Quote of the Week – “I feel duped”

Miguel Rakiewicz writes in Tips and Notes:

Spiegel.com has today published the English translation of its interview of “The Cold Sun” author, Fritz Vahrenholt.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,813814,00.html

Not only is Vahrenholt a prominent Social Democrat and former German Environment Minister, but also outgoing CEO of the  renewable energy group RWE Innogy.

It’s an extensive interview, touching upon the various climate-influencing factors left out by the IPCC in its promotion of CO2 as the apocalyptic threat to mankind, and the massive government intervention and expense to supposedly make it go away.

“The Cold Sun” author explains the reason of his current point of view as
follows:

Vahrenholt:

For years, I disseminated the hypotheses of the IPCC, and I feel duped. Renewable energy is near and dear to me, and I’ve been fighting for its expansion for more than 30 years. My concern is that if citizens discover that the people who warn of a climate disaster are only telling half the truth, they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy). Then the conversion of our energy supply will lack the necessary acceptance.

About these ads
This entry was posted in IPCC and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

78 Responses to Quote of the Week – “I feel duped”

  1. Andrew says:

    Now that’s good stuff right there!

  2. Jim Cripwell says:

    Renewable energy only makes sense if it makes economic sense. It is as simple as that.

  3. kbray in california says:

    Is something lost in the translation?

    His lamenting sounds like he wants to keep duping the public…
    into accepting the cost of conversion to renewable energy.
    eh? That’s a betrayal.

  4. Josh C says:

    Well, I am glad that even though Renewable Energy is a gris-gris for him, he does what he feels is most honest.

    I will have to look for a downloadable English version…

  5. Ged says:

    The conversion of our energy supply will be accepted when we no longer have to “be prepared to pay higher electricity costs”. I.e. when renewables become economically sound instead of economical suicide.

  6. Darkinbad the Brightdayler says:

    Half the truth?
    As much as that?
    All good lies contain a little truth but I think the “inconvenient” cocktail was long on tonic and short on gin

  7. KenB says:

    When you “sell” something based upon a fundamental lie, and that fact is exposed to those convinced to buy only by the urgency of the lie, then it is odds on the exposure will be accompanied by a feeling of gullibility that the buyer was taken in, with a loss of trust in both the product and the promoter.

    The trick is to anticipate the exposure, the decline in trust, shift ground, blame someone else, rejig and try to regain trust by reframing the sales pitch if the product is half good, otherwise grab whatever profits you can and head to some Paradise where they can’t extradite you. There you continue to claim innocence or victimization, even write a book?

  8. Auto says:

    A little late, but a welcome apostasy.

  9. Jenn Oates says:

    Well…duh. I could have told you that a long time ago.

  10. Latitude says:

    …uh, excuse me, but I wasn’t willing to pay higher electricity bills in the first place
    and everything else that will be higher because of it

  11. Jesse says:

    I don’t disagree with the conversion from carbon-based energy to alternate energy sources, but I believe it should be done for the right reasons and in a sane/logical manner that won’t destroy our civilization as we know it. We can do better than we are now, but not with the hysteria that is currently driving the agenda.

  12. JJ says:

    “The Cold Sun” author explains the reason of his current point of view as
    follows:

    Vahrenholt:

    For years, I disseminated the hypotheses of the IPCC, and I feel duped. Renewable energy is near and dear to me, and I’ve been fighting for its expansion for more than 30 years. My concern is that if citizens discover that the people who warn of a climate disaster are only telling half the truth, they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy). Then the conversion of our energy supply will lack the necessary acceptance.

    That sounds more like the reason for his former point of view ….

  13. krazykiwi says:

    He feels duped? Consumers should feel duped by his insistance that they pay more for a costly alternative that is ‘near and dear’ to him

  14. Brian H says:

    He’s giving up on one dup-ed Cause to retain another? The Reality Bites demolition of AGW projections is, fortunately, paralleled by the financial and engineering implosions of renewables.

