The Gore-a-thon on WUWT

This is a collection of all of the posts related to Al Gore’s “24 hours of climate reality” aka the Gore-a-thon. My sincere thanks to cartoonist Josh for making it possible.

Click each cartoon to go to the full story commentary.

In the beginning there was Gore, and a skeptical polar bear.

Hmm, so far, Al’s not getting the lift he needs after Katrina. The USA recently went over 1000 days without a major hurricane landfall. Watts Up with That?

According to some, Arctic Sea Ice is THE metric by which to gauge “global warming”. There’s only one problem. The ice is keeping its own schedule and temperature doesn’t seem to be much of a factor.

Sea level! Yes that’s it. Sea level rise is a primary indicator of global warming! Let’s have a look.

Polar bears are being threatened. They need rescue from climate change!

What temperature trend?

Where’s the warming?

Hockey sticks anyone?

Consensus says so!

Weather is not climate, unless we say it is.

Global warming causes floodroughts

Redefining the new normal. Wait, I thought actual climate scientists defined climatic normals, not ex-politicians

What can we expect from about 0.8C of warming? Catastrophe de jour ad infinitum

I’ll believe climate is a crisis when you start acting like there is one.

Carbon credits are the new indulgences.

Did you notice that Gore hasn’t brought up Mt. Kilimanjaro at all? Watts Up With That?

Windy whirligigs and Biomass are renewable.

Solar is the way forward (as long as the subsidies hold out).

I wonder why Al doesn’t drive an electric car everywhere?

An inconvenient truth from “Ivar the Terrible”

Models go Gaga with Gigo

Warming up the thermometers

Netting the big fish – payback

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

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

RELATED STORIES:

About these ads

48 Responses to The Gore-a-thon on WUWT

  1. Abigail McIntyre says:

    Too funny! I’m grinning, and I’m supposed to be maintaining the rage against the BIG BAD BILL.
    Stop distracting me with your righteous humour! BTW have you ever thought about the amount of electricity used to run corporate and home computers and entertainment and telecommunications industry equipment, and yet there has been no proposal to tax electricity dependent technology. What’s up with that?

  2. Ray says:

    Best Climate Fail file ever!

  3. Bob says:

    ” So long, and thanks for all the fish!”

    I love the allusion to the book, “Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy”.

  4. Pedantic says:

    “The ice is keeping it’s own schedule… ”

    ITS, no apostrophe. We don’t want people to think we’re stupid do we?

  5. Barbara Skolaut says:

    “We don’t want people to think we’re stupid do we?”

    That’s uneducated, Pedantic. Uneducated can be fixed; stupid (such as the Goracle, et al.) can’t.

  6. clankster says:

    Josh. So. Damned. Talented.
    Thanks, man.

  7. _Jim says:

    Great work Josh! Now that I see them altogether, they pretty well sum up Algore and his ‘Gore-a-thon’!

    .

  8. Richard Sandvig says:

    Thanks Ped-man. That apostrophe bothered me too.

  9. arhooley says:

    That’s hilarious.Add another ding for the apostrophe. But let’s end on a positive note, so: that’s hilarious.

  10. FerdinandAkin says:

    This has all the makings for an anthology of global warming information.

    Anthony, I would make the suggestion to get a copy write and proceed to publish this collection in a 24 chapter book. There would be one chapter from each of the postings of the 24 hours of climate reality followed by selected comments.

    Top 10 best seller list for sure!

    REPLY: Done deal. The book is being written as I write (well with a break for this comment) – Anthony

  11. Gary Hladik says:

    Great cartoons, Josh! #23, “Red Herrings” is my favorite. Hilarious!

    So long, Al, and thanks for all the laughs!

  12. John from CA says:

    Fantastic work Josh!

  13. Policyguy says:

    I have to hand it to you and Josh. Terrific stuff.

    Real world we still have to deal with AB 32 regulations in California. Both fixed rules and cap and trade.

    Although the President appears to have walked away from global warming regulations from the Clean Air Act. This is an election year suspension, but a big deal for business.

    California is a regulatory island. Something has to give.

