Category Archives: Anti-Science

CO2 Optical Illusion

Posted on by
10

“CO2 Optical Illusion“. Steven Goddard is nothing if not stubborn. He still thinks that graphics editors can be used to prove that Global Warming is a lie. NASA’s Earth Observatory image of the day has him all riled up.

Here he once again mangles legitimate scientific images and then counts pixels to prove… something. Although he admits that “This is not a perfect equal area projection – so the pixel count method is not 100% accurate” it doesn’t stop him from speaking from the mountaintop. He declares that “5% more pixels were below normal than were above normal” but ignores the unreported areas (most of India and China) that almost all lie within hotter than normal regions.

Pixels, eh Steven? I think you’re actually looking at pixies. I suppose it makes a change from arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

NOAA: behind the curve

Posted on by
Reply

“NOAA: behind the curve“. Anthony Watts delights that NOAA’s sunspot number projections aren’t exactly  the same as the observed count.

NOAA Sunspot Cycle Prediction, July 2010

You tell ’em Anthony.

From DMSP munching microbes to global climate

Posted on by
1

“From DMSP munching microbes to global climate“. Anthony Watts has found a press release about a paper by Justin Seymour of The University of Technology Sydney. Did you know that “Observations show that microorganisms display a behaviour characteristic of larger animals.”? Dimethylsulfide (DMSP) helps marine microorganisms find food (or prey on those microorganisms)!

Seymour’s paper seems trivial from a climate science perspective, but this post seems to be just an opportunity to encourage commenters to rubbish a scientific paper that happens to mention climate change impacts.

Comment of the week

Posted on by
3

Comment of the week: Anthony Watts thinks a goofy comment about the vileness of “academia” is worth making special note of. Note the incorrect punctuation and embrace of stereotype when Alexander Feht says:

I completely understand, why Christopher Monckton felt a need to make an example of a typical reprehensible representative of modern Academia.

So Watts Up With That is now officially anti-academic? An odd perspective for a “science” website.

Funny though, it’s Monckton’s response to Prof. Abraham’s analysis that is full of arm-waving bluster.

Condensed Monckton

Posted on by
7

Condensed Monckton: Anthony Watts takes a break from managing Steven McIntyre’s Climate Audit blog to help fellow denialists support “Lord” Monckton’s call for e-mail harassment of Prof. John Abraham of St. Thomas University (which Monckton calls a “half-assed Catholic Bible college”). Condensed in the sense of “no need to think, just click on the handy e-mail links and start ranting!”

So what’s triggered this? Prof. Abraham released a devastating analysis of Monckton’s intentionally misleading arguments against Global Warming. Monckton’s wounded ego has led to a two-pronged response:

  1. A call for denialists to pester St. Thomas University to remove Prof. Abraham’s analysis. So ironic! I thought denialists were in a state of constant lividity over perceived suppression of their arguments and ‘ground-breaking research’…
  2. Releasing a ‘response’ that consists of 84 pages and 466 idiotic questions (5 mb PDF) on that scientific clearinghouse the denialist Science and Public Policy Institute. Yes, 466 of them. Monckton’s massive rant is getting plenty of hilarious dissection. Here are a few:

The University of St. Thomas’ final response to Monckton, after a short e-mail exchange?

We received your email response to our June 25, 2010 letter. The University of St Thomas respects your right to disagree with Professor Abraham, just as the University respects Professor Abraham’s right to disagree with you. What we object to are your personal attacks against Father Dease, and Professor Abraham, your inflammatory language, and your decision to disparage Professor Abraham, Father Dease and The University of St Thomas.

Please be advised that neither we nor the University of St Thomas will communicate with you any further about your decision to sully the University of St. Thomas, Professor Abraham, and others rather than to focus on the scholarly differences between you and Professor Abraham.

Signed: Phyllis Karasov, Moore Costellow and Hart, P.L.L.P.

Denialists are actually casting this as proof that Monckton’s “rebuttal” has won the day!

Anthony; you’re out of your scientific depth (think playground splash pad) and you’re tying yourself to a boat anchor…

Arctic Ocean ice retreating at 30-year record pace

Posted on by
17

“Arctic Ocean ice retreating at 30-year record pace“. Steven Mosher is suddenly sniffing that short-term Arctic Sea Ice trends don’t mean anything. I guess short-term climate trends are only legitimate if they can be used to ‘prove’ that Global Warming is either non-existent or natural. They’re definitely not legitimate evidence that Global Warming is real or man-made. Ah, the hypocrisy.

His understandable indignation was triggered by an article about declining Arctic Sea Ice in The Montreal Gazette that was based on such wild sources as… the measurements of the National Snow and Ice Data Center and the research of University of Manitoba polar scientist David Barber.

Actually, short-term trends aren’t very meaningful for climate prediction. But you can be sure the denialists will swing back to touting them as soon as they can find one that suits them.

Book Review – Climatism

Posted on by
Reply

“Book Review – Climatism“. Anthony Watts has discovered Climatism!, “a wonderful, extremely factual, and very timely book” by “engineer and former business executive” Steve Goreham. William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus, reviews it for him in four short paragraphs. Apparently it’s all down to “world government” and “political chicanery“. Okey dokey.

Then and now, Europe, US to see snowy, cold winters: expert

Posted on by
4

“Then and now, Europe, US to see snowy, cold winters: expert“. Charles Rotter thinks that Dr. James Overland re-evaluating predictions in a story on physorg.com means that he’s just making it up as he goes along. So Charles does some making it up of his own with some pretend quotes.

Who said this? Not Dr. Overland.

We used to think that a warming Arctic with melting ice would be part of a warming trend, but instead, we got a lot of snow and cold weather, so the warming Arctic kinda messed with all those, you know, patterns and stuff like that we expected like.

But is the Arctic warming? Yes. Don’t give up the day job, Charles.

Scientists unmask ‘Ghost Mountains’ of Antarctica at last

Posted on by
1

“Scientists unmask ‘Ghost Mountains’ of Antarctica at last“. Steven Mosher copy and pastes a report titled Scientists unmask ‘Ghost Mountains’ of Antarctica at last from Newsdesk.org. They’ve created a detailed map of the Gamburtsev Mountain Range of Antarctica, buried under kilometers of ice, using radar techniques.

To Anthony Watts’ readers this interesting development is ignorantly interpreted as “we don’t know so much about this planet we live on after all”. The comments, predictably, devolve into a series of complaints about government-sponsored “scientists” and phony scientists that leech off the taxpayers via the government. Another day, another pavlovian response.

Concentration vs. Extent

Posted on by
Reply

“Concentration vs. Extent“. Steven Goddard plays word games to try to slip out of his unsupported Arctic Sea Ice claims. He’s nothing if not intransigent!

Steven used to argue about ice extent (surface area) but the ice volume facts completely undercut his position. Now he’s talking about ice “concentration”. This is pretty much just a variation on volume, but it lets him slip away from his claims about extent.

To do this though Steven has to baldly claim that his chosen model, PIPS 2.0, is the proper one to use because it’s the only one that he can use to claim that “concentration” is not collapsing too. The better model is PIOMAS, but unfortunately it doesn’t support his claims.

Funny how quickly the outrage over using “models” disappears when denialists like Steven find one that they think they can exploit.

How ’bout the numbers? Arctic sea ice extent is currently about 270,000 km² lower than the “record low” of 2007. Arctic sea ice volume is also down since then, by about 300 km³.