The WUWT Hot Sheet for Friday August 30th, 2013

WUWT_hot_sheet6

Pat Michaels: High School Science Discredits The New York Times’ Latest Global Warming Whopper – Forbes

…More completely, that would be the consensus of scientists who built their careers on the global warming gravy plane and really don’t want to go back to coach.)

Gillis has taken over the Times’ global warming beat from the much more careful Andy Revkin, and he isn’t shy about pushing lurid warming stories. He’s not, because Gillis wants action, which, in its latest incarnation, would be a tax on everything we do that in some way is powered by fossil fuels. That would mean pretty much everything we do.

===========================================================
North West Passage blocked with ice – yachts caught

‘The North West Passage seems to be reversing its recent warming trend and is threatening to end the dreams of dozens of adventurous sailors. A scattering of yachts trying to transit the legendary Passage are caught by the ice, which has become blocked at both ends and the season may be ended early.’ Source

http://www.sail-world.com/USA/North-West-Passage-blocked-with-ice%E2%80%94yachts-caught/113788

=================================================================

2013 Northwest Passage CLOSED without Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker escorts for transit.

At least 22 yachts and other vessels are in the Arctic at the moment. Some who were less advanced have retreated and others have abandoned their vessels along the way. Still others are caught in the ice in an unfolding, unresolved drama.”

=================================================================

Dr. Judith Curry: Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years

‘Recent observed global warming is significantly less than that simulated by climate models. This difference might be explained by some combination of errors in external forcing, model response and internal climate variability.’

‘Dare we hope for sanity from the AR5 in their assessment of detection and attribution?  Based upon the ‘leaks’, I am not too hopeful.’

==================================================================
MIT Climate Scientist Lindzen: Global warming is a ‘religion’

‘Global Warming has become a religion,’ writes Richard Lindzen. “A surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint.’

===================================================================

Al Gore’s Global Warming Desperation

…Eight of those studies predate the thousand-year global extension of Mann’s “hockey stick” graph of 2003, meaning that he had to deliberately ignore a huge swath of scientific evidence, which, if honestly considered, would have caused him to throw it into the trash. Instead, he and others associated with the IPCC essentially pretended that no other meaningful contradictory information existed.

In other words, Mann’s “hockey stick” is a bunch of what Colonel Potter of the TV series M*A*S*H used to call “horse hockey.”

===================================================================

“Huge canyon discovered under Greenland ice”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23866810

milodonharlani says:

Similar archaeological finds have been made in the wake of retreating Swiss glaciers, yet again demonstrating the cyclical nature of ice advance & retreat during the Holocene, as in prior interglacial phases:

http://climateaudit.org/2005/11/18/archaeological-finds-in-retreating-swiss-glacier/

More on the Greenland canyon
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2013/0829/Greenland-has-its-own-Grand-Canyon-deep-under-ice-study-says

====================================================================

Gail Combs says: Seems Greenpeace picked the WRONG PEOPLE to irritate.
Today’s Scores From The Arctic – Russian Coastguard 1 Greenpeace 0 or Green Watermelons met Real Reds and lose.

Greenpeace have just made a massive miscalculation of who to mess with in the Arctic, in this case Russia.

The story goes like this Greenpeace wanted to go the Northern Sea Route in Russia’s Arctic and protest, for that read, interrupt the search for oil and gas in the Arctic, the Arctic is reckoned to have 13% of the worlds undiscovered oil reserves and around 31% of the worlds undiscovered natural gas reserves.

Entry to the Northern Sea Route is by permit only, Greenpeace applied 3 times, and 3 times the Russians rejected the application, so the nobly motivated watermelons at Greenpeace decided they would ignore the lack of permit and go anyway….

A Greenpeace icebreaker that entered Russia’s Arctic without permission to protest offshore energy exploration is leaving after being threatened with gunfire by that country’s coast guard….

http://toryaardvark.com/2013/08/27/todays-scores-from-the-arctic-russian-coastguard-1-greenpeace-0/

 

About these ads
This entry was posted in The WUWT Hot Sheet. Bookmark the permalink.

53 Responses to The WUWT Hot Sheet for Friday August 30th, 2013

  1. H.R. says:

    Seems to me Greenpeace now only exists to perpetuate itself. I’m not seeing anything green about them except the money flowing their way, and peace hasn’t broken out all over the world just yet. Time to pack it up and go home, Greenpeace.

    P.S. Never poke a ‘Bear’ with a stick.

