Friday Funny – Sekrit Kidz Science

Today’s Friday Funny  from Josh is a double feature with the SkS kidz and the Royal Society, who seem to be acting like the kids when they demanded a secret meeting with The GWPF. Shhhh.

Josh writes:

This isn’t a cartoon about this story which Nigel Lawson never talked about in the Spectator.

Glad that’s settled.

Josh_royalsoc_secret

For this cartoon he quips:

In a bid to outdo the 10:10 campaign the SkS kidz have launched a Hiroshima app. What a great idea!

H/t Watts up with that. And there is a related video by Bob Tisdale here.

Josh_SkS_kidz_hiroshima

Josh
www.cartoonsbyjosh.com

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

66 Responses to Friday Funny – Sekrit Kidz Science

  1. Jim Cripwell says:

    I know that this is funny, but unfortunately it has so much truth in it, that it is frightening.

  2. Anthony Watts says:

    What I find hilarious is that John Cook is a cartoonist by trade, and he has yet to be able to launch a cartoon of his own with any effective satire. I guess he’s too busy being scary.

  3. Alan the Brit says:

    Let’s hope Lord Lawson spills the beans gently, wouldn’t want to upset the Royal Society too much, their Presidents are genius’, “Heavier than air flying machines are IMPOSSIBLE!”. Lord Kelvin, 1895! He was right, wasn’t he?

  4. Colin says:

    The science was “settled” in 1895. Or at least 97% settled. TG for the 3% that didn’t listen. Then the greenies could get to their conferences.

  5. GeeJam says:

    Excellent Josh. Maybe a hole cut on both sides of each bag so they can stick their fingers in their ears and go ‘La la la la la we’re not listening’. Here’s their ‘take’ on climate change:

    http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/News_and_Issues/Science_Issues/Climate_change/climate_facts_and_fictions.pdf

  6. Bruce Cobb says:

    Funny how liars and fools don’t like being outed. The RS members are a disgrace to themselves and their hallowed institution, which may never recover.

  7. Mike Ozanne says:

    “Heavier than air flying machines are IMPOSSIBLE!”. Lord Kelvin, 1895! He was right, wasn’t he?”

    Well at the time pretty much, The compression based IC engine was new and wasn’t being designed for lightness, The Wrights had to get their 12 HP job custom built. Also, as the Wrights discovered through experiment and redesign. Just about every bit of the science concerning aerodynamics was wrong. From the best work on aerofoils (Llillienthal) to the Smeaton number for air. Not just close with a larger than expected error band, but significantly and “guaranteed to end up a twisted corpse in mangled wreckage” wrong.

    Just goes to show, there is no such thing as settled science, it’s always one repeatable experiment away from unsettled.

  8. son of mulder says:

    Reminds me of the promotional potential England footballers found when they missed vital penalties for England’s soccer team.

  9. omnologos says:

    The Royal Society is unwittingly encouraging the idea that climate change science is not even a hoax, just an empty shell.

    As for SkS they’re just doing what they do best, i.e. feed their propaganda with corpses, in this case the abused memory of 400,000 dead and survivors in Hiroshima.

  10. Janice Moore says:

    Maybe a hole cut on both sides of each bag … .” (Gee Jam at 9:46am) — lol, good one.

    However…. I think it’s perfect the way it is; pretty soon, they will think it is nighttime and fall asleep zzzzzz. There. All quiet now. Aaah.

    Thanks for the link to the junk science document of the Royal Secret Society:

    “It has become fashionable… .” LOL — It has become fashionable, apparently, to wear a brown paper bag over your heads! Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaaaaaaaaa!

    **************************************************
    Re second cartoon: Out on limb, someone else’s (Lise Meisner and Albert Einstein, to name two) real science utterly destroying their credibility, lol.

    GREAT JOB, JOSH! (as usual) — on both (LOVE the bold colors, and the little shoe that fell off… poor widdo kid…, Mama will be soooo mad at him).

    btw: are “biscuits” what Americans call “cookies”? If not, lol, good for you, you stolid, stiff-upper lip, British — “We don’t eat cookies with our tea! Unlike the US, WE eat biscuits! Cookies are for sissies! And we don’t put any sweetener in our tea and we drink it out of a hollowed out boulder, not some sissy tea cup.”)
    #(;))

  11. Janice Moore says:

    @ Son of Mulder — lol, thanks for sharing that. Hilarious.

