Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t fobdangerclose and ralfellis – Philippe Verdier, weather chief at France Télévisions, the country’s state broadcaster, has been suspended for publicly criticising Climate Alarmism.
According to The Telegraph;
Every night, France’s chief weatherman has told the nation how much wind, sun or rain they can expect the following day.
Now Philippe Verdier, a household name for his nightly forecasts on France 2, has been taken off air after a more controversial announcement – criticising the world’s top climate change experts.
Mr Verdier claims in the book Climat Investigation (Climate Investigation) that leading climatologists and political leaders have “taken the world hostage” with misleading data.
In a promotional video, Mr Verdier said: “Every night I address five million French people to talk to you about the wind, the clouds and the sun. And yet there is something important, very important that I haven’t been able to tell you, because it’s neither the time nor the place to do so.”
He added: “We are hostage to a planetary scandal over climate change – a war machine whose aim is to keep us in fear.”
Frankly I’m shocked. Just a few months ago, January this year, in the wake of a horrifying terrorist attack on their offices, France rallied to support Charlie Hebdo’s freedom of expression, their freedom to satirise and speak out on sensitive issues such as religion. France prides herself that no subject is taboo. But apparently offending the Climate Taliban is a step too far – that gets you suspended from your government job.
France’s motto, Liberté, égalité, fraternité – except when you want to talk about climate change.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
je suis Philippe Verdier
Excellent!
Yes, brilliant.
I’m going to shoot off an email to the Telegraph, I hope you don’t mind if I quote that.
What is particularly sickening is the quote from le Monde, which claims that the climate models are actually predicting the climate rather well. What can you do in the face of a huge tsunami of lies?
It looks like he was literally sacked for telling the truth.
Truly, je suis Philippe Verdier
Le Monde shows this image as proof that the models are right and philippe is wrong
Climate models developed and ripened for several years proved rather accurate to predict the evolution of the Earth’s climate, even if they are not perfect.
To check the accuracy of climate models, they are tested on past climate. If they are able to correctly predict developments past, there is no reason to think that they can predict the evolution of the climate in the future.
The models used to predict the average increase in the Earth’s surface temperatures have proved to be rather reliable, the gap between observations and predictions being quite reduced.
“ripened” ? They certainly stink!!!
http://s1.lemde.fr/image/2015/10/12/534×0/4787863_6_11bd_les-modeles-climatiques-courbe-grise-ont-su_1e1c004af6c121de1b200e1afae65eb0.png
can’t I use image tags?
[No. Just paste the URL. ~mod.]
“quote from le Monde”
Sorry, you got this wrong.
Correct spelling is “L’immonde” now.
“Climate models developed and ripened for several years proved rather accurate to predict the evolution of the Earth’s climate, even if they are not perfect.”
That is not at all a correct description of the models. The only reason why the models seems to fit temperature records is that they are heavily adjusted to fit the temperature records. The predictions made just 10 years ago fails miserably. Even the fifth assessment report by IPCC report states that the models are really bad. The problem is that the necessary conclusion that they are bad does´t find it´s way in to the conclusions by IPCC. With IPCC´s own words:
“When initialized with states close to the observations, models ‘drift’ towards their imperfect climatology (an estimate of the mean climate), leading to biases in the simulations that depend on the forecast time. The time scale of the drift in the atmosphere and upper ocean is, in most cases, a few years. Biases can be largely removed using empirical techniques a posteriori.”
(Ref. Contribution from working group I to the fifth assessment report by IPCC; On the physical science basis; 11.2.3.1 Decadal Prediction Experiments)
There wouldn’t be a fit without using “empirical techniques a posteriori” or to put the language straight – the only reason the model output seems to fit the data is that the model has been adjusted so that the output fits the data. IPCC confuses nature with bad models.
jesuisphilippe
October 15, 2015 at 4:57 am
I like the Model vs Observations image and how it Conveniently cherry picks 2000 (after the last Super El Nino) as an end date
>>Correct spelling is “L’immonde” now.
It would have a common pedigree.
“A bit of a lemon” was coined from the strange design and reputed unreliability of Citroen cars.
R
The other “cherry pick” on the graph was that the model “results” were not initially zeroed like the data was in (approximately) 1865, which would have likely showed a separation (bias) of +0.2C between the model and observations in year 2000 and even more so if they extended the graph into the “modern anthropogenic pause period” through today.
