Category Archives: I Can't Hear You!

Climate Clash: Aussie Senator Malcolm Roberts Owns TV Physicist Brian Cox

Posted on by
4

“Climate Clash: Aussie Senator Malcolm Roberts Owns TV Physicist Brian Cox” (2016-08-16). In which Anthony Watts’ stand-in Eric Worrall trumpets racist Australian science-denier Senator Malcolm Roberts getting laughed at as a triumph. Perhaps that’s as good as it gets for denialists these days?

Strange that Senator Roberts, who Worrall boasts has “expert knowledge of climate datasets” is unaware that the raw temperature datasets have been available for decades and that they closely mirror the maliciously falsified corrected-for-station-errors version.

Senator Roberts is (was?) part the loopy Galileo Movement (because they, and only they, are as s.m.r.t and insightful as that old Italian). He wants to ban muslim clothing and put surveillance cameras in mosques and has alluded to both UN and jewish world conspiracies. Damn, I picking him next time I play Denialist Bingo!

Here are a couple of amusing links:

Members quitting the American Meteorological Society over stance on climate

Posted on by
7

“Members quitting the American Meteorological Society over stance on climate“ (2013-06-21). “This can’t be good” says Anthony Watts. Everyone’s quitting the American Meteorological Society because it’s an oppressive, dogma driven, anti-science organization! Global Warming is over!

Anthony knows this because renowned climate scientist Steve Milloy brought it to his attention. Steve Milloy is a Fox News commentator who runs junkscience.com (no, he’s not self-aware enough to know that his URL describes what he does) along with a variety of related political front organizations.

So, how many gullible meteorologists are left in that decrepit society? Three down, 13,997 to go. This is what Anthony wants us to think is denialist momentum?

What outrageous lies are the henchmen at the AMS trying to pass off as science? Here’s a taste:

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research. – Climate Change: An Information Statement of the American Meteorological Society

Oh, that’s the same thing that literally every international scientific organization says. They’re all in on it! Watts & Co. demand to see every single member’s signature or the S.O.s are all lying, natch.

Remember when Anthony claimed that elderly Hal Lewis quitting the American Physical Society was “on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door“? That turd sank pretty quickly too.

The only dissenting voice in the comments, “jai mitchell” found himself under “moderation” (meaning blocked) after a torrent of hostility and attempted intimidation.

The Anatomy of a Global Warming Smear

Posted on by
10

“The Anatomy of a Global Warming Smear” (2012-02-18). ¡Ay, caramba! Anthony Watts desperately posts fellow Heartland Institute funding recipient Alan Caruba’s full-on rant about climate science, apparently triggered by the Heartland Institute document leak. Also, he hates the New York Times.

Here’s some nuance for ya:

Suffice to say, the “climate science” served up by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been a pack of lies from the day it first convened.

Sing it brother! What next?

Next to oxygen, CO2 is vital to all life on Earth as it sustains all vegetation which in turn sustains every creature that depends on it as a source of food.

I guess as a good environmentalist I should rush outside and pant on some shrubs.

Thousands of scientists have signed petitions denouncing global warming as a hoax.

If you’re gonna stay stupid things like that someone should tell you about the internet. Your wannabe petitions were all fake petitions packed with unqualified names.

There’s a reason the theme of Heartland’s sixth conference in 2011 was “Restoring the Scientific Method.”

Cute misspelling of “undermining”.

2012-05-22 update: After much caterwauling by the Heartland Institute about forgeries and the shameful behavior of nasty warmists, the true conclusion can be drawn: “Peter Gleick cleared of forging documents in Heartland expose“

ATI press release on the Mann UVA emails

Posted on by
7

“ATI press release on the Mann UVA emails” (2011-08-27). Funny. You’d think that Anthony Watts would report the conclusions of the National Science Foundation Inspector General’s investigation into the accusation that climatologist, and denialist flash-point, Dr. Michael Mann falsified his data when he “created” the famous “hockey stick” historical temperature chart.

Instead Anthony offers the American Tradition Institute’s op-ed whining (italics mine).

The University of Virginia has joined a list of institutions claiming that there has been an actual inquiry into, and even ‘exoneration’ of, scientists exposed by the November 2009 “ClimateGate” leak, while simultaneously through its actions making a mockery of the idea.