  12. M Courtney says:

    Don’t knock Lord Kelvin.
    He was a genius.
    Even a genius can be wrong sometimes.
    Mere clever people are too cautious to be wrong.
    Idiots are rarely right.
    But Lord Kelvin was a genius who should be ranked high amongst the legends of science.

  13. Janice Moore says:

    (sshhh — top secret video from the most recent meeting of the S.S.)

  14. Snotrocket says:

    Is that Nuke-kid-celli on the right – out on a limb?

  15. Jquip says:

    I’d make some snark about the Star Chamber if they thought the sun had anything to do with it.

  16. Philip Aggrey says:

    Having just read through a 13 page article with comments from Steve Mc and Anthony about Sceptics being civil to the likes of Way & Cowtan I was a bit skeptical about this at first. However, I do make an exception where the SKidzS are concerned. They deserve everything they get. Thanks Josh and Anthony. Made my weekend.( ‘;-P)=

  17. tadchem says:

    “Above all else, the Devil cannot stand to be mocked.” – C.S. Lewis

  18. A.D. Everard says:

    So someone at the Royal Society said, “I know, let’s have that meeting in secret.” And the rest said. “Ooh, yes, lets!” Did not one of them step back and think what message that would send to the world? Are they nothing but fools and cretins?

    Josh – you portrayed them most accurately and gave us a good giggle in this house with both cartoons. The first one most definitely should be spread far and wide.

  19. Jim Cripwell says:

    Alan the Brit You mention Lord Kelvin. Don’t forget that Isaac Newton, in 1717, stated that it was impossible to make a marine chronometer.

  20. Neil Jordan says:

    Re M Courtney says: November 29, 2013 at 11:22 am
    I concur. One of the founders of thermodynamics shouldn’t be judged by hindsight about what he said late in life. William Thomson, Lord Kelvin’s life, accomplishments, and a few missteps are covered in this biography:
    “Degrees Kelvin: A Tale of Genius, Invention, and Tragedy by David Lindley”

  21. jorgekafkazar says:

    Nice vid, Janice. “The Royal Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things.” It’s clear the Royal Society is not on top of actual climate science, any more than the self-outed ⚡kidz⚡.

  22. Janice Moore says:

    Thanks, Mr. Kafkazar. Say, how DID you make that cool lightening bolt symbol? Leave it to an engineer to figure out something cool.
    #(:))

  23. Janice Moore says:

    Leave it to a…., well, let’s just say people in my line of work try extra hard not to do this …. to misspell “lightning. grrr

  24. Nick Stokes says:

    “they demanded a secret meeting with The GWPF.”

    Odd way to put it. The meeting was very publicly requested by Lord Lawson. And held, AFAICS, in accordance with his request.

  25. FrankK says:


    M Courtney says:
    November 29, 2013 at 11:22 am
    Don’t knock Lord Kelvin.
    He was a genius.
    Even a genius can be wrong sometimes.
    Mere clever people are too cautious to be wrong.
    Idiots are rarely right.
    But Lord Kelvin was a genius who should be ranked high amongst the legends of science.

    ————————————————————————–
    Yes even a genius can make many wrong calls.
    From: http://zapatopi.net/kelvin/quotes/

    “I can state flatly that heavier than air flying machines are impossible.” [Note: this quote is widely circulated, especially among self-help gurus, motivational speakers, and the like, but a newspaper archive search and Google book search shows no hits published during Kelvin's lifetime.]

    However he did say:
    “The air-ship, on the plan of those built by Santos-Dumont, is a delusion and a snare. A gas balloon, paddled around by oars, is an old idea, and can never be of any practical use. Some day, no doubt, some one will invent a flying machine that one will be able to navigate without having to have a balloon attachment. But the day is a long way off when we shall see human beings soaring around like birds.” [TLWT, vol. 2, p. 1168]

    “There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now, All that remains is more and more precise measurement.”