How impressive that those models are able to predict the past accurately! Those are some damn fine billion dollar curve fitting supercomputers.
The models used in hind-casting the past illustrated here are based relying on a aerosols fit, that have been shown to be far smaller with observations than this match. Especially don’t include ocean cycles or not correctly and have no idea on Earth’s albedo.
Every time when shown against future observations always fail.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/admin/ed-assets/2013/06/CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means1.png
Correct link.
I am Philippe Verdier.
If the climate models can’t predict weather for a year away, why should anyone believe the climate changers? It is a fraud by politicians to take away more taxes and enslave people, and they pay off some scientists with pressure and funding.
UN and others “support” their claims saying there is scientific consensus. Let’s see, there was scientific consensus that: miasma created disease, bleeding is a cure for illness, the earth is flat, the universe revolves around the earth, and on and on. Good science questions, it is not hidebound.
Beat me to it. Touché. I would also say “Je suis carbon”
It is time to start a movement behind this:
#plantlivesmatter
#jesuiscarbon
#jesuiscarbon appears a gnat’s hair away from “Jesus is carbon”.
Might upset the Pope…
Considering that we are all “carbon based life forms” the phrase “Jesus is Carbon” has a rather true ring it in my mind.
#jesuiscarbon
“To check the accuracy of climate models, they are tested on past climate.”
A model is fit to match past data, then based on the fact that it more or less can be made to fit the data is proof that it can predict future data.
Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please excuse me while I rip out my hair and gouge out my eyeballs. I cannot take it anymore.
Jgriggs3,
Exactly. This vilification of the essence of life is an absurd form of self-loathing by our planet “protectors”. The green movement actually condemns the primary substance needed for greening the earth. If it was a Hollywood movie, no one would believe it…
#jesuiscarbon
Could definitely deserve a good BM
Nous sommes tous Philippe Verdier
je suis aussi!
A positive when the climate alarmists feel threatened by a humble weatherman simply speaks the truth. There must be panic in the ranks as more and more speak out and fewer and fewer take heed of the scare. It won’t be long before politicians realize they will not automatically be elected simply for saying they believe in global warming. The thought that Paris will be another flop must be terrifying.
Je suis Phillipe Verdier.
Idem.
Hat Tip; to fobdangerclose of Watts Up With That yesterday.
Lies kill.
Truth is life.
seek truth or die.
[“or” fixed – mod]
Perfect timing. Perfect place. And his suspension will create a Streisand Effect. Magnifique!
Exactly. If they had done and said nothing then it would’ve been just another climate change book launch by just another weatherman and would’ve stayed largely anonymous. No big deal. Now the world knows of the French and climate activists intolerance to a challenging viewpoint.
Contact the “weather talking heads” of CNN, NBC, PBS, ABC, CBS, Weather Channel and ask them to give their assessment of this news on air for the record.
Push them, make them go in the real History as the liars they are.
To be known for all time as total frauds is not a good thing and they know it.
Wasn’t Al Roker fired for expressing some similar heresy?
Are there any practicing TV weatherpersons in the USA that are expressing the same sentiments as Philippe Verdier, and still have a job as TV meteorologists? Ie,: John Coleman is retired…and A. Watts is not doing daily weather either (as he has “bigger fish to fry”)…
Very much a ‘non story’ so far in France, alas.
May be a non story but it is still reported in Le Figaro
http://tvmag.lefigaro.fr/le-scan-tele/polemiques/2015/10/14/28003-20151014ARTFIG00369-philippe-verdier-choque-d-etre-ecarte-par-france-televisions.php
But that’s about it. That said He has replied to an early article in this obscure publication essentially demanding the ‘climate skeptics’ be denied anymore airtime.
http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2015/10/14/philippe-verdier-suis-donc-climatosceptique-261660
Essentially saying he is not a skeptic but a journalist arguing that the press is miss reporting on climate change, notably on the data but also the advantages of warmer weather. He also objects strongly to be tarred ‘extreme right wing’ due to association with authors published by the same house.
BTW his book concludes that the world is being ‘held hostage’ by the AGW lobby.
Note that the former French environment minister recently called him a c**t on TV. And she’s of the right.