  2. Nyq Only says:

    It is interesting that calling some science or technological issue a ‘religion’ has become if not a cliche then at least a trope. I’ve seen critics of evolution call it a religion (doubly ironic given that presumably those critics regard religion as a good thing) and also anti-vaccinators call vaccines a ‘religion’ (e.g. here http://therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/dr-suzanne-humphries-new-israeli-polio-vaccine-campaign-is-not-science-based/#.UiBld7xTS70 )
    In some cases I suppose the point that they are trying to make is that it is a false religion? Odd though either way.

  3. Nyq Only:

    re your post at August 30, 2013 at 2:32 am.

    There is nothing “odd” about AGW being a religion. It is a religion.

    AGW is completely based on faith.
    It has no supporting evidence and is refuted by much evidence which AGW-believers ignore.

    AGW has its dogma. i.e.
    CO2 is a GHG (it is, but so what?)
    The observed rise is atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic (it may be, or it may not be).
    The rise in atmospheric CO2 is the primary cause of the recent rise in temperature (almost certainly not true).
    etc.

    AGW has sacred texts. i.e.
    IPCC Reports.

    AGW has its priesthood. i.e.
    Mann, Trenberth, Hansen, Gore, etc.

    AGW has its acolytes and true believers. e.g.
    Nyq Only.

    Religions can be good or bad. The Aztec religion was evil because it promoted death and destruction. The AGW is more evil than the Aztec religion because it attempts to impose more death and destruction.

    Richard

  4. Bloke down the pub says:

    How many readers of the BBC article on the Greenland canyon will realise that it proves the Earth has been much warmer in the past. With the theory of positive warming feedbacks thus neatly de-bunked, in a sane world we would see the end of cagw hysteria. In truth, I expect they will rationalise it away as usual.

  5. andrewmharding says:

    Richard, I totally agree with you, but governments of the world do not want the AGW myth to be exposed, because if it was, then the flow of taxes that people pay to “save” the planet would stop. There is too much at stake to admit that a trace gas is not going to irreversibly heat the Earth, there is a huge industry dependent on renewable power. The EU has told the UK we have to decrease, drastically our reliance on fossil fuels, they have also interfered with our policies on water supplies, by claiming it will be a scarce resource in our rapidly warming future.
    We need cheap energy to keep the Western economies expanding, the myth of AGW and lies about shale gas and fracking are preventing that from happening. The UK needs to leave the EU, we need a right of centre government, as does the US, if we have any hope of reversing these lunatic policies.

  6. KNR says:

    Richard like other religions it also uses the concepts like ‘heretics’ used for those that fail to believe in the ‘right way’ and creation of ‘evil ‘ which explains way they need to paint AGW sceptics as not merely wrong but ‘mad or bad’
    And above all its amazing how often the word ‘belief’ are seen in what is supposed to be science. For some there is no doubt AGW is seen as a full blow religion , and lets remember its own ‘prophets’ , Mann etc., called there work ‘the cause ‘ hardly an idea that has much scientific foundations.

  7. And the old religions are creating new sins:
    http://www.3news.co.nz/Fossil-fuels-An-industry-of-sin/tabid/1160/articleID/311233/Default.aspx
    “Fossil fuels: An industry of sin”
    “The church already makes an effort not to invest in industries it sees as unethical, such as pornography, gambling, tobacco and armaments. It’s Rev Newton’s aim to add fossil fuels to that list.
    “For us, the science is really clear; we need to keep 80 percent of the world’s gas, oil and coal reserves within the ground if we are going to have any chance of keeping the rise in climate to within 2degC, so we think divesting from fossil fuels is very much a pertinent issue of the age, and we need to start acting now.””

  8. Jim Cripwell says:

    I find Judith Curry`s remark interesting.
    @@@@@
    ‘Dare we hope for sanity from the AR5 in their assessment of detection and attribution? Based upon the ‘leaks’, I am not too hopeful.’
    @@@@@

    Judith was annoyed when, recently, the AGU came out with what she seemed to consider was an unscientific statement. But from what I can gather she actually did little about it. Judith is a heavyweight in this discussion, and what she does matters. When the IPCC report comes out, it will be interesting to see whether Judith just says she does not like it, or whether she actually does something.

  9. john says:

    Wind turbines clutter the north German countryside

    http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/climatism-watching-climate-science/2013/aug/28/wind-turbines-clutter-north-german-countryside/#.Uh6Wlwo3HmM.twitter

    [excerpt]

    But all is not well with the Energiewende. According to figures from the German Federal Ministry, the 22,962 wind turbines operating at the end of 2012 provided only 7.3 percent of the nation’s electricity and about 1.8 percent of the nation’s energy consumption. Despite the location of many turbines on the windy North Sea, German wind turbines operated at a capacity factor (actual output vs. rated output) of only 17 percent in 2012.
    The low capacity factor of German wind turbines makes wind electricity expensive. Driven by increased costs from renewables, household electricity rates almost doubled from 13.9 eurocents per kilowatt-hour to 26.0 eurocents per kilowatt-hour from 2000 to 2013. Today, Germany has the second highest electricity rates in Europe, more than triple U.S. electricity prices.

