“Greenpeace’s Free Climate Pedometers at COP16“. Another snide post from Anthony Watts about environmental awareness activities at the UN COP16 climate conference in Cancun. Whatever.
“What really goes on at COP16 in Cancun“. Hey, there are amateur environmentalist PR events at the COP16 UN climate conference in Cancun! I though amateurs were the best scientists around. Why is Anthony sneering now?
Of course its politics that really motivate Anthony Watts’ readers, so they dig in with gusto.
“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.
There’s been a remarkable drop in comment quality here over the last day or two, but a rather massive increase in visitors. Seems that this is down to a sudden and unexpected influx of Anthony’s readers.
The purpose of this blog is not school-yard taunting, it is to highlight Anthony Watts’ unending dishonesty and hypocrisy. Sue me if I start to find it all a bit comical.
Please note that all comments are screened here. Don’t expect any more insightful denialist arguments like “bet you got a small dick” to make it through. Don’t stink up the place!
“Rebuild California! Vote for your favorite Jerry Brown commercial idea“. Anthony Watts seems to think that California candidate for Governor Jerry Brown is an evil librul who probably doesn’t care about Central Valley farmers. And those kooky Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 23) defenders fussin’ about greenhouse gases are just going to end up with dusty solar panels! Get with the Texan industrial program and vote for Proposition 23!
Is he making fun of the submissions to Brown’s promotion of voter-submitted advertising ideas, or does he think his readers are perfect candidates to submit them?
“Skeptical Science? John Cook – embarrassing himself“. Somehow John Cook calling Anthony Watts a “denier” is an embarrassment. Anthony’s in full thin-skinned rant mode here, and it seems that poor John is now dead to Anthony. It’s Anthony’s tantrum that seems embarrassing.
Anthony’s so incoherent about this that he seems to have manufactured a quote from Cook’s Skeptical Science website claiming that “the usual suspects in natural climate change – solar variations, volcanoes, Milankovitch cycles – are all conspicuous in their absence over the past three decades of warming.” He then thinks he has refuted them with a series “oh yeahs?”. I’m sure that John would actually say that the natural variations simply don’t correlate to the warming we’ve experienced.
John’s also apparently “smug” for restricting himself to peer-reviewed scientific literature and using “the ugly word denier”, and his associate Dr. John Bruno gets taken to task for being nice to Anthony once but only once. This is just a train wreck of a post.
“Ocean cooling contributed to mid-20th century global warming hiatus (and so did the PDO)“. Poor Anthony Watts seems in a foul mood here. Muttering about news story that doesn’t give him access to all the data, references to “public money”, particularly asinine comments about press release photos (where on earth does “grinning like a banshee” come from?), etc. You’d think he’d be clutching at a report about oceanic cooling with both hands…
Maybe he’s irritated that Dr. Phil Jones, who the denialists tried to bring down with the false “Climategate” controversy is publishing science again? Or is it that the paper discusses cooling, which the lying climatologists supposedly never talk about and he has no idea how to react.
So the paper in question is being published as a Letter in Nature titled An abrupt drop in Northern Hemisphere sea surface temperature around 1970 (here’s the abstract). It says that “the hiatus of global warming in the Northern Hemisphere during the mid-20th century may have been due to an abrupt cooling event centered over the North Atlantic around 1970, rather than the cooling effects of tropospheric pollution.” Don’t you just hate it when scientists observe things and try to understand them?