During the presidential electoral campaign against Ségolène Royal, Nicolas Sarkozy signed the ecological pact of Nicolas Hulot (with the exception of the antinuclear bullet point). Ségolène Royal signed the pact without reservation (according to the media), then she explained that actually made reservations.
Nicolas Sarkozy is known for his very limited economic reforms “libérales” (liberal in the very slightly libertarian direction, not US “liberal” direction), but also for many greeny moves like banning fracking and not allowing GM seeds (France was very advanced in GE tech some decades ago, now it’s gone elsewhere). The only part where Sarkozy did not let go is nuclear power (but then Mitterrand did not either, despite his electoral promises). Nuclear tech was a French national pride for some time, less today.
NKM was a minister of communication of Sarkozy, where she did nothing to stop HADOPI, an inept anti-piracy law and subject of jokes (except telling people that she knew how to get away with illegal downloads without fear of HADOPI surveillance).
She was also a forgotten as “secrétaire d’État” (2nd class minister) of environment, except for her hate of GMO, and for throwing a tantrum “J’en ai marre d’être confrontée à une armée de lâches” because members of the parliament wouldn’t come to vote against GMOs (on a legislative proposition from a communist). She believes elected people should vote as they are instructed (“Manifestement, Copé n’arrive pas à tenir le groupe.”) She has authoritarian tendencies with a love for the violent destructive methods of the “Faucheurs volontaires” (GM fields destroyers). She went to kiss “José” (actually Joseph, but José is more altermondialist) Bové, the leaders of these GMO destroyers, who is an elected representative in the European parliament.
NKM is more leftish than the typical leftish right politician. She wants to ban more diesel engines and do it earlier than the socialist mayor of Paris. She is all in favor of every ecoloonacy.
Galileo revisited. Science has now returned to what it was centuries ago: A cabal of ignoramuses led by the Pope putting the real scientists in jail applying RICO.
I wonder if the “journalists*” who work for France 24 will have anything to say about this.
Back a few years…
Clément Weill-Raynal of France 3 TV channel filmed the “mur des cons” of the SM magistrate union (far left); the SNJ-CGT union (far left) of France 3 TV channel “demandait que le journaliste soit traduit en conseil de discipline” (wanted him to face a disciplinary board).
http://www.francetvinfo.fr/politique/affaire/le-mur-des-cons/mur-des-cons-france-3-ouvre-une-procedure-disciplinaire_313827.html
They did it in the UK, silenced doubters or others wit scientific knowdleg. Dr David Bellamy had hi BBC career destroyed because he spoke out against AGW nonsense. Johnny Ball (mathematician), father of TV/Radio personality Zoe Ball, was taken off air, spoke out about AGW nonsense. At least some in the independent tv sector have tried by have appearances by Piers Corbyn on daytime tv to talk about AGW nonsense, but very few times this has happened! America, stand up & stay strong, resistance is NOT futile!!!!
Please excuse typos!
“French WW2 rifle for sale, Cheap! Never been fired. Only dropped once!!”
That’s not really helpful or correct.
“Comedy is not pretty”
– S. Martin
No. It’s a disgraceful comment.
Every day I walk past the war memorial in the small French village where I live. Its dozens of names of soldiers killed are the same names as those of my neighbours.
Lighten up Stephen. Good humour is supposed to make you feel a bit uncomfortable.
Q: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Paris?
A: Nobody knows, it’s never been tried.
Q. Why did the French plant trees along the Champs Elysees?
A. So the Germans could march in the shade.
Q: How many gears does a French tank have?
A: 4 reverse and 1 forward, in case the enemy attacks from the rear.
Q: How can you identify a French Infantryman?
A: Sunburned armpits.
Q. What’s the difference between Frenchmen and toast?
A. You can make soldiers out of toast.
Q. What do you call 100,000 Frenchmen with their hands up?
A. The Army.
“Every day I walk past the war memorial in the small French village where I live. Its dozens of names of soldiers killed are the same names as those of my neighbours.”
Yes, of course they are. Smith, Jones, Thompson, Anderson, Davis, Freeman….
‘On ne passe pas’ Verdun.
Martin A . My grandfather lost a leg at Chateau-Thierry in 1917, he was with the 26th Yankee Div. He was 17.
For a little perspective.
Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home
Close Window
WWI Casualty and Death Tables
One way to understand the violence and slaughter that occurred in the Great War is to examine the number of casualties aand deaths. Exact figures are still in dispute, because of different definitions used each category, the questionable accuracy of the recording system used and the loss or destruction of a number of official documents. The data in the tables below reflect numbers from several sources and are consistant with most experts’ current estimates.
Country Total Mobilized Forces Killed Wounded Prisoners and Missing Total Casualties Casualties as % of Forces
ALLIED AND ASSOCIATED POWERS
Russia 12,000,000 1,700,000 4,950,000 2,500,000 9,150,000 76.3
British Empire 8,904,467 908,371 2,090,212 191,652 3,190,235 35.8
France 8,410,000 1,357,800 4,266,000 537,000 6,160,800 73.3
Italy 5,615,000 650,000 947,000 600,000 2,197,000 39.1
United States 4,355,000 116,516 204,002 4,500 323,018 7.1
Japan 800,000 300 907 3 1,210 0.2
Romania 750,000 335,706 120,000 80,000 535,706 71.4
Serbia 707,343 45,000 133,148 152,958 331,106 46.8
Belgium 267,000 13,716 44,686 34,659 93,061 34.9
Greece 230,000 5,000 21,000 1,000 27,000 11.7
Portugal 100,000 7,222 13,751 12,318 33,291 33.3
Montenegro 50,000 3,000 10,000 7,000 20,000 40.0
TOTAL 42,188,810 5,142,631 12,800,706 4,121,090 22,062,427 52.3
ALLIED AND ASSOCIATED POWERS
Germany 11,000,000 1,773,700 4,216,058 1,152,800 7,142,558 64.9
Austria-Hungary 7,800,000 1,200,000 3,620,000 2,200,000 7,020,000 90.0
Turkey 2,850,000 325,000 400,000 250,000 975,000 34.2
Bulgaria 1,200,000 87,500 152,390 27,029 266,919 22.2
TOTAL 22,850,000 3,386,200 8,388,448 3,629,829 15,404,477 67.4
GRAND TOTAL 65,038,810 8,528,831 21,189,154 7,750,919 37,466,904 57.5
https://www.pbs.org/greatwar/resources/casdeath_pop.html
sorry to be wet blanket. It just touches home with me,
michael
Before you leap to criticize gudolpops, read Bill Shirer’s book The Collapse of the Third Republic.
rw no I have not read it.
Have you read “The gathering storm” by Winston Churchill? A bit self serving but fairly good on the events of the time. 6 volumes as I remember. Somewhere, I think I have a first printing of volume 1
michael
Marvelously inventive the French. Their military vehicles are a thing of wonder. 5 gears in reverse, 1 in forward. “Advance to the Rear” mes amis.
That was the Italians.
ReSteve Pas vrais!
https://www.google.fr/#q=Philippe+Verdier
Is it any wonder that scientists who depend upon grants to continue their research efforts might turn a blind eye to this climate alarmist crap? I hope that Richards in Vancouver is right the Streisand effect.
“Climate Taliban” is awesome.
I thought now that the AP had eliminated “denier” from its style guide for climate change, the position was not to use name calling to address people with differing opinions. This doesn’t seem like a good way to further healthy debate, especially given Anthony’s comment:
“People are fond of saying that when you’ve resorted to insults, you’ve lost the argument. My view is that you can win many more arguments with persuasive language than you can with labeling and name calling.”
Perhaps the author was just trying to imply that those who called for Verdier to be let go are censoring views they don’t like, something that the Taliban have done as well. Isn’t that the same way the whole “denial” thing started? I suggest/request that the original author remove the reference.
I couldn’t care less if they call me a d*ni*r. I’m not that precious.
I’ll call them names as well, because it’s fun:
climate taliban
warmistas
thermageddonists
grant troughers
hypocrites
etc.
No comments section in the telegraph piece, although the page has 2.6M “likes” on Facebook
Careful dennisambler – that 2.4M likes could include those who support his sacking !
Surely time for a Twitter storm:
.@france2tv #JeSuisPhilippe
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11931645/Frances-top-weatherman-sparks-storm-over-book-questioning-climate-change.html
Another Global Warming-related job loss . . .
Je suis Phillipe Verdier.
SOP for the green blob – ignore the and take out the man.
https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/the-age-of-unenlightenment/
Pointman
Doh! s/b “ignore the ball and take out the man”.