    If he feels disoriented now, he’ll have to take up full-time residence in a State Home For The Bewildered once the Renewables Scam also penetrates his mental miasma.

  15. Luther Wu says:

    “Concerned” are you, that your collaborators are only telling half the truth?
    They aren’t telling any truth.

  16. Simple says:

    The link seems broken…

    Frequent readers of wattsupwiththat know about the climatescam. But there are other scams, lots of them… I’m not gonna point them out, but as a general rule anything that is highly propagandized and where critics or sceptics are subject to ridicule or harrassment is highly suspect and should be looked at closely. The thing is that truths stand on its own merits. If it takes propaganda and discouraging those questioning something, it obviously can’t stand on its own. Then it’s often just a meme that’s designed to serve a purpose and has very little to do with truth or what’s good for mankind in general as opposed to a small clique of resource heavy individuals. As the climatescam falls apart, keep looking for the rest of those wicked memes and kill them off too.

  17. Brian H says:

    He’s giving up on one dup-ed Cause to retain another? The Reality Bites demolition of AGW projections is, fortunately, paralleled by the financial and engineering implosions of renewables.

    If he feels disoriented now, he’ll have to take up full-time residence in a State Home For The Bewildered once the Renewables’ Inanity also penetrates his mental miasma.

  18. Steve from Rockwood says:

    There are many on the front lines of alarmism who are true believers in AGW. If they “feel duped” enough to turn against the cause, they will end up as the alarmists fiercest opponents.

  19. Steve from Rockwood says:

    Link not working.

    REPLY: Checked, works just fine – A

  20. Tom G(ologist) says:

    Let’s have a hypothetical parody of Varenholt’s position. The year: 1975. “I learned today that what Jim Jones has been telling us is not wholly correct. That he has been ommitting some information from his sermons. That he has distorted the truth. This upsets me because. if thie becomes whidely known, then many followers might not accept the other things he has been telling us and we won’t get to go to that lovely commune in South America that I have been looking forward to……”

    Come on. I mean, I am glad this person is now a thinking person, but why should he have ANY delusions that the rest of the population SHOULD accept anything. it’s time for a system re-set.

  21. bair polaire says:

    In his book Vahrenholt describes that he felt duped and decided to write his book when he read Montford’s “The Hockey Stick Illusion” and realized the tricks Michael Mann used to get rid of the medieval warm period.
    Nobody shall say the hockey stick was all bad…

  22. JohnBUK says:

    “My concern is that if citizens discover that the people who warn of a climate disaster are only telling half the truth, they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy)”.
    Substitute the words, “half the truth” with “lies” and maybe it’ll become more understandable.

  23. John F. Hultquist says:

    Then the conversion of our energy supply will lack the necessary acceptance.

    Try telling the truth!

  24. Don K says:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,813814,00.html is the right address Unfortunately, that’s not where clicking on the link in the article takes one. It’s hard to describe the problem, but I don’t think you’ll have much trouble fixing things

    Thanks for posting the article.

  25. RockyRoad says:

    Why does this gentleman feel like citizens should be forced into the “necessary acceptance” of anything?

    WHY are they the elite? WHY are they the ones that determine what is acceptable or not? Isn’t that what has produced numerous horribly unacceptable kings and dictators throughout history? Isn’t that what has killed more people on the earth than anything else?

    The nerve of these people. The only thing that’s “necessarily acceptable” is individual freedom and the progress of responsible and educated citizens. Anything less is unacceptable.

  26. Latitude says:

    “Again, I want us to continue stressing renewable energy, which we have to make competitive.”
    =============
    “they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy)”
    =====================

    Mar 18, 2009 – Barack Obama: “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

  27. Gary Hladik says:

    Steve from Rockwood says (February 8, 2012 at 1:05 pm): “Link not working.”

    Try copying it to another browser window.

  28. kbray in california says:

    Vahrenholt may still be a little brainwashed.
    May I suggest therapy ?
    A cruise Way South this summer ?

    On the bright side, even a modicum of conversion back to reality
    lets the light start shining in on the brain cells,
    allowing room for more truth to enter.