  10. philjourdan says:

    Greenpeace is lucky they are leaving with their ship. The Real Reds are known for confiscating ships that they perceive (note, I did not say actually do) violate their sovereign space.

  11. Brad says:

    The Curry article above is the most important. Big journals and important scientists are FINALLY telling the truth about global warming. This is just a toe in the water, but if the rest of the science community does not attack these first thinkers to question the dogma of warming, we will get more. Hopefully this represents the hole in the dike.

    Time will tell, but the quality of journals says alot.

  12. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    Some who were less advanced have retreated and others have abandoned their vessels along the way. Still others are caught in the ice in an unfolding, unresolved drama.

    What helicopters are suitable for lifting heavy loads under Arctic atmospheric conditions? Seems there’s some money to be made in salvaging derelicts up North.

  13. Steve from Rockwood says:

    @kadaka. Helicopters prefer cold weather and low elevation so they would perform best over Arctic waters. But there are only a few types that can really lift any significant weight. The king of helicopters is the Russian MI-26 which I believe can dead lift 30,000 lbs. You would need a fuel barge nearby. I was inside one in Novosibirsk a decade ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if the downwash from these machines could easily capsize a boat. An interesting rescue problem.

  14. izen says:

    @- andrewmharding
    “….but governments of the world do not want the AGW myth to be exposed, because if it was, then the flow of taxes that people pay to “save” the planet would stop. ”

    The tax raised from the use of fossil fuels is FAR greater than the tax derived from restricting fossil fuel use. The dominant motivation for governments is to support the use of fossil fuels because that generates far more revenue than can be gained from reduction of emissions.

    @- “There is too much at stake to admit that a trace gas is not going to irreversibly heat the Earth, there is a huge industry dependent on renewable power. ”

    There is over a century of science, its roughly contemporaneous with the development of evolutionary theory, that validates the theory that as a GHG rising CO2 warms the planet. The size of the renewable power market is a minute fraction of the fossil fuel industry. The huge industry dependent on fossil fuels has more to lose by several orders of magnitude than the renewable power business.

    Just in pure monetary terms the market forces opposing fossil fuel use reductions are much, MUCH greater than any gains that could be made by renewable power generation. Look at the amounts each business group spends on funding and lobbying politicians, the asymmetry is enormous.

  15. rgbatduke says:

    Judith was annoyed when, recently, the AGU came out with what she seemed to consider was an unscientific statement. But from what I can gather she actually did little about it. Judith is a heavyweight in this discussion, and what she does matters. When the IPCC report comes out, it will be interesting to see whether Judith just says she does not like it, or whether she actually does something.

    ???? Civilized human beings, especially those of the “scientist” persuasion, consider “doing something about” errors to be speaking out against them, writing about them, communicating with others about them. What else did you have in mind? Firebombing somebody’s house?

    I’m genuinely curious. What would you consider to be “doing something” that she isn’t already doing and that remains within the ethical boundaries that keep us from beating one another over the head with rocks when we disagree?

    rgb

  16. Big Don says:

    CAGW is clearly a religion. It both irks and amuses me when people state that they “believe in science”. I am a “scientist” in that I incorporate the scientific method in my daily work and life. In short, the scientific method is a never ending loop of hypothesis, experiment, conclusion, hypothesis, experiment, conclusion. Each hypothesis must be tested. Sometimes the experiment comes very close to matching the predictions of the hypothesis. Since it almost never exactly, absolutely, perfectly matches, the hypothesis is refined, and hence another experiment. On the other hand, sometimes the test completely trashes the hypothesis, and one must buck up and throw the hypothesis away. In the case of CAGW, the “experiment” is simply the passage of time, comparing the actual behavior of nature to its predicted behavior. The experiment has failed, and the hypothesis should be discarded.

    In the case of CAGW, there are those who say that the hypothesis was the opinion of eminent “scientists”, hence it MUST be correct. If you understand the scientific method, you understand that science is NOT a belief system. Science is actually a DISBELIEF system, in as much as its basis is to not believe anything just because an “authority” says that it is so. If you “believe” something based purely on testimony of authority, you are practicing a faith, not science.

    I also get both irked and amused when I see a car with multiple bumper stickers, with one stating “Question Everything” (which I agree with whole heartedly), yet others supporting the CAGW initiative.