    “X-rays will prove to be a hoax.”

    “We know that light is propagated like sound through pressure and motion.”

    [Is there any matter not subject to the law of gravitation?] “I think that I may say with absolute decision that there is. We are all convinced… that ether is matter.” [BL]

    “Radio has no future.”

    “Wireless [telegraphy] is all very well but I’d rather send a message by a boy on a pony!” [Quoted in My Father, Marconi by Degna Marconi]

    Writing to Niagara Falls Power Company: “Trust you will avoid the gigantic mistake of alternating current.”

    “During the thirty-five years which have passed since I gave this wide-ranged estimate [of 20-400 million years] experimental investigation has supplied much of the knowledge then wanting regarding the thermal properties of rocks to form a closer estimate of the time which has passed since the consolidation of the earth, we have now good reason for judging that it was more than 20,000,000 and less than 40,000,000 years ago, and probably much nearer 20 than 40.” [AEAFL]

    “It seems as if we may also be forced to conclude that the supposed connection between magnetic storms and sunspots is unreal, and that the seeming agreement between the periods has been mere coincidence.”

    “It would, I think, be exceedingly rash to assume as probable anything more than twenty million years of the sun’s light in the past history of the earth, or to reckon on more than five or six million years of sunlight for time to come.”

    What will the population think about AGW in 100 years time?

  26. wayne says:

    … or maybe Johnny Cook gave up his crayons for painting climate cartoons in words. Wouldn’t that explain their site pretty well?

  27. Jquip says:

    Nick Stokes: ” The meeting was very publicly requested by Lord Lawson.”

    So that meeting they publicly requested: Was that a public meeting or not? If nothing else, I admire your tenacity in being such a thorough wordsnitch. If you haven’t, you should consider writing political speeches.

  28. Bruce Cobb says:

    Perhaps the correct word to describe the meeting would be “private”. The question still remains; what are they trying to hide?

  29. Nick Stokes says:

    “Jquip says: November 29, 2013 at 3:39 pm
    “So that meeting they publicly requested: Was that a public meeting or not?”

    Not. Lord Lawson requested thus:
    “They give no good reason for their unwillingness to engage though they do state that they would be happy to “advise” me personally. That can be readily achieved. I would like to invite your Fellows to meet me and my team in the House of Lords and to fix a firm date for such meeting as soon as practicable.”

    I do not think “advise me personally” is a request for a public meeting.

  30. JCR says:

    Josh has nailed it – SkepticalScienzKidz. In a general way, I can’t abide ad hominens, but this is too good to pass up!

  31. *What will the population think about AGW in 100 years time?*

  32. Rick Bradford says:

    They will regard our generation as a laughing stock.

    “Ha, ha, do you know that back then, they were frightened of CO2?” “Haha — look, I’m going to breathe out!” “Wow, scareeeeee!”

  33. Peter Wilson says:

    Nick Stokes says:
    November 29, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    I do not think “advise me personally” is a request for a public meeting.

    Honestly Nick, I think you’d be stretching it way to far to call it a request for a secret meeting. Its just a request for a meeting. The secrecy part clearly comes from the RS. How you can attempt to spin it otherwise is beyond me.

  34. Nick Stokes says:

    Peter Wilson says: November 29, 2013 at 5:48 pm
    “Honestly Nick, I think you’d be stretching it way to far to call it a request for a secret meeting. Its just a request for a meeting. “

    Indeed. I’m not calling it a secret meeting – that’s the OP. Lord L put his correspondence on the web; that’s not secret. He asked for and got a meeting between Fellows of the RS and Lord Lawson. That’s what happened.

  35. Janice Moore says:

    Well, well, Mr. Uriah Heep Stokes-to-the-Defense, if it was, indeed, not a meeting held in secrecy, what most people call a “secret meeting”, who was present and what was said and done at that meeting? If you do not know the answer to that question, where is the answer to be found? If you do not know even that, then you apparently have no evidence upon which to base your conjecture. Why make your assertions here at all?

    btw: the mere fact of the meeting is not the issue.