Spoiler for you impatient types who can’t be bothered reading (or are trying to ignore) the National Tradition Science Foundation’s PDF:

We found no basis to conclude that the [Climategate] emails were evidence of research misconduct or that they pointed to such evidence.

Also,

There is no specific evidence that [Mann] falsified or fabricated any data and no evidence that his actions amounted to research misconduct.

Funny as in slapstick. Funny as in a bungled magician’s trick.

Time Travel and Causation in the Climate Debate

Posted on by
1

“Time Travel and Causation in the Climate Debate“  (May 16, 2011). Anthony Watts posts Craig Loehle’s petty irritation with the IPCC.

In the climate change debate, by contrast to physics, the force of GHGs and human evil is so great that it transcends time. Bad things happen BEFORE their cause. It is simply amazing.

He’s annoyed with the IPCC AR4 Report’s attribution chapter, in a general sort of way. Why doesn’t it restrict itself to the post-1950 era when man-made greenhouse gases (maybe) started to (maybe) influence climate? How dare they talk about glaciers in the 1850’s (um, see Skeptical Science), or that “impacts claimed by the IPCC to be likely in the distant future are claimed to be already evident.” After-all, changes predicted by the distant future must only happen in the distant future. All at once (or were they supposed to be a perfectly linear transition over time? I can never keep the story straight).

See, everything's fine! From Skeptical Science.

I guess he’s simply too worked-up to bother providing references or quotations for the IPCC’s implied scientific transgressions. It would help though.

Craig’s main peeve is that “Climate change will cause bad things, and climate change is happening. Therefore, if bad things happen it is due to climate change” is circular reasoning. Those lazy alarmists! QED, if that’s the way you choose to tell it. Strangely he has no problem with the denialist corollary that all climate change is natural, except in retrospect (Oops, too late).

Sea Ice News – Call for Arctic sea-ice forecasts, plus forecast poll

Posted on by
4

“Sea Ice News – Call for Arctic sea-ice forecasts, plus forecast poll“ (May 19, 2011). Pull the other one, Anthony Watts! I almost shot tea out of my nose reading Anthony’s blithe claim:

It has been awhile since I’ve done a sea-ice report. That said, not much of note has been going on in the sea-ice arena, we are in that time of year when all of the years converge into a tighter grouping.

I guess his stalwart bobble-heads were starting to need reassurance that Global Warming was still over. Unfortunately there are a few differing opinions out there:

Anthony even thought he could bluff his way past his own chart. Nice try. He does try to bury it among a busy collection of eye-glazing squiggles and bar charts.

Nothing to see here, says Anthony... My annotations in red.

Wegman paper retraction by Journal

Posted on by
10

“Wegman paper retraction by Journal” (May 16, 2011). Anthony Watts tries to dismiss the retraction of the denialist’s beloved Wegman Report because of “the caterwaulings of the anonymous Canadian named Deep Climate and his accusations of plagiarism”. Anthony sneers: “congratulations to Deep Climate for being able to attack a man in another country without having having [sic] to put your name behind it. Such courage. You must be proud.”

I always get a chuckle when Anthony’s howls for blood flip to whimpers of pain. It’s purest irony when a victim-bully accuses someone of cowardice.

Unfortunately, Deep Climate’s accusations were true. Wegman’s Report to Congress in 2006 was a sloppy piece of work produced to meet the political needs of the denialist Republican Congressman Joe Barton. Although widely rebutted, denialists held the Report up as evidence of both faulty statistical underpinnings for Dr. Mann’s so-called global temperature “hockey-stick” and of corruption in the scientific publication process. That Report[‘s” social network” accusations were] hastily reworked as Said, Wegman, et. al. (2008) in the un-related journal Computational Statistics and Data Analysis which has now, to their undoubted reluctant embarrassment, retracted it.

This is not a little technical “oops”, this is academic incompetence and ethical failure. Still, it’s an easy “spoonful of sugar” fix according to Anthony:

So, no problem from my view. I expect the report will be rewritten, with citations where needed, maybe even adding extra dictionary definitions of words and their origins to satisfy the imagined slights against our lexiconic ancestors envisioned by DC and Mashey man,  and they’ll resubmit it with the very same conclusions. That’s what I would do.

