God help us. These “artistes” write:
The scientific community can meet us in December when we bring the calendar to the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting. This is the world’s largest gathering of Earth and space scientists: 20,000 of them converge in San Francisco to discuss their research (think science fair for adults).
Have a look at what they are pitching along with “please send money”:
Last year Josh and I published a calendar using only on demand printing services (like COSTCO) and Josh’s talents. We didn’t have to sucker in the clueless to “fund” the project. We just did it. They justify their pitch with:
What’s Inside
The 12×9 calendar features 13 months of renowned climate scientists and their research, along with information like their favorite dataset, chart or climate phenomenon. The calendar also includes dates of weather and climate events that live in infamy, dates of key scientific meetings and more. Participating researchers work at Columbia University’s International Research Institute for Climate and Society, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
Why kick start the Climate Models calendar?
We’ve had a photo shoot and designed the calendar, and even received a grant from the New York City chapter of the Awesome Foundation. Now we need to raise funds to print it. That’s where you come in. We believe in the power of this calendar to increase scientific literacy and want to distribute as many as possible. Meeting our funding goal will enable us to do this by covering the cost of printing our first run of calendars.
Any money raised above and beyond our goal will be used for calendar-related education and outreach activities.
You can read more about it here.
This year won’t be any different for Josh and I, though maybe this year when Michael Mann gets his free copy he won’t try to create conspiracy theory about it.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“features 13 months”
Is that like the 57 states that Obama visited when campaigning?
Since he rocketed you to #1, I think you got your money’s worth out of the gift.
Oh God.
Nothing wrong with this at all. Terribly old business adage: “Don’t gamble with your own money.”
Ah, but, Anthony, things are a bit different when you’re funded by the Loch brothers, obviously.
@Tom – would that be Nessie and Chessie? 😉
“13 months” — two Augusts (from northern hemisphere) to skew the “data,” no doubt.
Pledge $5 or more
Show your love of climate science on your laptop sleeve or car (we hope it’s a hybrid). Pledge $5 or more and we’ll send you an I Heart Climate Models sticker.
—–
This would make a perfect Christmas gift for Mosher.
Needs to be pictures of a bunch of plus size models (since they all seem to be a little heavy in their predictions) laying around eating melting snowcones. Now THAT, I’d buy!
LOL, a calendar from people who lie about dates, whose time series’ are always WRONG, and whose graphs are distorted.
“For that special person on your Christmas list who doesn’t care what day it is.
Calendar recipient Pip says:
Buy one — TODAY (we haven’t printed them yet, but, once we get enough
suckersinvestors, we’ll have those babies in the mail)!chuckarama says:
October 29, 2013 at 1:20 pm
Needs to be pictures of a bunch of plus size models (since they all seem to be a little heavy in their predictions) laying around eating melting snowcones. Now THAT, I’d buy!
_________________________
Reubens would have bought you a beer.
@Alan Robertson – I thought that was Botticelli?
I clicked on the “here” to read more about it, and tried to send a message saying “if you want to go into business put up your own cash”, but it only works if you are on facebook.
Does the calendar feature a nekkid picture of algore greased up for a massage?
Hmmm. That gives me an idea, too! My 12 favorite model-data comparisons showing how poorly climate models really perform.
Alan Robertson said:
October 29, 2013 at 1:28 pm
chuckarama says:
October 29, 2013 at 1:20 pm
Needs to be pictures of a bunch of plus size models (since they all seem to be a little heavy in their predictions) laying around eating melting snowcones. Now THAT, I’d buy!
_________________________
Reubens would have bought you a beer.
_________________________
Pee Wee Herman likes plus-size models?
Well lets see if Michael Mann puts his hand in HIS pocket (rather than the taxpayers) and actually buys one of those to send to you A….. But then why should HE change his lifelong habits, perhaps he will send his freebie advance copy to you… sarc/
I will inspect the calendar when I am at the AGU meeting.
John
Hm, they stole the calendar idea from the firefighters …
From the Risks & Challenges section: “We’ve already faced a few challenges in the process of producing the calendar, including a federal government shutdown, food poisoning and temperamental models. We’re only kidding about one of those.”
Temperamental models. Maybe they’re finally starting to recognize the problems with GCMs. Or maybe they’re talking about models for the calendar instead of computer models. Either way.
(I’m just going to assume it’s the government shutdown they were kidding about.)
(yes, I know the “l” is right next to the “k”….., heh, but could not resist)
The Loch Brothers!
(you can tell that they are rich and wi-cked because they wear suits and ties)
Note: A-th-y W-att-s receives no funding from either the Loch or the Koch brothers>
FYI: Don’t spell out “K-o-ch” either. Arrrgh.
[The mods will find all anyway. 8<) Mod]
@Mark and Two Cats, you owe me a new bottle of brain bleach. That was a horrible mental picture to inflict on an innocent thread reader!
When writers parenthetically tell me to (think something they believe), the thing in the parenthesis is usually a misnomer, something I disagree with, a bad analogy, or just plain wrong. I believe they put these phrases in parenthesis because their subconcious mind is too embarassed to form them into a plain text sentence.
Watch for it, it has become a rhetorical black hole lately.
I would rather see a calendar with Bob Tisdale’s data models than a calendar where Al Gore, Bill McKibben, Lewandowsky, or James Hansen as models.
It’s a good idea, but they got the year wrong. It should be a 2100 calendar, because that’s the year their projections are finally going to come true.
That’s so bizarre, my first thought was that it’s another parody like the “Save the Gender-Neutral Kittens form Global Warming” campaign I did last year. (It’s still visible at: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-gender-neutral-kitten-salvation-happiness-fund – and yes, for those who still didn’t get the message, it’s parody)