  17. Jimbo says:

    AGW is a religion.
    Here is the Warmists’ prayer:
    Our Carbon, which art in heaven,
    Damned be thy name,
    Thy power be gone,
    Emissions be none,
    On Earth as as well as in heaven,
    Give us this day our daily rations,
    And forgive us our emissions,
    As we forgive those who emit against us,
    and lead us not into electrification,
    but deliver us from evil dioxides,
    For his is the kingdom, the power and the Al Glorey for ever and ever, Carbon.

  18. Jimbo says:

    You can’t falsify a religion.

    You can’t falsify man-made ‘global warming’ because they changed it to ‘climate change’. You can’t falsify man-made ‘climate change’ because they changed it to ‘climate disruption’. You can’t falsify ‘climate disruption’ because they changed it to ‘extreme weather’……………. :-)

    Even if we were in the depths of another Little Ice Age they would not ‘repent’. They will blame carbon dioxide for disrupting something and causing it. This is a religion.

  19. DaBilk says:

    “Never poke a bear with a stick”.

    Sometimes “Fuzzy fights back”.

    http://darwinawards.com/personal/personal2002-22.html

  20. Jim Cripwell says:

    rgbatduke writes “I’m genuinely curious.”

    Judith has given testimony before Congrssional committees. I suspect she will in the future. She could testify that the new IPCC report is a load of scientific garbage. Judith has access to scientific publications where her work would receive acceptance. She could write a severe criticism of the “science” that the IPCC has (not) presented to support it’s claim of 95% certainty. You, yourself, have stated that if the IPCC persisits in doing what it would appear to be doing there ought to be “hell to pay”., IMHO, Judith should be one of those leading the charge, in the MSM, the scientific journals, in public statements, showing the science of why the IPCC’s claims of near certainty are just plain, old, scientific garbage.

    Someone with some stature in the scientific community, who used to be a supporter of CAGW, needs to stand up the the preachings of the Royal Society, The American Physical Society, the UK Met. Office, etc. etc.etc. on the scientific certainty that CAGW is supported by solid science. None of these organizations has polled their members to determine whether they support these statements.

    Someone of some scientific stature, who was a warmist, needs to become an activist speaker to, as I say, lead the charge. Who better than Dr. Judith Curry?

  21. Bill Illis says:

    Northwest Passage ice chart as of Aug 26th. I don’t think any of the expeditions made it to their planned destination this year.

    Dangerous business made more dangerous by the global warming hype.

    http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS56CT/20130826180000_WIS56CT_0007236133.gif

  22. mogamboguru says:

    Oh, bugger: “North West Passage blocked with ice – yachts caught”

    Blimey: Where’s that friggin’ Global Warming when you need it?

    Obviously, believing the IPCC has it’s dire consequences.

  23. Steve Cota says:

    I would like to suggest some reading on religion and prophecy. AGW does seem like a religious movement with belief based philosophy, prophets and a set of social moral that are being passed on. The book “When Prophecy Fails” copy write 1956, by Leon Festinger/Henry Riecken/Stanley Schachter provide an interesting perspective on how the followers react to failed prophecy with increased fervor and intensified belief. The perspective would seem to apply to the failure of the AGW prophecies.

  24. Ric Werme says:

    Good grief – the fellow running http://northwestpassage2013.blogspot.com/ has been incredibly busy the last few days. I wasn’t going to check back until next week, but it looks like the NW passage may be closed for the year with vessels trapped between two barriers. It looks like one vessel made it through a route that deterred an ice breaker – “NW Passage History – POLAR BOUND becomes the first yacht to navigate a Route 1 West Northwest Passage via McClure Strait”.

    There’s a video of a rescue from a few years ago – an ice breaker pulls a yacht, Fine Tolerance, from the place it got stuck. Might as well have dragged across some rocks, but it may have made it. http://youtu.be/nsOsWEo4p1Y

  25. Jim Cripwell says:

    Bill Illis, you write “I don’t think any of the expeditions made it to their planned destination this year.”

    At least one did, but I admit they were exceptional. Adventure Canada uses their cruise ship Sea Adventurer to run two cruises “Into the NW Passage”, and “Out of the NW passage”. The first goes east to west, changes passengers, and then the second cruise goes west to east. These two voyages, through the NW Passage, were completed. However, Sea Adventurer is ice hardened, and is not like some of the other ships which may be trapped.

  26. DirkH says:

    “A Greenpeace icebreaker that entered Russia’s Arctic without permission to protest offshore energy exploration”

    If I were Russia I would shoot EU Commission Naval Forces as well.

  27. Jeff Alberts says:

    ‘Global Warming has become a religion,’ writes Richard Lindzen. “A surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint.’

    We can conclude, then, that religion is a bad thing, which is used to control people via scary, fictitious stories. I can agree with that.

