Why the CO2 increase is man made (part 1)

Why the CO2 increase is man made (part 1). A rare bit of reality pops up unexpectedly on Anthony Watts’ blog. Yes, the increase in atmospheric CO2 is effectively all man-made, says Ferdinand Engelbeen.

Oh, here’s the catch; Engelbeen has left himself an escape hatch for the ensuing denialist assault. The increase in atmospheric CO2 apparently has limited impact on temperature. This is to be discussed later.

So that’s why Anthony offered a bit of “mainstream” perspective. He’s trying to gently steer his readers away from embarrassing attacks on scientific evidence and on to new and more flexible topics.

Sensenbrenner Report Challenges EPA Greenhouse Finding

Sensenbrenner Report Challenges EPA Greenhouse Finding“. Anthony Watts gives us part of a post by the right-wing media outlet Pajamas Media about a “staff report” produced for Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner “on the scientific issues that tend to discredit the EPA’s endangerment finding for carbon dioxide as a pollutant.” (emphasis mine.)

This is pretty funny, as I’ve been reading selections of the EPA’s response to submissions opposing the recent finding that CO2 emissions have environmental consequences. They’re straight-faced but hilarious slap downs of denialist stupidity. You can find a bunch of them at Rabett Run.

They’re also excited to report that the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will be hearing testimony from “noted skeptic (as well as a Pajamas Media contributor)” Christopher Monckton, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley. This is called an “own goal” in soccer.

Pielke Sr. on Revkin’s question

Pielke Sr. on Revkin’s question“. In spite of abundant evidence to the contrary, Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. is more convinced than ever that NO! is his answer to a question posed in 2005 by journalist Andy Revkin: “Is most of the observed warming over the last 50 years likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations?”

He now says that Dr. Spencer’s assertion that it’s all because of a reduction in cloud cover, in a somehow on-going 50 year pattern, explains it. Especially since he still thinks the “missing heat” statement by Kevin Trenberth last month was an admission that the heat “wasn’t there” rather than that it can’t be identified by current instrumentation.

Dr. Pielke backs his assertion with a collection of references to debunked denialist fellow-travelers and right-wing “conferences”. Confirmation bias in three, two, one, now.

[Note: In the comments Dr. Pielke thanks the WUWT readers for editorial corrections. My god, sloppy typing as well as sloppy thinking!]

Mann 2008 a Victim of Sudden Oak Death?

Mann 2008 a Victim of Sudden Oak Death?” Anthony Watts is eager to join the new round of uninformed nit-picking over tree ring chronologies. He posts some comments from Canadian sourpuss Steve McIntyre on the subject, quote-mining various news reports. Otherwise, his contribution is a Star Trek and Peanuts graphic and a link to a whack-a-mole copy of the Dr. Mann “spoof” video.

Dr. Mike Baillie of Queen’s University in Belfast has stated that the oak tree ring data he is being forced to release is not useful for temperature proxies, but the infamous Dr. Mann uses some oak ring data in his hated “hockey stick” temperature reconstruction. This clearly proves that the “hockey stick” is a lie! Or something. If you ignore all the other data.

Wait, do Anthony or McIntyre have any idea why Dr. Mann included this data in his reconstruction? Um, no. Doesn’t seem to stop them from complaining though, does it?

Second Mann spoof video removed

Second Mann spoof video removed“. Anthony Watts says that “Somebody just can’t handle satire.” I think the real problem is that somebody is determined to slander a scientist.

But fear not, another ambitiously named astroturf outfit called “Minnesota Majority” has popped up, Whack-A-Mole style, to re-post it.

This reminds me of watching drunken streakers at a college football game.

[Funny, the “Minnesota Majority”, springing to the defense of “Minnesotans For Global Warming” has the same principals. Astroturf puffery.]