half-mast since the re-election of that communist Kenyan. Just sayin’!

Just another dispassionate observation from our science-minded guide.

Is it “a sign of distress or emergency” or “respect for the fallen in service of our country”? Anthony suggests that the flags identify right-thinking Americans, but let’s not forget Samuel Johnson’s observation – “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Suck it up, Anthony.

Friday Funny – David Suzuki goes postal

“Friday Funny – David Suzuki goes postal” (2012-11-09). Anthony Watts re-blogs the Heartland Institute’s A Polite Discourse with Professional Climate Alarmist David Suzuki, where right-wing political hack Jim Lakely pretends that sending a Heartland Institute published rant on climate science (Roosters Of The Apocalypse: How The Junk Science Of Global Warming Nearly Bankrupted The Western World) was an attempt at “polite discourse.” (“Roosters” didn’t exactly make a splash back in February, this Bismarck Tribute review is the first real analysis that shows up in Google.)

Here’s Lakely’s attempt at polite discourse:

  1. He publishes and attacks a private correspondence.
  2. He calls Dr. Suzuki a “Professional Climate Alarmist”.
  3. He calls Dr. Suzuki childish.
  4. He puts “esteemed scientist” in sneer-quotes.
  5. He dismisses a renowned environmental scientist as expressing “faith-based climate views”.
  6. He ignores the entirety of environmental science to write “defaming people who disagree is the only trick aging alarmists like him have left.”

Here’s the note Dr. Suzuki wrote on his return-to-sender package:

“I am a scientist and I take great umbrage at being sent such a load of crap from a bullshit shill organization for the oil industry. You are the most anti-science group I can imagine.

David Suzuki.”

Seems pretty accurate to me, Anthony. In fact it applies equally to you, although I suspect your motivation is garden-variety incoherent libertarianism.

Climate totally absent from all presidential debates

“Climate totally absent from all presidential debates” (2012-10-22). Had to jump back to this otherwise disposable post by Anthony Watts. It struck me as illuminating that Anthony was so pleased that a topic on which he obsesses over is allegedly being ignored in the current US elections.

Surely if Anthony truly cared about the scientific debate he’d crave the opportunity to explain to the wider public why he’s right and the worlds almost uniformly nefarious climate scientists are wrong? After-all, he regularly boasts of his status as “the world’s best science blog”!

nobody cares anymore and the leaders don’t want to ride the lightning.

Nope. His only purpose is distraction and confusion. Shameful.

Why I no longer subscribe to Popular Science

“Why I no longer subscribe to Popular Science” (2012-110-03). Anthony Watts reminds us that he holds grudges. Popular Science is still on his long list of subversive publications with which he will have no truck. National Geographic and Scientific American are also on his list.

What re-warmed the fire in Anthony’s belly? Popular Science reported on the controversy of a denialist Wikipedia volunteer Ken Mampel spending a week feverishly expunging references to climate change from the Hurricane Sandy Wikipedia page. The PopSci article was really about the randomness and wildly varying credentials of Wikipedia editors, but it’s the wiki page subject that woke Anthony up.

Where’s PopSci’s coverage of the William Connolley Wikipedia controversy? Equal time! Credentialed climate scientist versus “Joe Blow”!

Did Global Warming Reduce the Impacts of Sandy?

“Did Global Warming Reduce the Impacts of Sandy?”(2012-11-06). This one’s good for a laugh! Anthony Watts wants us to hear Chip Knappenberger’s (not a climatologist) idea that Global Warming “lessened [Hurricane Sandy’s] intensity and impacts”. Thank god for Global Warming! We need more Global Warming!

Chip’s idea came to Anthony’s attention through the Cato Institute (august science council or libertarian hard-liners? You decide.) which proudly offers it’s brand-new “Center for the Disparagement Study of Science”. The CSS, a scientific initiative along the lines of the Derek Zoolander School for Kids Who Can’t Read Good and Want to Do Other Stuff Good Too.

Here’s a summary of Chip’s arguments, which Anthony found so compelling:

  • Global Warming only contributed 6″ to the 17.34 ft of flooding (but it was the last 6 inches…)
  • No-one can precisely measure the effect of warming tropical storm sources, and besides winds blow in all kinds of directions.
  • Hurricane Sandy could have missed!

Wait a minute… Did Anthony just switch from “Global Warming is a Lie” to “Global Warming is Good”? Don’t worry, he’ll switch back next argument. But I did hear somewhere that CO2 is plant food.

Update: Here’s a discussion by actual climate scientists and meteorologists: Yes, Climate Change Contributed To Superstorm Sandy.

The IPCC weighs in on the Mann Nobel dilemma, and throws him under the bus

“The IPCC weighs in on the Mann Nobel dilemma, and throws him under the bus” (2012-11-02). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change swats a semantic mosquito and Anthony Watts, as he gets squished like the bug he is, declares victory.

So did Dr. Michael Mann win the Nobel Peace Prize or just help?

Apparently it’s way more important to argue about semantics, comma placement, etc. and use that for personal attacks than it is to discuss climate change science. Honest scientific discussion is a topic of last resort at WUWT, repeatedly chosen “Best Science Blog”, by weblogawards.org. (Funny how in every possible 2012 category denialist bloggers “won”. Like every fraudulent accolade Anthony claims, they aren’t worth the pixels they’re printed on.)

  • Did the IPCC receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for their scientific work on Climate Change? Yes. They shared it with crypto-communist Al Gore.
  • Did the IPCC thank key contributors for their work, which resulted in the IPCC receiving the Nobel Peace Prize? Yes.
  • Was Dr. Mann one of those contributors? Yes.
  • Did Dr. Mann, in fit of alleged ego, fabricate his own Nobel Peace Prize certificate? No.
  • Do Anthony and his denialist buddies care? No.

Nobel cause corruption?

“Nobel cause corruption?” (2012-10-31). Anthony Watts knows that Dr. Michael Mann has never claimed to have “won the Nobel Peace Prize.” The editors of The National Review also know this. And yet they are both enthusiastically spreading that false claim.

The National Review is that impartial journalistic enterprise currently being sued for defamation by Dr. Mann. Anthony Watts is just a rabidly partisan blow-hard.

Here Anthony is chortling that the National Review put a snarky advertisement in the Penn State campus paper. You can hold it in your hands! This is even better than that time we hijacked the morning announcements back in high school. Also way better than Anthony’s fake Bloomberg Businessweek cover the next day.

Everyone knows that it’s Anthony’s friend, denialist birther Lord Monckton, who won the Nobel Peace Prize!

Helping Bloomberg understand ‘stupid’

Helping Bloomberg understand ‘stupid’ (2012-11-01).  Oh Anthony! To understand stupid all one has to do is visit your little weblog. It’s the distilled essence of same.

For the thousandth time Anthony Watts hauls out the assertion that weather has nothing to do with climate. Think about that for a minute… But when business magazines like Bloomberg Businessweek start calling denial of Global Warming “stupid” you know the penny is finally dropping. So much for Anthony’s pleasure over the absence of climate issues in the current Presidential campaign.

Communist rag Bloomberg Businessweek’s Nov. 1st cover, addressing A. Watts personally.

Anthony’s expert climate refutation? “Hurricane Expert” political economist Roger Pielke Jr. and infamous climate liar Steve Goddard. ‘Nuff said.

P.S. Anthony: If you’re gonna fake up a passive-aggressive mock magazine cover figure out line formatting or you’ll just come across as grade-school.