  28. Judith Curry’s comments on AGU statement and Pielke’s written dissent.

    JC comments
    Of the two statements, I vastly prefer Roger Pielke Sr’s statement,since he discusses the complexity of the issue and the uncertainties.

    That said, I will once again question why AGU or any other professional society is issuing statements on this topic. IMO, AGU’s statement is one of the worst I’ve seen from a professional society on this topic, in particular its title ‘Human-induced climate change requires urgent action.’ This is an explicit statement of advocacy, that goes well beyond what the IPCC has said (and is expected to say in the AR5; we will see).

    What really irks me about this statement is that I am a member of the AGU, and therefore this statement is implicitly speaking for me. It is clear that not even the 15 AGU members set to write this statement agreed, since one of their members (Pielke) has written a dissenting statement. The words ‘uncertainty’ or ‘debate’ are not used in the statement, leaving no wiggle room for them to pretend that this statement accounts for the range of perspectives in the AGU (or even within the writing committee), or the uncertainties.

    If the AGU wants to maintain credibility as a scientific organization, it should do some serious self reflection.

    rgb: I’m genuinely curious. What would you consider to be “doing something” that she isn’t already doing and that remains within the ethical boundaries that keep us from beating one another over the head with rocks when we disagree?

    “What really irks me … is that I am a member of the AGU, and therefore this statement is implicitly speaking for me. ”
    Stand back, folks. Judith is irked. ….

    She and Pielke are in the right. The AGU has crossed the line into advocacy, it publishes as statement as from the AGU without informing its own members, much less asking for comment. Judith Curry is in the right, yet pulls her punches whilst in a gun fight. Has she written a word in objection to the AGU/EOS decision not to publish Pielke’s dissent? If so, it is much too hard to find.

    From Yale Climate Forum (Bob Ward) on AGU statement

    Pielke, considered an outlier by those in the so-called “mainstream” climate science consensus community, used the climate.etc site headed by Georgia Tech climate scientist Judith Curry (also considered an outlier) to blast the process and what he felt was a predetermined result. He said group leaders “had a course of action in mind even when we were appointed.”

    In other words, “irked or not, Judith is an outlier so she can be patronized as Pielke. The two of them are nothing more than speed bumps on the road of advocacy.”

    All I know is that first, you’ve got to get mad.
    You’ve gotta say, “I’m a human being, godd***it! My life has value!”
    - Howard Beale “Mad as H***” speech

    @Jim Cripwell 6:26 am. I totally agree.

  29. What happened to the “Preview” button?
    It wasn’t perfect, but it really helped find html tag errors.

    REPLY:
    I had to give up WordPress Enterprise for a bit, it was causing other problems internally, not ready for prime-time. They are working on it, and I hope to be able to get the preview feature back. – Anthony

  30. eco-geek says:

    The Russians only threatend Greenpeace with gunfire?
    Big mistake. They should have turned the ship red on the inside….

  31. DirkH says:

    Jeff Alberts says:
    August 30, 2013 at 7:47 am
    “We can conclude, then, that religion is a bad thing, which is used to control people via scary, fictitious stories. I can agree with that.”

    Non sequitor.

  32. Gail Combs says:

    izen says: @ August 30, 2013 at 5:39 am
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    You forgot

    1. The oil companies (and others like GE) are invested in “Green” energy
    2. It is a boondoggle, a scam not a viable means of generating electricity. The companies are formed the money siphoned off and then they bankrupt. Al Gore and Maurice Strong perfected the ‘MODEL’ in 1995.

    During the First Earth Day celebration in 1995 when Al Gore visited Fall River, Massachusetts he gave a speech praising Molten Metals Inc. The stock soared to $35/share. The stock price in part was based on Department of Energy funding for a research contract that was about to get cut in October of 1996. Strong, no fool he, bailed before the stock became worthless.

    ….Strong is up to his eyeballs in Molten Metal Technology, a busted handler of hazardous waste notorious for its flaky technology and ties to presidential hopeful Al Gore (FORBES, Jan. 22, 1996 and Apr. 21, 1997). A big contributor to Gore’s campaigns, Molten Metals has surfaced in the Senate hearings on corrupt campaign financing.

    A member of Molten’s board, Strong sold some shares at around $31 apiece a month prior to the stock’s October 1996 collapse. Today the stock is at 13 cents a share and Strong is being sued by San Diego class-action shark Milberg Weiss….
    http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0112/6101046a.html

    THAT is the REAL Business model for the 34 plus failed Green energy companies

    The economists (if they are honest) call it The Broken Window Fallacy This economic model only moves money from one pocket (the tax payer and fools gambling on green stocks) to another (the Elite/business tycoons) and leave all of society poorer.