  29. Joe Ryan says:

    What Mr. Vahrenholt is describing is precisely what I have been saying for decades in response to “What’s the worst that could happen?” from the Warmist crowd. The problem is they can’t see the effect that the global warming scam will have on the public at large when they eventually realize they have thrown trillion of dollars down a hole to stave off a catastrophe that was never going to happen.

    If Green, renewab;e energy is to survive it has to be sold on sound science, or at cheaper costs. There is no third way. Look at the gas crisis of the 1970s. By the early 80s we were accepting Geo Metros as the wave of the future because gasoline was going to cost an arm and a leg forever more… then the price of gas dropped and the SUV era blossomed. Absent the gasoline cost justification the consumer had no other reason for driving around in an aluminum egg with an engine that made moped owners feel butch.

    Now we are trying yet again to pull people off of fosile fuels with yet another bogus argument and the rebound will match extent of the alarmist message. So at this rate by the year 2020 we will all be driving Abrahams tanks.

  30. Me says:

    :lol: good stuff, even if ye snipped Me earlier post! But Me’s knows ye were laughing!

  31. manicbeancounter says:

    It is worth reading the whole article. Vahrenholt treads a moderate line here. He still thinks that 50% of warming is from CO2. His belief in renewables excludes solar as:-

    “Wind power and biomass are fine in Germany, but no solar panels, please! They’re better off in Africa and southern Europe. It’s crazy to install 50 percent of worldwide solar panels in “Solar Country Germany” for fear of the supposed climate disaster and to spend €8 billion ($10.4 billion) a year on it!”

    What Vahrenholt is saying is that we should put CO2 in context and is open to being proved wrong. That is an enormous step for a former believer. Those who have traveled further down the road should rejoice in this progression and encourage others to do so. Those who are younger, and with less baggage, will travel further as a result of the steps Vahrenholt has made.

  32. R de Haan says:

    It took Vahrenholt years to figure out he was duped on the CO2 story.
    I wonder how long itwill take before he understands that he’s also duped on wind, solar and bio fuels.

    If someone this prominent breaks ranks he should do it on all fronts.

    This is just half a job.

    We now have double digit freezing temperatures in Germany and high pressure so all the costly wind farms do nothing. Solar is covered by snow and everything that runs on bio fuels is out of business.

    The guy is still half an idiot,

  33. Jaypan says:

    This book is excellent and causing a lot of discussion. Rank 88 in Amazon right now, but the rapid response team has already begun to work hard. The usual kind of comments and concerted actions: He’s not a climate scientist, he works for Big energy, nothing new, already proven wrong …
    And then this, Stasi style observation: He and his co-author have joined a sceptic event (EIKE). “While V. spent some hours, his co-author joined them all day long.”
    Lots of sick people out there.

    .

  34. Paul Milligan says:

    If his admiration of renewable energy is not founded in concerns about AGW, I am guessing he has concerns about Peak Oil.

  35. Henry Galt says:

    The real, overriding problem here is that if you give money to rich people they squirrel most of it away. Give money to poor people and they spend it, so that it circulates and stimulates an economy instead of stalling it by hiding in tax havens and safe deposit accounts.

    The climate scam is just the latest implementation of this trick by the wealthy to push the poor more deeply into the mire. There are, and will be, others, as Simple, above, says.

  36. James Sexton says:

    R de Haan says:
    February 8, 2012 at 1:56 pm

    The guy is still half an idiot,
    =========================================================
    No, no…. he’s still a full fledged idiot. He’s just a better informed idiot than he was. You can’t fix stupid, you can only mitigate its effects. He’s been partially mitigated. It isn’t like this guy wasn’t told, he was for years. Now he has learned a bit of truth and he feels “duped”.