I’ve seen this bloke number of times, as well as some rather attractive weather presenters on all 3 news channels. He has my sympathy, I suspect he knew what is getting himself into and what consequences might be, so his honesty and bravery should be exemplary lesson to many others.
It’s not only France gone bonkers, UK, Germany and others are just as bad.
It all comes from the Brussels’ Bastion of Bureaucracy (better known as EU) , from the experts who banned curved bananas and invested millions in research for production of square eggs…
Indeed. The rapid removal of people with a contrary opinion shows how weak the warmists think their hypotheses are.
Kind of reminds me of the ooh ahh bird… the one who lays square eggs and goes ooh ooh…. ahhhh whenever it lays one.
I just sent this email to the Telegraph, though the chances of it being printed are very small:
Sir,
The sacking of Philippe Verdier, as reported by the Telegraph, is truly sickening. Is this the France of Charlie Hebdo, where those who were murdered were regarded as heroes for telling unpalatable truths? Verdier was sacked literally for telling the inconvenient truth. I am very familiar with climate science, and all of Verdier’s claims are true. Climate science is in a shocking state which makes Volkswagen look good in comparison.
The Le Monde quote about climate models is shocking: it is a complete inversion of the truth. The models have utterly failed to predict future climate and even the IPCC has admitted this. But don’t take my word. Listen to the words of perhaps the greatest living scientist, Freeman Dyson: ”What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger. It’s clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn’t so clear 10 years ago.”
I hope that any journalist with the slightest integrity will protest against this sacking.
je suis Philippe Verdier
Christopher Wright
Do you remember the huge protests among journalists after the sanction of Clément Weill-Raynal?
Neither do I.
He was sanctioned for reporting about the “mur des cons” of the SM (syndicat de la magistrature, far left magistrate union). He was working for France 3 (national TV) where the unionized journalists didn’t like his reporting about that wall where photos of politicians of the “right” together with photos of parents of victims of serial rapist/killers who had the audacity to criticize the judge who released the dangerous already convicted rapist-killer before the end of the duration of the prison punishment.
And RSF (reporters sans frontières) found an excuse to not defend the journalist.
Note: Also, one of the terrorists involved in the “Hyper Cacher” attack (synchronised with the Charlie Hebdo attack) had been convicted six times. Last conviction: he prepared a plan for an evasion for Smaïn Aït Ali Belkacem (involved in the RER bombing in 1995). He was convicted in 2013 and received 5 years in prison. Adding all the prison terms he theoretically got, the total is 18 years. (Naively adding these years, he would still be being bar.)
A few days ago, someone convicted for armed robbery was temporarily released during his prison term, did not return to prison (why?), and killed a cop. (We are told that everything is normal.)
Anyone who criticizes this façon de faire is immediately labelled “hard right”, “far right” or “extreme right”.
Here’s hoping Philippe Verdier will submit a guest essay to this blog.
Je suis Phillipe Verdier.
“We are hostage to a planetary scandal over climate change – a war machine whose aim is to keep us in fear.”
If you want to learn about climate ask a TV weatherman – especially one like this ‘Charlie’ who hasn’t even studied meteorology
Ha ha ha ha! Good one
‘Ha ha ha ha!’ So, what’s your CV? I mean, beside being the village idiot?
You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
It’s reassuring that a luke-warmer like Phillipe can still see and be offended by the corruption of Big AGW.
He. (Phillipe Verdier.) took a stand, did something noble, that’s his CV.
So what have you done lately ah, Village Idiot ?
michael
Village Idiot. We could call up a bunch of Highly credentialed Scientists, and you would still find fault with their sceptical views.
It doesn’t take a Ph.D. to calculate that the warming since CO2 “took off” is ~1.2C/century (~0.7+C since 1950), with a 40% measured increase in CO2. And that’s using the “pause-buster” data, at that.
Raw CO2 forcing (without net feedback) is ~1.1C/doubling. The atmospheric sink is 400ppm with ~2ppm added per year (+0.4%/yr., actually). Net feedback has no shown itself in the data.
So how do you figure +3C by 2100?
Village Idiot, I’m not sure why you are happily and proudly calling yourself “Village Idiot”. If your comments were accurate, thoughtful, well reasoned, and you had earned the respect of your target readership; the name might be appropriately ironic. However, based on the vast majority of your comments, it is merely descriptive.