Newly discovered planet may have water on its surface

Posted on by
1

“Newly discovered planet may have water on its surface“. Anthony Watts pastes in a University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa press release about a newly discovered planet that appears to be in the “Goldilocks Zone” where liquid water can exist. If you want to learn more that Anthony’s “Look! A pony!” post, try Bad Astronomy.

Although its merely 20 light years away it’s calculated to be at least three times the Earth’s mass. So not a good fall-back position if we take Anthony’s word that global warming isn’t bad (and also isn’t happening).

The Royal Society’s Toned Down Climate Stance

Posted on by
3

“The Royal Society’s Toned Down Climate Stance“. The Global Warming Policy Foundation (urging no policy because there is no warming) has jumped on the pretend bandwagon and “welcomed the Royal Society’s decision to revise and tone down its position on climate change.” They tell us the the Royal Society now agrees with them, and they’re now BFFs.

Whatever. The actual Royal Society pamphlet is in full agreement with the “consensus view” and the despised IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report.

Threshers - in - spaaaace!

Funny that the commenters are mistaking the labeled sketch of the Cryosat satellite on the Royal Society’s publication for an old-fashioned thresher while also talking about how they’re going to “teach the scientists.” Groan.

No evidence for Clovis comet catastrophe, archaeologists say

Posted on by
1

“No evidence for Clovis comet catastrophe, archaeologists say“. Maybe the Clovis people, the earliest known culture to inhabit North America, disappeared after an ancient comet impact. Maybe not. Maybe they just changed their favourite tools. Whatever.

Stick to what you do best, Anthony, or your troops will get restless.

Extreme Weather, Extreme Claims

Posted on by
1

“Extreme Weather, Extreme Claims“. The ever-impartial think-tank Science and Public Policy Institute, home to any and all denialists itching to see their name in print, is offering Dennis Ambler’s latest pamphlet, Extreme Weather Extreme Claims. Apparently this summer’s heat wave and forest fires in Russia, the floods in Pakistan, etc. could have been taken care of if we had redirected all that foolish climate research money  into fire-hoses and rafts.

Sorry, that’s as much brain-power as I can bear to spend on Dennis’s stupidity.

Can someone explain why Dennis has used two photos twice each on the cover?

Royal Society blinks – embraces sceptics and uncertainty

Posted on by
Reply

“Royal Society blinks – embraces sceptics and uncertainty“. The Royal Society has released a 19-page layman’s guide to climate change science. Because it’s fairly cautious and restricts itself to the physical science of climate change the denialist industry, including dear Anthony Watts, is trying to crow that the Royal Society has “blinked” and changed their position on climate change (i.e. that it’s real).

So did the Royal Society suddenly realise that their 43 “rebellious” members were right and their 1700 other members were not? No. The document states right off the bat that there is “strong evidence that the warming of the Earth over the last half-century has been caused largely by human activity”. If this is what passes for turning tail and running these days it’s a pretty thin gruel.

Here’s the desperate little nub the denialists are pinning their hopes on – pretending that any awareness of uncertainties is new:

“The size of future temperature increases and other aspects of climate change, especially at the regional scale, are still subject to uncertainty.” (italics mine)

“There is little confidence in specific projections of future regional climate change, except at continental scales.” (italics mine)

Well, duh. Useful regional predictions may not be possible in this decade, but global ones have been made and are coming to pass. Royal Society vice president John Pethica says “If the report sounds cautious, that’s because the IPCC is cautious” and “There is no change in the science.” Their statement from December 2009, Preventing dangerous climate change, (pdf here) stands unchanged, as does their 2007 Climate change controversies: a simple guide.

That 2007 pamphlet remains an effective rebuttal to Anthony’s most recent posts, which shows just how stagnant and intellectually bankrupt the denialist arguments are. Funny or sad? I guess it depends on your perspective.

Nicole lasts all of 6-hours as a named tropical storm

Posted on by
2

“Nicole lasts all of 6-hours as a named tropical storm“. Tropical storm Nicole peters out after six hours, so Anthony Watts sniffs that the climate scientist conspiracy is giving names to smaller storms so they can inflate the numbers and trick the denialists into surrendering.