  37. Latitude says:

    This has me so mad…I can’t even see straight

    For years this expert know-it-all has been telling us we’re all going to die…
    …then he finally sit down and reads the science he’s been pushing

    and now he feels duped

    All those years……he just took their word for it….but promoted it, pushed it, argued the science, talked down to people that did read the science

  38. Robert Austin says:

    People are easily duped or self-duped when there is money to be made. Vahrenholt chose to be blinkered whilst acting as CEO for a renewable energy corporation. Allegedly, it was only after being figuratively whacked over the head with “The Hockey Stick Illusion” that the lights came on upstairs. Still, it’s a significant defection from the CAGW camp. A few more like this might turn the tide.

  39. TG McCoy (Douglas DC) says:

    “happiness is a warm fast breeder.”
    You need this for a high functioning civilization..

  40. u.k.(us) says:

    Vahrenholt:
    “For years, I disseminated the hypotheses of the IPCC, and I feel duped.”
    ============
    In Greek mythology, Sirens were part human, part bird. The Sirens lived on a rocky island in the middle of the sea, possibly near Italy. They sang melodies so beautiful that sailors passing by couldn’t resist getting closer to them. Following the sound of music, the sailors would steer their boats towards them or jump in the water to get closer. Either way, it always ended in disaster on the rocks.
    ——-
    It would seem, there is, truly, nothing new under our sun.

  41. DirkH says:

    kbray in california says:
    February 8, 2012 at 12:42 pm
    “Is something lost in the translation?

    His lamenting sounds like he wants to keep duping the public…
    into accepting the cost of conversion to renewable energy.
    eh? That’s a betrayal.”

    No, the translation is accurate.

    RockyRoad says:
    February 8, 2012 at 1:23 pm
    “Why does this gentleman feel like citizens should be forced into the “necessary acceptance” of anything?”

    He’s a Social Democrat.

  42. kbray in california says:

    His thinking is a little “on the fritz”…

    ?”off the fritz”?

  43. Jack Savage says:

    I think we are going to have a few more dramatic head in hands ” I was duped” conversions as some of the previous cheerleaders start seeing the revolting peasants gathering the torches, pitchforks, tar and feathers.
    This guy keeps his pension and now he gets his book royalties.
    As a former environment Minister, it was his duty not to be duped.
    &%$£*% them all!

  44. David Wells says:

    God survives because dead people can’t return to tell us its crap. The green myth survives only because humanity is inately superstitious and technically illiterate politicians think its a good idea to hedge their bets. This guy believes in renewable technology but whilst he is beginning to doubt the IPCC he fails to recognise that wind turbines can never replace coal, oil, gas or nuclear because their performance is weather dependent and therefore intermittant and you can neither run the met offices supercomputer or a hospital on a wind turbine. If there was a working alternative to fossil fuel then all of this bitching would disappear but there isn’t and that is crux of the problem.

  45. Robert Austin says:

    James Sexton says:
    February 8, 2012 at 2:29 pm
    This just demonstrates that the HSI is a supremely timely, important and influential publication. It is well researched, well written and accessible by the educated layman. The narrative compelling, a veritable “tour de force”.

  46. Delingpole’s blog has a good piece on this and subsequently a good piece on Windfarms in the Irish Independent.

  47. Goldie says:

    Unfortunately it looks like he hitched the renewable energy car to the AGW gravy train assuming it was a short cut to renewable utopia and then realised that the train was on the wrong track! Of course, the problem he is expressing is that we still need to find a sustainable low impact source of energy. Still because none of the current candidates will serve us in the long run or even the short run. There are no shortcuts!

  48. kakatoa says:

    It looks like the Italian government must of had an advanced copy of the book as
    “Italy to discontinue ground-mounted PV
    From July to December, Italy will not have a list for arrays larger than a megawatt because too much PV was installed last year. Those currently finishing the installation of a grount-mounted array have to hurry to be eligible for feed-in tariffs.” /

    “Legal experts say the sudden announcement is dubious, but for the moment the industry has to live with it. The stipulations remained basically unchanged, however. Solar arrays on farmland will not be eligible for feed-in tariffs unless they are smaller than a megawatt and take up less than 10 percent of the plot. Furthermore, the land in question has to have been unused for at least the past five years.” http://www.renewablesinternational.net/italy-pulls-up-deadline-for-farmland-pv/150/510/33029/www.renewablesinternational.net/italy-to-discontinue-ground-mounted-pv/150/510/32958/

  49. DirkH says:

    Paul Milligan says:
    February 8, 2012 at 2:19 pm
    “If his admiration of renewable energy is not founded in concerns about AGW, I am guessing he has concerns about Peak Oil.”