  36. kim says:

    If the fellows of the Royal Society learned anything they sure don’t seem to be in a hurry to tell us.

    On the word of no one’s here.
    ===============

  37. Nick Stokes says:

    Janice Moore says: November 29, 2013 at 7:24 pm
    “what most people call a “secret meeting”, who was present and what was said and done at that meeting”

    The meeting was reported by Lord Lawson in the Spectator. That’s hardly secret. There is a link to that in the OP. Richard Lindzen was one other attendee. Lawson called it a “long-discussed meeting”, and it was. Lord L put the planning correspondence on the web as it happened. I linked one item. The RS attendees were nominated well in advance.

    Lord L called it “secret” on the basis that no press were present. Ever been to such a meeting? Did people call it “secret”?

    There seems to be nothing preventing Lord L, Richard L etc telling you everything you want to know.

  38. GeeJam says:

    @ Janice Moore (and Nick Stokes) some light relief over Janice’s earlier comment about Josh’s biscuits @ 11:00 am . . . .

    When a bag of crunchy ‘crisps’ mean a bag of crispy ‘chips’,
    and a big portion of ‘chips’ become ‘fries’,
    Little wonder we sometimes get confused,
    however much we are wise.

    If a large sponge ‘fairy cake’ is a ‘muffin’,
    But ‘muffins’ are like toasted rolls of bread,
    and a ‘hood’ is a hat – not a cars ‘bonnet’,
    yet a ‘bonnet’ is something worn on the head!

    Just accept that ‘elevator’ means ‘lift’ and ‘sweets’ are ‘candy’,
    Life’s too short – so why risk it,
    So, whether small sweet crunchy ‘biscuits’ become ‘cookies’,
    or a ‘cookie’ means ‘large flat gooey ‘biscuit’.

    UK gallons are bigger, ‘rubbish’ is ‘garbage’,
    And an ‘anorak’ is worn as a coat,
    But “I’m going for a fag” may not mean ‘to smoke’,
    So, perhaps I should end on that note.

  39. rogerknights says:

    “A closed-door meeting” seems like a better descriptor than “a secret meeting.”

  40. Janice Moore says:

    Thanks for that, Gee Jam, LOL. So, “cookies” are “biscuits.” Applause, applause!

    When that slimy Defender of the Faith, Deacon “Half-truths” Stokes is slithering about, one NEEDS comic relief.

    If I EVER get the privilege of visiting Great Britain, it will help me immensely, NO doubt. For ONCE, I would keep my mouth shut most of the time for fear of embarrassing myself!

    Well, we may go to town in our pants and place a napkin to the left of our dinner plate over here (and lots of other silly things of which I am blissfully unaware, I’m sure) …… but, at least we drive on the right side of the road.
    #(;))

  41. jorgekafkazar says:

    Janice Moore says: “Thanks, Mr. Kafkazar. Say, how DID you make that cool [lightning] bolt symbol? Leave it to an engineer to figure out something cool.”

    Janice: The symbol’s code is U+26A1, high voltage symbol. Some other examples: ☏⚓♾♡☆♜. Fun!

  42. jorgekafkazar says:

    My understanding is that the meeting was held under “Cheat ‘em House Rules,” in which no attribution of specific quotes to specific people is permissible. So who said what is….drumroll…a SECRET!!! And if the Press was not permitted in, they were denied access to what was said. It was thereby kept…haha, you guessed it…SECRET from the Press. Still, Nick Stokes continues to dance around the truth like the Sugar Plum Fairy, attempting to deny that the meeting itself was conducted in a closed manner, i.e., in SECRECY. No one here claimed the meeting was arranged secretly, merely that the content was not 100% public–certain facts to be kept confidential, which, Nick, is a synonym for SECRET. Nick dances with a strawman in his choreography of faulty logic. Pathetic, Nick.

  43. Janice Moore says:

    @ Gee Jam — well, I fired up the computer again even though it is nearly “stupid o’clock” here because I felt bad that I didn’t give your excellently written wit and humor fitting praise above. You are a super-talented writer, G.J.! I hope we get to read more of your creative writing. I enjoyed your fun poem immensely. Nice job!