It sucks when something that denialists like yourself have been falsely clinging to for years is pulled down by a couple of intelligent observers, doesn’t it Anthony?

Extra irony: The Said, Wegman, et. al. (2008) paper was “personally reviewed” by CSDA chief editor Stanley Azen. Exactly the kind of cosy ‘social network’ peer-review manipulation they tried to accuse Dr. Mann and his co-authors of.

Update on May 18, 2011: Anthony has elaborated on his “no problem” plagiarism assessment, clarifying that he is in fact opposed to plagiarism. Also, Anthony has been the victim of it so he knows what he’s talking about. Anthony’s referring to the fact that someone (Dr. Menne) discourteously took his loud allegations of poor surface station data quality and proved him wrong using his own claims (this is now confirmed by Anthony’s own lame-duck paper). And then Menne failed to attribute a photo of a weather station to Anthony’s website!!!!!!!! Horrors. But that’s “attribution” not “plagiarism”.

Sea Ice News #25 – NSIDC says 2010 3rd lowest for Arctic sea ice

Posted on by
3

“Sea Ice News #25 – NSIDC says 2010 3rd lowest for Arctic sea ice“. Anthony Watts says to ignore that the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) press release reporting that September’s “Arctic sea ice extent was the third-lowest in the satellite record”. Don’t click-through and read it, just take Anthony’s word that it contains alarmist “zingers”. Like this outrageous statement:

Over the summer of 2010, weather and ocean conditions in the Arctic ranged from warm and calm to stormy and cool. Overall, weather conditions were not extremely favorable to melt, but ice loss proceeded at a rapid pace.

Focus on the JAXA and DMI charts, which suggest that in October “things are icing up quickly”. Well duh, it’s winter up there already…

Anthony and the slowly rehabilitating Steven Goddard can always find a cherry-picked counter-example. In this case, Anthony tries to deflect attention from the overall September record by talking about “a quick turnaround” in October and includes several of Goddard’s dumbed-down photoshopped graphics that only show the start of winter increase. He’s also careful to exclude  avoid any reference to Arctic Sea Ice volume.

The actual science-based NSIDC analysis is here.

Delivering Messages Is Not Communicating

Posted on by
2

“Delivering Messages Is Not Communicating“. Thomas Fuller rambles on in an “op ed” guest post about how “they” are losing the battle of “messages”. “They” need over-dramatize because:

there really isn’t enough data to make a definitive case for the type of climate change the establishment needs to command immediate and decisive action. (emphasis mine)

Andrew Montford’s book The Hockey Stick Illusion? Not defeated by a blog! Hah! Stephen Schneider’s paper about the credibility of climate change authors? Somehow, libelous! Environmental videos featuring exploding children? In poor taste! (I’ll give you that one.) Hair-splitting denialist scientists like Lindzen, Spencer, Christy? Still splitting hairs!

But what is the denialist messaging, Thomas? Climategate fraud accusations – proven to be fabricated. Political and legal attacks on scientists – proven to be unjustifiable. Statistical evidence disputing global warming – proven to be misreprentative.

Your ‘message’ is one of insinuation about their motives. “Their” message is that denialists are provably lying. Pick a side.

A reply to Vonk: Radiative Physics Simplified II

Posted on by
1

“A reply to Vonk: Radiative Physics Simplified II“. Denialist Jeff Id from “the Air Vent” tries to explain to the more enthusiastic followers of Anthony Watts’ blog why they shouldn’t make themselves look foolish defending Tom Vonk’s recent imaginative foray into radiative physics.

My statement is – CO2 does create a warming effect in the lower atmosphere.

Horrors! But the usual escape hatch is attached:

Before that makes you scream at the monitor, I’ve not said anything about the magnitude or danger or even measurability of the effect. I only assert that the effect is real, is provable, it’s basic physics and it does exist.

Lasers and canisters of CO2 explain it all. Source: WUWT figure 7.

After some simple-minded talk about lasers and canisters of gases Jeff declares that “NONE of this should create any alarm” and says that perhaps “CO2 then, can be considered nothing but plant food”. And of course we all must be reminded why the “true and high quality results from Anthony’s surfacestations project [is] so critically important.”