    Well, that’s just another pretense for the public (just like CAGW); the real and constant worry of Germans is energy security in a strategic sense; being a country that is relatively poor in energy resources. (this might change with future shale gas production in Northrhine Westphalia, though)

    Vahrenholt argues that wind power makes sense and is close to being economic in Germany while solar power is not. I think the subsidy tariffs are at the moment about 5 Eurocent for a wind power kWh and 24 cent for solar so the numbers for wind are at least not THAT bad for wind.

  50. acckkii says:

    Global Warming as a theory seems to be untenable. The reason in addition to many other issues, apparently may be Fritz Vahrenholt a German prominent green supporter who is no longer following IPCC. One nice GOAL for the pro CO2 anti global warming team. Long way still to go and our happiness may break at once I have a poem:

    “Look not for happiness from Fate,
    For all life’s yield is but a breath:
    Each grain of dust records the death
    Of some once lordly potentate.”

    “The world’s affairs, as so they seem,
    Nay, the universe complete
    Is a delusion and a cheat,
    A fantasy, an idle dream.”

  51. Goldie says:

    @David Wells -
    Interesting that two people with diametrically opposite views on God should write almost exactly the same response. :-)

  52. Robertvdl says:

    Nevertheless, we still have to reduce CO2 emissions through worldwide emissions trading.
    WHY ? If CO2 is not the problem.

    And there are also other reasons to burn fewer fossil fuels. We don’t have that much coal, oil and gas left in the world, so we have to economize more.
    So Africa has no right to have cheap energy? They have to stay in the dark. There is more than enough.

    We also have to become less dependent on imports from totalitarian countries.
    What does he thinks the EU is?

    I don’t trust this person. He is doing this for the Money. He still believes in Them controling You.

  53. TonyG says:

    Introduction & interviewer appear just a bit hostile to me

  54. Jeremy says:

    Vahrenholt:
    “For years, I disseminated the hypotheses of the IPCC, and I feel duped.”

    ————————

    Yes and we, the people, feel that you are an incompetent bungling idiot of a former environment minister! Of course you were duped.

    However, since you were also a former CEO of a renewable energy company then surely you are one of those also doing the duping! How about returning some of that wealth from tax-payer subsidized renewable energy?

  55. Walter Cronanty says:

    I’m glad he found some sense, but this is really bs:
    “My concern is that if citizens discover that the people who warn of a climate disaster are only telling half the truth, they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy). Then the conversion of our energy supply will lack the necessary acceptance.”
    No, I am not prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar energy that are totally inefficient and not ready for prime time.
    One of the most revealing two sentences concerning “green energy” were found in an earlier Spiegel article discussed on this site. The two sentences read as follows: “The costs of subsidizing solar electricity have exceeded the 100-billion-euro mark in Germany, but poor results are jeopardizing the country’s transition to renewable energy. The government is struggling to come up with a new concept to promote the inefficient technology in the future.” http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,809439,00.html
    Read that last sentence again. Only a government bureaucrat would admit to such a struggle.

  56. R de Haan says:

    @James Sexton says:
    February 8, 2012 at 2:29 pm
    R de Haan says:
    February 8, 2012 at 1:56 pm

    The guy is still half an idiot,
    =========================================================
    No, no…. he’s still a full fledged idiot. He’s just a better informed idiot than he was. You can’t fix stupid, you can only mitigate its effects. He’s been partially mitigated. It isn’t like this guy wasn’t told, he was for years. Now he has learned a bit of truth and he feels “duped”.