  14. Roger Knights says:

    In case it got missed, here’s a suggestion I made for a cartoon in one of the earlier threads:

    Gore is standing in his “cherry picker” alongside a cherry tree with juice stains around his mouth, one hand behind his back fingers crossed, saying to an irritated man below in 18th century clothing, “What, me cherry-pick?” The man below is holding a piece of paper on which are a few words about some cherry-picked claim Al has made.

  15. Roh says:

    LMAO too funny.

  16. tralari says:

    [uh, don't come here and call us Nazis. That is not a good way to make friends. luv ya bye. ~ ctm]

  17. RoHa says:

    That’s great. I’m glad i didn’t bother reading all the accompanying text that you worked so hard at.

    Now we need that in a printable handout format that we can send to members of the Green Party, leave on buses and in library books, etc.

  18. Ric Werme says:

    I think I found a WUWT Fail!

    Nowhere here (until now) was there a link to Josh’s cartoon site

    That link goes to the page where he hid the donation jar, just click Home to get to the cartoon page. Then come back and click on the Donate button. Worked fine for me.

  19. dwright says:

    Josh. you are brilliant, combined with Mr Watts you two are making history that will survive the spin and hopefully Al Gore. The bear can get back to doing bear stuff. Looking for tasty fish. crapping in the woods a snacking on the hippies (hopefully)

  20. Thanks Josh!
    Your cartoons are the best thing that came out of Al Gore’s “24 hours of climate reality”.

  21. ACCKKII says:

    Al is one person with its characters.
    But!
    Al is that much important to all to forget realities?
    What are realities:
    1- CO2;
    2- O2;
    3- FBF Fossil Based Fuels;
    4- a billion cars in carpools still to add China and India, they are thirsty to DRIVE!;
    5- 28,000 daily flight sorties in US only, add others http://www.flightradar24.com ;
    6- what should be preferred first:a. Oil Industries, related jobs, markets and world economy? b. weather, Climate or whatever you like to name it and the EARTH?
    http://acckkii.tumblr.com

  22. Pipmon says:

    [snip. Accusing people of "denial" violates site Policy. ~dbs, mod.]

  23. K~Bob says:

    Thanks, Josh! A summary that even the IPCC can understand!

  24. kuaka says:

    Orwell was spot on with “double speak”. The purpose of politics is control and “wealth redistribution”…that is, take from the productive and distribute it into the pockets of the elite.

  25. Milen says:

    ummm, I would point out the obvious fallacies in these here “humorous” arguments, however why bother? People are not going to change. The only time we will stop spitting out copious amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere will be when the fossil fuels run out.
    And by the time things become irreversible, both you and I will not be living anymore. Just sucks for our grandchildren. I just hope they manage to go to Mars. Now THAT’s a planet that needs some global warming :)

  26. Robert of Ottawa says:

    Josh should produce a calendar

  27. Andrew Harding says:

    Gore looks like “Roger Mellie, the Man on the Telly” (Viz, an adult comic, published in UK: it takes the p**s out of stereotypical excuses for human beings!)

  28. morgo says:

    you need to draw one on gliard aust PM

  29. Norma J. Franklin says:

    All this jet-fuel used by Gore and his private trips. All the power used in his multi-room mansions. All the water pumped into his swimming pools. You sure are setting a great example, Mr. Gore. Way to go fellow – good ole hypocrite.

  30. Jeff Allen says:

    So…. what does Theo think of the current low arctic ice extent and thickness numbers coming in via satellite? The heck with Gore, I really couldn’t care. Whats up with the empirical data?

    Natura no facit saltum. (at least, not without a VERY obvious cause).

    In view of that, why are things changing so fast? Inquiring minds want to know….

  31. P.G. Sharrow says:

    @Jeff Allen: Logic says that the Earth can only make so much Ice and most of that has been going to the Antarctic. So there is not as much left over for the Arctic. Easy Grade School Science. Even AL can understand this. ;-) pg

  32. Jeff Allen says:

    @P.G.Sharrow
    Just wrong on sooo many levels…

  33. Jeff Allen says:

    @P.G. Sharrow – there was supposed to be a “Guffaw” in there. What you said was very funny.