    Too bad ‘Socialists’ (and Capitalists) are falling for this crap. The Elite don’t care what sheepskin they wear as long as it moves money and power into their pocket.

    My only hope is they stop before they completely wreck the economies of the EU, USA, Australia and others but since they are moving on to raping India, Brazil, Africa and (trying to rape) China and Russia I wouldn’t bet on it.

  33. Jimbo says:
    August 30, 2013 at 6:12 am

    You can’t falsify a religion.

    That proves that CAGW is not a religion, as it has already been falsified.

  34. johanna says:

    To those who criticise Dr Judith Curry for not spearheading the activist campaign they want her to – I think it’s pretty presumptuous to try to conscript an independent scientist (and an autonomous human being) to fulfill your desires.

    Dr Curry is not your cipher in the climate wars. It is entirely up to her what role, if any, she chooses to play. The fact that she is not the hard line activist that you want her to be does not mean that she lacks integrity and courage. I think that she has demonstrated plenty of both compared to the tens of thousands of scientists from whom we have not heard a peep of dissent. Why pick on her?

    It is also worth noting that she is a very busy person. She is a university department head, and also runs a business and a blog. Those who say she is not doing enough are presumably on the hustings 24/7/365 themselves?

  35. Steve from Rockwood says:
    August 30, 2013 at 5:33 am

    Standard internal or external load of Mi-26 Halo is 20,000 kg (44,000 #), ie without cutting back on fuel or stripping the helicopter down. But, as you note, capability in a high & hot regime (Afghanistan summer) is less than over the Arctic Ocean.

  36. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    From Stephen Rasey on August 30, 2013 at 8:20 am:

    What happened to the “Preview” button?
    It wasn’t perfect, but it really helped find html tag errors.

    I’ve been using CA Assistant for the Preview function. HTML and formatting errors show up well enough there. The one HTML error that isn’t noticeable is missing opening double-quote, which WordPress automatically converts to a link to the page you’re on (sadly Gail Combs makes that mistake often). But if you make your links with the CA Assistant linking tool, not a problem.

    After using both Preview functions at once, I determined CA Assistant was better than the WordPress version as it more faithfully showed the spacing after posting, WPP didn’t do line spaces. Try CA Assistant.

  37. Louis says:

    Jimbo says:

    “…And forgive us our emissions,
    As we forgive those who emit against us, …”

    Al Gore would never offer such a prayer. It would be more like:

    And forgive us our emissions,
    As we condemn the emissions of others,

    These people are not in the forgiving business. But they do believe that condemning other’s emissions justifies an increase in their own emissions as they fly their jets around the world to do so.

  38. Louis says:

    arthurpeacock says:
    August 30, 2013 at 11:37 am
    Jimbo says:
    August 30, 2013 at 6:12 am
    You can’t falsify a religion.

    That proves that CAGW is not a religion, as it has already been falsified.

    Sorry, but just because you realize CAGW has been falsified does not mean members of the CAGW religion agree with you. Can you name any? The fact that they still cling to their CAGW religion and ignore all observations and evidence to the contrary proves Jimbo’s statement.

  39. Louis says:
    August 30, 2013 at 12:31 pm

    The fact that they still cling to their CAGW religion and ignore all observations and evidence to the contrary proves Jimbo’s statement.

    Whether CAGW is a religion, is one thing. Whether warmists treat CAGW as if it were a religion, is quite another. You are confusing the two.

    If I think that a mirage is an oasis, that doesn’t mean that it is an oasis. It means that my perception is wrong. I repeat, CAGW has been falsified. Therefore it is not a religion. And warmists are wrong in treating it as one.

  40. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    Peru Declares State of Emergency in Puno as Temperatures Drop
    August 28, 2013 by Andean Air Mail & PERUVIAN TIMES

    Hundreds of families have been affected and more than 250,000 alpacas have died due to freezing temperatures and snow storms that have hit the southern highlands.

    The cold kills the alpacas. Thus the people loose the alpaca “wool” for making the warm clothing to withstand the cold, and a source of meat thus energy needed to make the body warmth, that is now being lost faster with the lack of warm clothing.

    Thus less humans are supportable, thus less alpaca will be raised, so less humans are supportable, and if there’s another cold-induced mass slaughter of alpaca next year… It’s the Peruvian Cold Death Spiral!