    OK, let’s settle this.
    We call him a Little Green Moron
    http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2012/02/little-green-morons.html

  57. JohnWho says:

    Well, maybe he was duped, but still, from the article:

    Vahrenholt: All I’m saying is that CO2 is a climate gas, but that its effect is only half as strong as the IPCC claims. Nevertheless, we still have to reduce CO2 emissions through worldwide emissions trading.

    Bold mine, and no, we do not.

    He may have just discovered he’s been duped, but that doesn’t mean that the rest of us weren’t already aware of his “dupidness”.

  58. R de Haan says:

    DirkH says:
    February 8, 2012 at 3:16 pm
    Paul Milligan says:
    February 8, 2012 at 2:19 pm
    “If his admiration of renewable energy is not founded in concerns about AGW, I am guessing he has concerns about Peak Oil.”

    Well, that’s just another pretense for the public (just like CAGW); the real and constant worry of Germans is energy security in a strategic sense; being a country that is relatively poor in energy resources. (this might change with future shale gas production in Northrhine Westphalia, though)

    Vahrenholt argues that wind power makes sense and is close to being economic in Germany while solar power is not. I think the subsidy tariffs are at the moment about 5 Eurocent for a wind power kWh and 24 cent for solar so the numbers for wind are at least not THAT bad for wind.

    DirkH,

    Wind costs a lot more than 5 eurocents per KWH.
    Just think about the back up power you need 90% of the time.

    And they still have to start building a new grid.
    This is a major investment.

    If they switch to shale gas right now they don’t need a new grid at all.

    Gerrnany is executing costly EU directives and they should put the break on it right now.

    Germany has for centuries of shale available.

  59. TRM says:

    Most con men get away with a lot of scams because the people taken don’t want to admit it to themselves. To yourself be true. I give him credit for admitting it. His lament for renewable energy and it’s possible demise comes from a very real, although misguided and abused, concern for the environment. To cheer up Mr Vahrenholt I hope he takes time to see this

    There is always hope for mankind. We just have to focus on solving the real problems. We have enough of those to go around, we don’t need to invent more.

  60. hollister uk says:

    Write more, thats all I have to say.

  61. jorgekafkazar says:

    Latitude says: “uh, excuse me, but I wasn’t willing to pay higher electricity bills in the first place
    and everything else that will be higher because of it”

    Water bills will necessarily skyrocket. Most of the cost of water is in pumping it. But don’t look to hear Obama admit this voluntarily.

  62. kakatoa says:

    At least they didn’t moth ball the plants……….http://www.nuclearpowerdaily.com/reports/Cold_snap_forces_Germany_to_restart_nuclear_reactors_report_999.html

    “The cold snap gripping Europe has forced Germany, which decided last year to abandon nuclear power, to bring several reactors back on line, the daily Handelsblatt reports in its Thursday issue.”

  63. Caz in BOS says:

    We should not vilify him. He has done what we want – he has recanted his position on AGW. We should celebrate him for that.

  64. JimJ says:

    The key to understanding the duplicity in the warmist camp has always been their insistence that renewable energy is the only solution to the coming climate catastrophe.
    You have only to ask yourself what you would do if you absolutely knew beyond a doubt that devastation as described by Mann and the team were imminent. Windmills? Solar panels? I doubt it! I might have bought in if a Manhattan like project were proposed to develop fusion or thorium alternatives. The whole thing is preposterous and reeks of another agenda.

    Jim

  65. Robert Austin says:

    DirkH says:
    February 8, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    “Vahrenholt argues that wind power makes sense and is close to being economic in Germany while solar power is not. I think the subsidy tariffs are at the moment about 5 Eurocent for a wind power kWh and 24 cent for solar so the numbers for wind are at least not THAT bad for wind.”

    DirkH,
    I assume that it works in Germany as in other jurisdictions. When wind and solar are producing power, the power companies are required to purchase the power at a premium whether they need it or not. If the power is not required, the power companies must try to dispose of it to some other jurisdiction, often at a bargain rate or less. Even where the power can be used, backup generation must be available on standby ready to take over when the wind and/or solar craps out. So the premium paid for wind and solar is only part of the appalling story that is wind and solar power.