  34. Michael says:

    Sad. Get a grip on reality. Soon.

    The globe is warming. Due to increased CO2, which humans have caused.

    The sooner you all get used to it the better.

    Even the great Monckton, said so in 2012 and it’s documented on this site. His quibble was over the exact climate sensitivity. But given that it’s taken ages for SOME of the “skeptics” to come around to what the climate scientists have said for over 25 years, I vote that we don’t waste another 25 years of BAU just to allow time for the remaining “skeptics” to realize they stuffed up also.

    PS an apostophe can indicate possession, so the phrase, “the ice is keeping it’s own schedule,” was the correct punctuation.

  35. Sam says:

    It is impossible to prove that any warming is ‘man made,’ because there aer 500 trillion factors relevent to how the temperature of earth is effected. To prove cause and effect, you can’t just make blanket statements or make a mini ‘greenhouse’ and claim it simulates the earth, which has trillions of organisms that react to differing levels of CO2.

    Add to that fact that we are approaching a solar maximum, and all of this global warming junk science should be ignored.

    Also, bonus points to any idiot who claims sea levels will go up when the arctic ice sheet melts. Floating ice doesn’t increase the water level when it melts – go run an experiment in your microwave idiotas.

  36. Milen says:

    Sam, just to clarify: ice sheets are on land – Greenland and Antarctica mostly. When that ice melts, water goes into the sea. I don’t even want to start explaining the greenhouse causality of CO2 to the planet to you. Your text sounds way too preconceived for you to understand science or any new ideas.
    Cheers,
    an Earth scientist

  37. PappaDaddy says:

    ‘PS an apostophe can indicate possession, so the phrase, “the ice is keeping it’s own schedule,” was the correct punctuation.’

    From dictionary.com

    its: the possessive form of it (used as an attributive adjective): The book has lost its jacket.

    It wouldn’t have taken you long to look that up Michael. I hate linguistics deniers! Clearly 1/3 of the warming in the last century was caused by linguistics deniers. The experts say so (or was it the models?) No matter. I’m not one to interfere with a man’s religion, so if you want to write a check for these ass clowns to turn the thermostat of the Earth down, press on. By no means should you expect others to follow your lunatic ideology. I’m not a scientist, but I know when I’m being hustled!

  38. PappaDaddy says:

    Scientist Milen says:

    I just hope they manage to go to Mars. Now THAT’s a planet that needs some global warming :)

    It’s (notice the apostrophe) interesting that you mention Mars with its (notice the lack of an apostrophe) 95% CO2 atmosphere. I wonder why it’s not burning up up there (or is it down there?) Could it be its distance from our common heat source and its atmospheric pressure (aka fewer molecules to collide with each other to create heat)? Again, I’m not a scientist— well technically I play a computer scientist at work.

  39. Milen says:

    P.Daddy, apostrophes noticed and appreciated.

    The pressure on Mars is roughly 200 times lower that that of Earth. Yes, the Sun is also further away and don’t forget the role atmospheric dust plays in climate control (it cools things down). Anyway, if you want a better analogue, look at Venus. Earth sized, higher insolation, but not so much higher than ours and a CO2 atmosphere. Average temperature – 462 degrees Celsius (that’s 836 Fahrenheit for you unit barbarians).
    I’m not saying we’ll ever get to that stage or that we are directly comparable, but Venus is a good proof of an extreme runaway greenhouse effect.

  40. PappaDaddy says:

    Scientist Milen

    PDaddy is that rapper isn’t he?!?!

    You fail to mention that there are significantly more of those molecule thingys bumping into each other in Venus’ atmosphere. Also the temperature on Venus is nearly the same on the dark and lighted side…just like Earth right? Last I checked temperature on the Blue Marble goes down when the Sun sets. And Venus’ oceans are just like Earth’s…oh wait…no oceans. So other than relative size, I see no comparison to Earth. I’m the same relative size as a jelly fish (and some would say of the same intellect). Does that sound like a fair comparison?