    Hi, Mr. Kafkazar the (modest, heh) Engineer,

    THANK YOU! U+26A1 U+26A1

    Yes, yes, I am impressed. Hm, I’ll try to decipher that message…. “Telephone before anchoring next to ‘The Button.’ Love, Starcastle.” Close? lol

    Well, now I’ll see if I needed to put the lesser than/greater than symbols to the right and left of the lightning bolt code or not… .

  44. Janice Moore says:

    Uh, Mr. Kafkazar…. I messed up. The third set (between lesser than/greater than symbols) disappeared and, well, you can see that at least my bolding worked. I tried typing: Ctrl (holding while simultaneously typing) – U+26A1, but that (Ctrl-U) only exposed all the html stuff for this page… and well, I’m going to bed, now! Thanks, so much, for trying.

  45. Pogo says:

    In regard to the assorted comments about eminent scientists of the past making statements now proved to be hopelessly incorrect, may I draw your attention to (Arhtur C.) Clarke’s “Second (or perhaps Third) Law:- “When an eminent scientist says that something may be possible he is almost certainly correct, when an eminent scientist says that something is impossible he is almost certainly wrong.”

  46. gaelan clark says:

    Nick Stokes…..a bit of clarity from the point you seem to be trying to make…..

    If a meeting is known to be happening…..nothing within that meeting can be secret?

    Odd logic from you and not supportable from the reality of any government on the planet where and when meetings take place that are highly publicized but which about nothing is known.

    I wish you wouldnt beclown yourself so.

  47. Nick Stokes says:

    gaelan clark says: November 30, 2013 at 3:13 am
    “If a meeting is known to be happening…..nothing within that meeting can be secret?”

    What exactly is your suspicion? Do you think Lord Lawson, Lindzen and the Royal Society are conspiring to take over the world? Is there any evidence that GWPF is bound to secrecy? They were there, in fact, they organized it.

  48. Merrick says:

    Mike Ozanne,

    Depends on how you define “twisted mangled corpse wrong.” The Smeaton coefficient was too *high* by about 50%, which would lead one to believe too much lift was possible. Because of that one might *more* optimistically predict a would-be craft airworthy and go down in flames. But that datum wouldn’t lead one to be more pessimistic (as Lord Kelvin was) about the possibility of heavier-than-air flight.

  49. beng says:

    Shh. Be vewy vewy quiet. We’re hunting the missing heat, and it’s a twavisty we can’t find it. Hahahahahahaha.

  50. gaelan clark says:

    Nick Stokes…..

    I do not have any suspicions. I am though, curious.

    Will you answer the question posed in my prior comment?

  51. Bruce Cobb says:

    @Nick Stokes;
    There you go again with your ridiculous, [snip] straw man argument of some giant conspiracy. [snip . . mod]

  52. Yet another Mike from the Carson Valley where we deal with cold a lot and heat says:

    Nick the self acknowledged genius of WUWT clearly demonstrates the genius can make stupid mistakes syndrome once again.

  53. jorgekafkazar says:

    Janice Moore says: “Hi, Mr. Kafkazar the (modest, heh) Engineer… I’ll try to decipher that message…. “Telephone before anchoring next to ‘The Button.’ Love, Starcastle.” Close? lol…”

    Sometimes we see messages in random figures that aren’t really there, Janice. Glad you didn’t see a hockey stick, though.

    Try here for help: http://fsymbols.com/all/

    You can also simply block and copy from there. I’m running Ubuntu, so I copy from their font/symbol table.
    ♔♕♖♗♘♙♚♛♜♝♞♟
    ʞɔıʇs ʎǝʞɔoɥ

  54. jorgekafkazar says:

    gaelan clark says: “Nick Stokes…I do not have any suspicions. I am though, curious. Will you answer the question posed in my prior comment?”

    Gaelan: There are TWO Nick Stokes. One of them has a normal IQ and is okay, if misinformed. The other often paints itself into a logical corner, then can’t answer simple questions about the reasoning that got it there. It may have something to do with cranial capacity.