  66. Beth Cooper says:

    The cold wind of reality doth blow.
    It blows thtough chinks in crumbling walls,
    It blows through cracks beneath the door,
    Draught protection is no avail,
    The cold wind of reality
    Is becoming a gale.

  67. 1DandyTroll says:

    [snip over the top - Anthony]

  68. otsar says:

    He is just a professional politician. He anticipated that the government feeding station he was sucking at is about to go dry. He will now rehabilitate himself while making money, people will praise him for having seen the light, etc,etc. He will then attach himself to a new feeding station.
    It will be interesting to track where he lands.

  69. KevinK says:

    Anthony quoted Varenholt;

    “My concern is that if citizens discover that the people who warn of a climate disaster are only telling half the truth, they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy)”.

    I, for one, WAS NEVER PREPARED to pay higher electricity costs for any of these silly “alternative energy” schemes. They are in fact JUST THAT; an ALTERNATIVE to REAL ENERGY….

    Anthony again quoted Varenholt;

    “and I feel duped”

    Welcome to the large historical cadre of dupes… The members are almost endless; The Tulip mania, The Pet Rock, Ulcers are caused by stress and spicy foods, “Cold” fusion”, etc. etc.

    Cheers from a “denier”, Kevin.

  70. DirkH says:

    Robert Austin says:
    February 8, 2012 at 6:28 pm
    “some other jurisdiction, often at a bargain rate or less. Even where the power can be used, backup generation must be available on standby ready to take over when the wind and/or solar craps out. So the premium paid for wind and solar is only part of the appalling story that is wind and solar power.”

    Don’t tell me, I’m a free market proponent. I just wanted to explain Vahrenholt’s position oand the economic parameters in Germany that make solar power 5 times as ruinous as wind power.

  71. DirkH says:

    kakatoa says:
    February 8, 2012 at 5:58 pm
    “At least they didn’t moth ball the plants……….http://www.nuclearpowerdaily.com/reports/Cold_snap_forces_Germany_to_restart_nuclear_reactors_report_999.html

    “The cold snap gripping Europe has forced Germany, which decided last year to abandon nuclear power, to bring several reactors back on line, the daily Handelsblatt reports in its Thursday issue.””

    As far as I could find out, no nukes are restarted, but old inefficient mothballed foosil fuel plants worth 1000 MW combined; they have been prepared for restart as designated “cold reserve” in the past months.

  72. Myrrh says:

    It’s the meme – oh I’m really a sceptic because, fill in choice, but it can all be put right if we all just paid more carbon taxes, and variations thereof.

    Can he really have held the position he did and not know the scam?

  73. DirkH says:

    Myrrh says:
    February 9, 2012 at 3:33 am
    “Can he really have held the position he did and not know the scam?”

    Remember that Mann’s hockeystick was widely trusted before Steve McIntyre uncovered Mann’s statistical tricks. And it took Montford’s book to bring that information to Vahrenholt. The MSM in Germany were a very effective block for all skeptic information. Most Germans don’t read American blogs. So, yes, it is very likely that it took Vahrenholt that long.

  74. Myrrh says:

    DirkH says:
    February 9, 2012 at 6:09 am
    Remember that Mann’s hockeystick was widely trusted before Steve McIntyre uncovered Mann’s statistical tricks. And it took Montford’s book to bring that information to Vahrenholt. The MSM in Germany were a very effective block for all skeptic information. Most Germans don’t read American blogs. So, yes, it is very likely that it took Vahrenholt that long.

    OK, then he’s got a lot of head searching to do. I hope he puts some of into examining his beliefs on renewable energy. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/06/germany-in-skeptical-turmoil-on-both-climate-and-windfarms/#comment-886200

  75. Markus Fitzhenry says:

    SUGGESTION:
    How to tell somebody why you don’t believe in AGW.

