Quote of the Week #18 – "fait accompli"

What happened is that, collectively as a society, we forgot why we write things down as they happen, and we also forgot to check the past. What that leads to is yet another hysterical panic over that which we have no control over. The assumption was that man had ascended into control over the climate, and had overridden it. When things started to change, the behavior of those who proclaimed the warming message got desperate. Seeking to silence the opposition and alter the record of the past proved to be a big undoing. Further, the alliance of the warmist with political ambitions has led to intense political opposition, and yes, they have made hard political enemies.
Today, as we watch the progression of years grow colder despite the alteration of records, as we hear pounding alarms in stark contrast to what is going on outside, there is a story unfolding. It’s the Sun. Having zero control or predictive power over it, the attempts to bury the spectacle has instead fueled consternation and scurried digging into the past in an effort to peg how is stacks up.
NASA calls it Deep Solar Minimum, and it’s no fluke.
It’s consequences can only be surmised in a vague manner, not knowing how long it will last or how low it will sink.
For now, it is truly the science story of the 21st Century.

I’m waiting for Andy Revkin to flip. It’s not as if he hasn’t been properly instructed, and I’ve faith in his honesty and his curiosity. He’s been a long term global warming believer, though.
=================================

Better late than never.
Although it must be said that in general the big media and their journalist have
performed a very bad job on the issue.
The word “disgrace” is a rightful description of their performance.

Even the Dutch Tulip craze finally collapsed and so will AGW, but at the cost of vast amounts of money spent for nothing. What worries myself as a scientist, is the climate science selection of data to prove the AGW viewpoint and the tossing out of any data that contradicts it. In Australia, proof was offered of how droughts were becoming commonplace – based only on the last 50 years. Including the records back to 1850 actually showed that there was nothing out of the ordinary.
Science itself – not just Climate Science – is taking on the aspect of arguments based on feelings rather than logic. That is bad for everybody.

Well news.com.au still thinks the science is settled. In their 2009 “Green Awards” (http://www.news.com.au/features/0,,5019059,00.html) (You know Easter is to Christians as “Green Awards” is to Alarmists.) they awarded the “Can Do Better” Award to Australian Senator Steven Fielding, because he actually dared to ask why the world had cooled over the past few years whilst CO2 went up. It appears he’s a Warming Alarmist Heretic!

Tip of the day ~ Do not stand in front of fans or on rugs. Seems that AGW believers (among others) are doing both. Real science will survive, its blemishes quickly forgiven and forgotten (think geology & plate tectonics).

Check out this link: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17742-worlds-climate-could-cool-first-warm-later.html Looks like the warmists are getting their excuses ready:

kim- you say “I’m waiting for Andy Revkin to flip. ”
If he does, it will be subtle. He will lose a lot of faithful readers if he does noticeably shift. I spend a fair amount of time over at Dot Earth.
Andy’s posts recently have had an interesting trend. There are a lot of posts on touchy-feely topics (happiness, how many people is too much, etc.). The reduced number of posts of substance on climate science/fiction have occasionally been presented as a question rather than a certainty. Commenters have shown increasing annoyance with Andy’s lack of catastrophic certainty in his post titles.
I don’t pay much attention to the details in Andy’s posts. Its the comments by the regulars (alarmists, zero-pops, pyschobabblers, AGW catastrophists, left-coasters, urban tree-huggers, renewable energy advocates) that are entertaining, although the comments from the regulars are becoming predictable.

chris y 15:18:30
You have been following DotEarth closely enough to catch Andy’s subtle shift. Fortunately for him, he has an even greater obsession than climate and that is the sustainability of nine billion people on earth and general environmental concerns. Those will save him when he finally understands that the CO2=AGW paradigm is mistaken.
There are many more effective voices over there than mine, now, but I started commenting regularly in ’08 during and after the epic AGU thread, and up until the NYT required registration. Those most disgusted with me over there started calling it DotKim. I’ll repeat, I believe in and trust Andy Revkin’s honesty and curiosity to guide him to the truth sooner rather than later.
=======================================

rbateman (12:54:21) :
“Solar Minimum”
“For now, it is truly the science story of the 21st Century”.
And how right you are!

Bad science and consensus science is certainly nothing new. Ever read, in Scientific American, “50, 100 and 150 Years Ago”? It is sometimes hilarious almost to the point of being tragic. I just hope we don’t have to wait 50 years to laugh at all this or it will surely be tragic.

KimW (13:41:36) : “What worries myself as a scientist, is the climate science selection of data to prove the AGW viewpoint and the tossing out of any data that contradicts it.”
“Science itself – not just Climate Science – is taking on the aspect of arguments based on feelings rather than logic. That is bad for everybody.”
Yes, there are many scientists that are blind to this “rot”, a few even prominent on this website, but as the number of scientists become self-aware of the problems confronting the discipline, the more likely it actually will be self-correcting.
But a few scientists will have to be made an example of and be publically disgraced to get the message across.
Humiliation and shame and the desire to avoid same are an effective tool for correcting over-bloated egos.