  41. heat_island says:

    Watt a difference 18 months makes . . .
    No droughts – check!
    No heatwaves – check!
    No arctic sea-ice loss – check!
    No superstorms – check!

  42. DWisehart says:

    These comics are just fantastic and just what we need: to laugh at some real non-sense.

    I wish I knew why the alarmists never point out that when CO2 levels were 5 to 20 times higher than today the earth was covered with lush vegetation from pole-to-pole. It doesn’t get much greener than that. What we have right now is a CO2 deficit.

  43. Jdallen says:

    Ah! Excellent! Does this in fact imply people here are joining a consensus that co2 increases are cause by human activity? If so that is encouraging. That permits me to suggest this metaphor: when moving a basket of eggs from a high shelf to the floor, which is more useful; to lower them or drop them?!

  44. Sam says:

    To Milen from Sam.

    You can’t concieve of how bad your models fail to account for reality. Your CO2 cross-sections are all wrong. Atmospheric modeling fails to account for the fact that, although the sun is a black body radiator, the emission spectrum of the various constituents of the atmosphere do not re-emit energy as a black body source. In addition, the models fail to account for biological sequestration which naturally occurs in atmospheres with increased CO2. Also, failure to account for solar maxima and minima in your models is a fatal flaw. If you look at a graph of solar maxima and solar minima against CO2 concentrations and temperatures, you will see that the solar maxima and minima tail the CO2 and temperature increases. In other words, the effect of the solar seasons creates temperature variations orders of magnitude greater than any ‘human’ caused CO2 contribution. Your soft science should be thrown out for not being based on REAL science.

    – A physicist.

  45. Milen says:

    Sam,

    I will endeavor to respond in full when I read up on the new advances in modelling, my knowledge is a few years old. However, you were talking about solar variation, Milankovic cycles and climate. Were you talking about such a graph, perhaps?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Temp-sunspot-co2.svg
    There I see temperature and CO2 steadily increasing, with sunspot cycles remaining the same. To some other posters here, who mention much higher CO2 levels in the past – I would like to make the following analogy: it is not harmful for a car to move at 100kph, it’s harmful to accelerate it from zero to 100 in a few microseconds (essentially, the last 200 years in geological time). Oh, and don’t hate on my soft science, as a geophysicist I am the one who brings you gas for your car :)

    Cheers,
    Milen

  46. Sam B. says:

    Milen:

    Sunspots are NOT the equivalent of the radiant flux of the sun on earth, and they are particularly meaningless if they are not directly facing earth. That is the problem with you “soft science” followers. You don’t look at the hard numbers, don’t care about the details, don’t actually do any analysis – you effectively cherry pick data to fit your hypothesis. You have to ‘read up’ on the new advances in modeling, because you don’t even understand the assumptions that go into the model.

    Case and point: the temperature part of that chart is based on the fake University of East Anglia numbers, which were discredited by a whistleblower. Click the link, it takes you right to their site. Effectively, your chart compares false temperature data to meaningless sunspot data.

    As opposed to ‘soft science’ models, where you plug in 1000 assumptions and manipulate the variables to get the ‘model’ you want, hard science asks the question, how do we analyze data that we have obtained to determine whether there are any correlations and to determine whether the data disproves a hypothesis. The very fact that there are ‘new models’ to predict the future in your soft science betrays the fact that there is not a solid theoretical basis for your conclusions. The equivalent in hard science would be to ‘predict’ the orbit of the moon based on a new ‘model’ of gravity. Effectively, you are telling us that the moon is going to fly away. Except, every ‘new model’ you come up with gives a slightly different answer. Try again.

    There used to be a nice (real) graph on wikipedia that showed CO2, temperature and solar flux, all appropriately fit to size on the same graph, but the global warming advocates took it down (it even had the treasured Vostok ice data on it). The only problem – if you took a straight edge on the graph and looked at what preceded what on the chart, it was clear that solar flux increases always preceded temperature increase, which slightly preceded CO2 increase. When I find the graph again, I’ll post it.

    Sam

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s