Of course since this tropical storm is the only evidence of AGW, at least for the purposes of this denialist talking point, it’s decline is the final nail in the coffin of global warming.

White House science advisor Holdren’s climate slide show at Kavli

Posted on by
Reply

“White House science advisor Holdren’s climate slide show at Kavli“. Oh noes! A White House science advisor gives a speech on the topic of climate change intended for the public and doesn’t use 3,000 footnotes! I guess he didn’t learn anything from the example of the Wegman Report. Anthony Watts has him dead to rights, John Holdren’s generalized statements will never survive Anthony’s micro-nit-picking.

John Holdren’s Keynote Address to the 2010 Kavli Prize Science Forum.

Remember when the White House could be counted on to do The Right Thing? You know, muzzling NASA climate scientists, editing EPA reports to conform with political agendas, etc. The good old days, right Anthony?

Quote of the Week – David Suzuki, a farce of nature

Posted on by
1

“Quote of the Week – David Suzuki, a farce of nature“. Anthony Watts is irritated that renowned Canadian biologist David Suzuki has the nerve to say that “we have joined God, powerful enough to influence these [hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, drought, forest fires, earthquakes, volcanic explosions] events.” Maybe he’s just alarmed that someone is stating the obvious: humanity’s actions can and do affect our weather and our climate. Never! It’s all natural!

Come on Anthony, you might well argue about the intensity of our influence, but you’re just being sullen if you try to deny it altogether with nothing but links to your own lame blog as evidence.

Pielke on ground water extraction causing sea level rise

Posted on by
7

“Pielke on ground water extraction causing sea level rise“. Roger Pielke Dr. discovers a new excuse for why sea-level is rising – groundwater extraction! Yes, we’re sucking our way to oblivion. Groundwater extraction is causing sea-level rise! No need to turn off the power plants after-all.

A rising tide floats all boats? Source: Wikipedia.

Actually, Groundwater extraction is a well-known contributor to local subsidence. Happens over oil fields. Happens in areas of intensive irrigation by groundwater. Happens naturally in river deltas as the weight of new sediments squeezes water out of underlying sediment. Happens over underground mining operations sometimes. Is it really the cause of sea-level rise, or just a contributing factor?

I wonder what the article Pielke Sr. briefly notes and that Anthony Watts wants us to believe is YAFNCSLR (Yet Another Final Nail in the Coffin of Sea-Level Rise) really says?

“Although the role of groundwater depletion in rising sea levels had already been acknowledged, it was not addressed in the most recent IPCC report due to a lack of reliable data to illustrate the severity of the situation. Our study confirms that groundwater depletion is, in fact, a significant factor.” (italics mine)

Hmm… They suggest that about a quarter of the sea-level rise can be attributed to groundwater extraction, which of course means that Pielke and Watts are conveniently forgetting the other three-quarters. Still, that’s 7.62928887 × 1013 gallons of groundwater drawn out every year! An interesting topic, but for Pielke and Watts it’s just a useful factoid that has served the purpose of distracting their readers.

It’s tiresome to repeat these criticisms, but why does Pielke Sr. have to keep making false representations about AGW?

“This is yet another paper that shows the interconnection among the components of the climate system. The attribution of a climate effect (in this case sea level rise) to just one cause (e.g. ocean warming and glacial melt due to positive radiative forcing from anthropogenic greenhouse gases) is too narrow of a perspective.”

Show me a scientific paper that claims that modern sea-level rise is entirely due to AGW! He’s dismissing an argument that was never made. (That’s called a straw-man.)

Admission of unfair dealings by DEC to the Thompsons

Posted on by
Reply

“Admission of unfair dealings by DEC to the Thompsons“. The “tragic” Thompson family feed-lot saga in Australia continues; the Department of Environment and Conservation heavies may have blinked! But is it “governmental abuse”, or are the Thompsons being held up as martyrs because they expressed denialist sentiments and drew the wrath of intolerant environmentalists?

Maybe that’s why Anthony Watts is taking such an interest, it’s a two-fer! Oppressive government (by the way Australia’s “Liberal” parties are an analog for America’s Republicans, so you might want to re-think some of the invective) and fascist environmentalists! Delicious.

Well, they’re both the final nail in the coffin for AGW, right?