    (Side note: It’s official, the “sky dragon slayer” anti-GHE debate has gone way too far. I went to type “warm clothing” and thought “Wait, I can’t write the clothing is warm since what it does is slow the rate of heat loss, it doesn’t provide warmth…”)

  41. izen:

    In your post at August 30, 2013 at 5:39 am you write
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/30/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-friday-august-30th-2013/#comment-1403650

    @- andrewmharding

    “….but governments of the world do not want the AGW myth to be exposed, because if it was, then the flow of taxes that people pay to “save” the planet would stop. ”

    The tax raised from the use of fossil fuels is FAR greater than the tax derived from restricting fossil fuel use. The dominant motivation for governments is to support the use of fossil fuels because that generates far more revenue than can be gained from reduction of emissions.

    Izen, I know you want to sustain your reputation for stupid comments, but that is daft even by your standards.

    Fossil fuels will continue to be used because there is nothing except nuclear power which can replace their use by a measurable amount. So, governments will continue to obtain taxation revenue from them.

    And governments are not acting to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Indeed, some are promoting intermittent energy sources (e.g. wind and solar) which increase fossil fuel use.

    Governments are promoting taxation from e.g. ‘Cap and Trade’ and ‘Carbon Markets’ in addition to the taxation revenue from fossil fuels.

    Richard

  42. arthurpeacock:

    Your post at August 30, 2013 at 12:55 pm
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/30/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-friday-august-30th-2013/#comment-1404034
    says

    Whether CAGW is a religion, is one thing. Whether warmists treat CAGW as if it were a religion, is quite another. You are confusing the two.

    If I think that a mirage is an oasis, that doesn’t mean that it is an oasis. It means that my perception is wrong. I repeat, CAGW has been falsified. Therefore it is not a religion. And warmists are wrong in treating it as one.

    Sorry, but your argument defeats itself.

    If “CAGW has been falsified” then continued belief in it can only be superstition or religious faith.

    Superstition is a belief – usually based on fear – which has no tenets so no philosophical structure.

    Religion is a set of beliefs based on accepted tenets and has a coherent philosophical structure.

    The cult of AGW has a coherent belief system based on a set of tenets and has organised structure including training, communication and hierarchy. Thus, it is a religion and not a superstition.

    Richard

  43. goldminor says:

    Last night I came across a graph from SIDC that shows the international sunspot number in a monthly format from 1950 to the present. It showed the trend in sunspot numbers with either the north hemisphere leading the south, or the south hemisphere leading the north. From slightly before 1950 up until 1972 the north predominates. Then from 1972 till 1976/77 the south plays a strong role, ‘Is this what starts the warming? After 1980 and all the way till 2008, the south predominates in the ssn count. Since 2008 the north is now back on top. The ‘north’ Sun from 1950 till the late 70s led the Earth through a slight cooling period. Then the ‘south’ Sun has a strong show between 1972 through 1974. The last stretch of ‘south’ Sun,1977/78 till 2008, led the Earth through a noticeable warming. Now we are back into a ‘north’ Sun and the Earth has seen a slight cooling since 2006/07. So, why is it that the IPCC doesn’t consider the Sun as having a greater affect.

    Here is a link to the graph…http://sidc.oma.be/sunspot-index-graphics/wnosuf.php

  44. Jimbo says:

    arthurpeacock says:
    August 30, 2013 at 11:37 am

    Jimbo says:
    August 30, 2013 at 6:12 am

    You can’t falsify a religion.

    That proves that CAGW is not a religion, as it has already been falsified.

    Funny. :)

  45. goldminor says:

    Jim Cripwell says:
    August 30, 2013 at 7:36 am
    ————————————
    I had to read that post about the Polar Bound several times, myself. At first glance it appears that he somehow made it through the McClure Strait. It took a few looks to see that those photos are from 2012, when he made a successful transit, his fifth. He is now at Cambridge bay with most of the other ships. At least one left Cambridge Bay yesterday to see if they can find an opening at Cape Bathurst by the time they arrive around Sunday/Monday. This could likely be the last chance to make the passage in one shot. The forecast for that area drops to 30F after Tuesday/Wednesday. The region is warming up for four more days as of today, from the continent into the edge of the Arctic sea lane that the boats need to traverse.

  46. Brian H says:

    Up north, fools and their yachts are soon sunk. As for the fools on jetskis and rowboats…

  47. richardscourtney says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    Religion is a set of beliefs based on accepted tenets and has a coherent philosophical structure.

    That is a correct statement about religion. It is not a definition of religion. A definition of religion would have to include the fact that it deals with issues (such as meaning and purpose) which lie outside the realm of scientific discourse. CAGW lies within the realm of scientific discourse; therefore it is not a religion, but an ideology. Like Marxism, it is a pseudoscience which apes religion. It has many of the features of religion, and is therefore useful as a ‘straw man’ for people who want to discredit religion without understanding what it actually is.

    Jimbo says:
    August 30, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    Funny. :)

    Thanks! Half joking and whole in earnest, as they say.