    Science, won the day for scepticism, the scientific method when properly applied won the day. It is the solid foundation that sceptics are able to base their argument upon.
    Science can’t be politicised, truth of fact can’t be denied, a syntax of logic will always destroy beliefs that are without truth.

    The Science says:
    Pressure is the required variable only if one compares Atmosheric Thermal Enhancement across planets. For any individual planet, it is the atmospheric mass that effectively controls thermal enhancement. There is no confusion with the pressure-controlled lapse rate with the atmosphere of a given planet.

    Why Now? It’s the science;
    • The climate of Earths’ atmosphere results from a formation of a climate machine by combining solar isolation and force of pressure. Coupled with spatio-temporal chaotic systems of irradiation and radiation of surface and atmosphere, dynamic heat distributions of oceans, a multiple pole thermodynamic atmosphere, with a gravitational velocity and planetary harmonics, spinning on an uneven axis around a Sun, with fluctuation of solar isolation, immersed in a space that has galactic electromagnetic winds.
    • The physical construct of a planet, with or without an atmosphere, retains ancient energy by the force of pressure on its mass. Otherwise planets could not exist.
    • Planets attract cold by the density of its mass and distribute heat by the dynamics of mass. Space attracts heat by the sparsest of its mass.
    • Heat rises, cool sinks. Atmosphere cannot back radiate heat to a warmer surface than the atmosphere which, cools with height. Thermodynamic gas laws describe the mechanisms of weather in the troposphere.

    Ref: General Remarks on the Temperature of the Terrestrial Globe and the Planetary Spaces; by Baron Fourier.
    The pressure of the atmosphere and bodies of water, has the general effect to render the distribution of heat more uniform. In the ocean and in the lakes, the coldest particles, or rather those whose density is the greatest, are continually tending downwards, and the motion of heat depending on this cause is much more rapid than that which takes place in solid masses in consequence of their connecting power. The mathematical examination of this effect would require exact and numerous observations. These would enable us to understand how this internal motion prevents the internal heat of the globe from becoming sensible in deep waters.

    Where NASA got the science wrong:

    Arrhenious in 1897 screwed up about the conservation of energy in gaseous mass , he flipped out about the relationship of carbon to life in a stupid greenhouse.

    Dopey Hansen in the early 80’s flipped out about Arrhenious’ mistake and caused all his stupid mates to believe in an invalid scientific principle.

    They spent billions in chasing argumentum ad populum. When, if they had followed a correct method of science, by applying scepticism, they would have found the answer that has been there, right under their noses.

    Climate is a multidisciplinary field of science, and cannot be treated as a pseudoscience, necessary of propitiation. Science will correct this fatal mistake.

    The force of pressure encloses our atmosphere not a greenhouse.

    So, when somebody asks why you don’t believe in AGW you can say;

    “It’s the science, stupid.”

    Ike Eisenhower gave a warning, philosophers expressed it, we fell for it. This time it came in
    the cloak of science.
    The line it is drawn
    The curse it is cast
    The slow one now
    Will later be fast
    As the present now
    Will later be past
    The order is
    Rapidly fadin’.
    And the first one now
    Will later be last
    For the times they are a-changin’.

  76. Xarkonul says:

    I applaud Fritz Vahrenholt for jettisoning many of his earlier beliefs about climate change and questioning the manmade global warming hypothesis. He will now face stiff opposition as I once did on a much smaller scale.

    When I used The Huffington Post’s own figures to point out that the earth’s climate has not been warming since 1998, Arianna Huffington’s website censored me and removed my profile. You can read about my censorship troubles at my website, Xarkonul, which is available at

    https://sites.google.com/site/xarkonul/

  77. corporate message says:

    It may be that Dana at SS has posted and withdrawn and reposted an article on this topic.
    It was linked to on another site, along with a comment that it was posted on SS on Feb. 11th.
    By the 13th SS had then announced it was in the pipeline…then posted by the 15th.
    Someone might want to check how the revision is going so far.

Comments are closed.