“Extraterrestrial Global Warming“. Anthony Watts hints at the idiotic denialist idea that other planets are warming too, so Earth’s Global Warming (which isn’t happening!) is natural too. This is deliberately ignorant and wrong.
“Hey dude, where’s my solar ramp up?” David Archibald pastes in some charts of solar activity. Thanks I guess.
“Sea Ice Graphs Have Limited Predictive Value“. Steven Goddard decides that since the sea ice charts aren’t illustrating his desired climate trend he’d better start deprecating them. Funny, for a few weeks there he thought they were definitive! Now, they don’t tell you anything until August. Now he admits that:
The fact that April, 2010 had the highest extent in the DMI record tells us little or nothing about the summer minimum.
As a backup, he posts a photo of Barrow, Alaska with dirty-looking snow. Therefore all increased Arctic snow or ice melt is due to dirt, not Global Warming. Got it.
“Off to the conference“. Anthony Watts’ is off to the right-wing Heartland Institute’s 4th International Conference on Climate Change. All the regular lunatics will be there, all the legitimate scientists will be as far away as possible. The right-wing activists are trying to build the event up in their usual way.
I wonder what new scientific insights will astound us all?
“NIWA’s Kiwi Kaper“. Anthony Watts gravely informs us of an uncovered climate conspiracy in New Zealand. But fear not, a “skeptical” (right-wing) New Zealand politician is calling for the replacement the existing New Zealand NIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research) climate record of a 0.92°C twentieth-century warming trend with something more ‘suitable’. Namely that it should be depicted as “remarkably steady at 12.6°C“.
A former politician named Barry Brill tries to fake it up with a “substantial essay” on a right-wing Australian website called Quadrant Online. Barry is also Chairman of the fraudulent denialist “New Zealand Climate Science Coalition”, caught in 2009 telling flat-out lies about NZ weather records.
The claims are all about “smuggled data” from Dr. Jim Salinger that doesn’t gibe with denialist’s anecdotal recollections, cherry-picked counter-examples and imputed political motivation. Somehow a conspiracy to manipulate climate data was initiated in 1994 in order to support a left-wing political agenda created in 2007.
Here’s the response from the NIWA to the denialist games. The above chart illustrates the dishonesty of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition’s claim that temperatures have been “remarkably steady“. There’s a “kaper” alright, Anthony. You’re part of it.
“Now it’s caterpillar outbreaks caused by global warming“. Anthony Watts is annoyed by an article in The Independent titled “Caterpillar plague on Isle of Wight was caused by climate change, says expert“. Here’s the offensive passage:
In general, these insects are getting worse in this country because the climate is changing and the summers are getting warmer.
Outrageous! Hopefully Anthony’s readers will flood the article comments with truth.
“Satellite Temperatures and El Niño“. Steven Goddard has convinced himself that recent satellite temperature observations are “too warm”. He’s compared them the surface temperature records and decided that the satellite record is somehow incorrect because of unspecified El Niño effects. Maybe it’s because of aliens with investments in carbon-neutral technologies?
I thought that the surface temperature records were hopelessly contaminated by Urban Heat Island effect, human incompetence and malevolent selection and were to be ignored (because they showed a strongly significant warming trend) in favor of the purity of satellite measurements (a useful delaying tactic because they were too new to have good statistical meaning). I guess the surface temperature records are fine when they suit the denialist argument du jour.
Here’s what happens: The surface temperature record is only observed at the surface. Satellite measurements reflect a much ‘thicker’ selection of the atmosphere. The vertical transport of heat/moisture has a lag of several months and hence satellite measurements will normally trail surface measurements.
“A surprising change in the ‘eye roller’ public slogan of NOAA“. Anthony Watts takes note of an important change in the NOAA mission statement. What was once:
“NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.”
is now this:
“NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources.”
Oohh, that’s the first crack in the armor for Anthony. They’re admitting that they don’t have perfect knowledge! Next they’ll be admitting that they made everything up all along!
My head is spinning, my world has been rocked.
“Climate Craziness of the Week – New Scientist: The Denial Depot Edition“. New Scientist has printed a number of articles about “denialism”. Anthony Watts thinks it’s a “sanctioned hatefest” and that New Scientist is now “nothing more that a political science mouthpiece.” Anthony makes sure his readers can get to the articles and bombard the comments.
Why are any articles critical of climate change denial proof that the publication is corrupt, while supportive articles are always evidence of courageous reporting. Confirmation bias is a funny thing.
So why do so many people refuse to accept the evidence? What are the clear lines between scepticism and denial? How does denialism satisfy deep emotional needs? Do smokescreens really work wonders for big business? Is it easy to send a lie flying around the world, and almost impossible to shoot it down? Must we let denialists be heard, and respond with patience, vigilance and tireless rebuttal? Is calling an opponent a denier is illiberal, intolerant and ineffective?
That’s some uncomfortable reading there Anthony. Unless you can convince yourself to dismiss it as a “hatefest”.
“Now it’s more CO2 that will threaten crops“. But plants love CO2! Anthony Watts is confused by this UC Davis press release. Apparently “Rising CO2 levels threaten crops and food quality”. What’s confusing about this, Anthony:
…findings from previous research by Bloom and colleagues suggested that elevated levels of carbon dioxide decreased photorespiration and inhibited nitrate assimilation in plant shoots.
Oh, maybe that ‘whole CO2 is good thing’ isn’t going to stick, even though the partisans at CO2Science.org have an “amazing video”.
Wott's Up With That? 