  48. Jeff Alberts says:

    DirkH says:
    August 30, 2013 at 9:39 am

    Jeff Alberts says:
    August 30, 2013 at 7:47 am
    “We can conclude, then, that religion is a bad thing, which is used to control people via scary, fictitious stories. I can agree with that.”

    Non sequitor. [sic]

    Ah, so everyone here who denigrates CAGW as a religion are also practicing non-sequitur. They certainly aren’t praising either CAGW or religion when they do that. Wouldn’t you agree?

  49. Jeff Alberts says:

    Religion is a set of beliefs based on accepted tenets and has a coherent philosophical structure.

    Especially if those tenets have no basis in reality.

  50. JPeden says:

    Adding my 2 cents to what has already been argued towards the conclusion that adherents to CO2CAGW are practicing a Religion:

    In calling skeptics “deniers”, adherents to the Formalized CO2CAGW Belief System have thereby defined themselves as “Believers” in that belief system. They also display a belief in a return to a “Garden of Eden”, or a ‘progression’ to a “Heaven on Earth”, but essentially Other-Worldly Condition.

    Their own Dogmatic Postulation of CO2CAGW “tenets”, which in effect constitute an instant litmus test for defining Believers as against “deniers”, and their incessant repetition of statements which publicly preach a Liturgy involving a coming Apocalypse, both contribute to bringing their Ideology very close to constituting at least some kind of Religion.

    And, what used to be a necessary characteristic defining a Religion and its most critical weakness, at least according to pre-postmodern Philosophers: the Believers also lay claim to having a Special “Way of Knowing”, different from the way in which the rest of us establish what is “known”. [But as usual, they still insist upon using the same word for it.] It might or might not involve “Faith” because some advocates of the Believers’ revered Post Normal Science even further define themselves as essentially being able to “Speak Directly With God” in order to deliver unto all of us the “Given Truth”.

  51. James at 48 says:

    Just FYI, the remaining upright Polecam (which rightfully might be termed, at this point, the Spitsbergen Outer Waters Cam) is now completely iced over. At this point it may never thaw again, there may be no more images this year. In any case,seasonal darkness will ultimately overtake it.

  52. arthurpeacock:

    At August 31, 2013 at 8:30 am
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/30/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-friday-august-30th-2013/#comment-1404622
    you assert

    richardscourtney says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    Religion is a set of beliefs based on accepted tenets and has a coherent philosophical structure.

    That is a correct statement about religion. It is not a definition of religion. A definition of religion would have to include the fact that it deals with issues (such as meaning and purpose) which lie outside the realm of scientific discourse. CAGW lies within the realm of scientific discourse; therefore it is not a religion, but an ideology. Like Marxism, it is a pseudoscience which apes religion. It has many of the features of religion, and is therefore useful as a ‘straw man’ for people who want to discredit religion without understanding what it actually is.

    I agree that my statement is not a complete definition of religion. It was a distinction between religion and superstition.

    You had claimed

    Whether CAGW is a religion, is one thing. Whether warmists treat CAGW as if it were a religion, is quite another. You are confusing the two.

    If I think that a mirage is an oasis, that doesn’t mean that it is an oasis. It means that my perception is wrong. I repeat, CAGW has been falsified. Therefore it is not a religion. And warmists are wrong in treating it as one.

    I replied to that saying

    Sorry, but your argument defeats itself.

    If “CAGW has been falsified” then continued belief in it can only be superstition or religious faith.

    Superstition is a belief – usually based on fear – which has no tenets so no philosophical structure.

    Religion is a set of beliefs based on accepted tenets and has a coherent philosophical structure.

    The cult of AGW has a coherent belief system based on a set of tenets and has organised structure including training, communication and hierarchy. Thus, it is a religion and not a superstition.

    The only ‘straw man’ is yours, and it is achieved by selectively quoting me out of context.

    Also, and importantly to me, I do NOT “want to discredit religion” and I DO understand “what it actually is”. If you think otherwise then formally complain to my Superintendent with a view to getting me struck off the List of Accredited Methodist Preachers. My congregation yesterday seemed satisfied that your views are unfounded.

    Richard

  53. Jeff Alberts:

    At August 31, 2013 at 9:09 am you say

    Ah, so everyone here who denigrates CAGW as a religion are also practicing non-sequitur. They certainly aren’t praising either CAGW or religion when they do that. Wouldn’t you agree?

    No! That is rubbish.
    The cult of AGW is a religion. To state the fact is not to “denigrate” believers in AGW.

    And I suspect you think your comment at August 31, 2013 at 9:11 am was clever. In reality it was ignorant and foolish.

    Richard

Comments are closed.