  55. Janice Moore says:

    Thanks, Jorge Kafkazar! lol And, this morning…. I DID see a hockey stick!!!!

    LOVE your brilliant writing at 12:21am today. A ♚ing achievement.

    Okay I have a baby version of a Symbol Chart in my Word software so:

    Ode to Jorge

    Now, I am ☺, for symbols are FUN,
    to make ♫ or look ♯ or to draw a nice ҉
    and a mouthful Θ of π
    and a snail on the run « ﻕ
    but the ♥ is for certain my favorite one.

    ********************
    @ Gaelen Clark, (Jorge, again), Beng, Bruce Cobb, and Mike from Carson Valley — what a witty bunch! This ended up being one of the finest threads I’ve read in awhile (so many jovially witty raconteurs) — YOU GUYS ARE THE BEST!

  56. Janice Moore says:

    Well, I obviously haven’t mastered the “end bold” –sigh. Actually, it may have been my subconscious making that happen, for the bold reflects my enthusiasm for all you guys!

  57. Mike Ozanne says:

    @Merrick Well it depends on whether he took the inductive or deductive approach to form his opinion. Extrapolate the lift equation as it was known, or simply work out the proportion of aviation pioneers turning up in the “twisted mangled corpse” cohort………..:-)

  58. Nic Lewis says:

    Nick Stokes
    “Is there any evidence that GWPF is bound to secrecy?”

    It depends what you mean by secrecy. But, certainly, the Royal Society Fellows (or their leader) required that there be substantial restrictions on reporting of the meeting. I’m not free to tell you who said what (apart, maybe, from what I said myself) or even to disclose the list of participants.

    Note, incidentally, that the Royal Society Fellows were attending as independent specialists not as representatives of the Royal Society, and likewise those on the GWPF side of the table were attending as independent specialsts not as representatives of the GWPF.

  59. Robert of Ottawa says:

    So why did the RS want a “secret meeting” with their scientific opponents? Were they hoping to beguile, seduce or bribe the skeptics? In which case, their desire for secrecy is understandable. Enquiring minds want to know.

    Or are the member of the RS just pompous and plain stupid; a more likely explanation.

    There is only one way to resolve these burning issues.

  60. Nick Stokes says:

    “Note, incidentally, that the Royal Society Fellows were attending as independent specialists not as representatives of the Royal Society, and likewise those on the GWPF side of the table were attending as independent specialists not as representatives of the GWPF.”

    So a group of independent specialists, who likely included Brian Hoskins, John Mitchell, Tim Palmer, John Shepherd, Eric Wolff, Lord Lawson, Richard Lindzen and Nic Lewis had a well publicised meeting and agreed to observe Chatham House rules on quoting. That’s the “sekrit meeting”?

  61. gnomish says:

    no, nick- that’s an open meeting of the utmost transparency.
    p.s. why do you have to guess who attended?

  62. Nick Stokes says:

    gnomish says: November 30, 2013 at 5:25 pm
    “p.s. why do you have to guess who attended?”

    Not guessing. Rs declared their list here. Lord L said in the Spectator that he and Lindzen were there. And Nic added himself.

  63. gnomish says:

    nick- did you see the date on that letter? June 5, 2013 it indicates only that a meeting of some kind was discussed.
    nor does it list attendees at any meeting held after that date (logically enough)
    is there some relevance, then?

  64. Janice Moore says:

    Go, Gnomish!

  65. Nick Stokes says:

    gnomish says: November 30, 2013 at 9:55 pm
    “nick- did you see the date on that letter? June 5, 2013 it indicates only that a meeting of some kind was discussed.
    nor does it list attendees at any meeting held after that date (logically enough)
    is there some relevance, then?”

    Yes. There was only one meeting (unless they had a sekrit one), and as Lord L said, it was “long discussed”. Those FRS’s were his later email list.

  66. gnomish says:

    ok. so it’s not a list of attendees because there had been no meeting and that’s how you know who attended what hadn’t yet happened. good enough for me.
    i’ll never call you McGillicutty the bridge builder. time to disengage from this tar babby.

Comments are closed.