This is likely to cause a bit of a stir. Michael from the Climate Skeptics Party in Australia writes in Tips and Notes:
The TCS ad campaign hit the airwaves last night in Australia. I thought you might be interested and post them on your website.
Here are the other TV advertisements:
Kind Regards
Michael
The Climate Sceptics
Policy and Media Unit
Townsville Qld
email: climatesceptics.policy.media@gmail.com
website: http://www.climatesceptics.com.au
Ah, depends on the time and channel. I didn’t see them at all. We usually get the pro-AGW sheet.
But at least we don’t get the “black CO2” deemon in the sky ads anymore. Sadly however, KRudd747 is set on being the “poster boy” for climate tax in Crapenhagen.
Skeptics from Weather Action
http://www.kane-tv.com/wa/index.html
Headline: “launch” is misspelled.
Best regards.
IanM
I watched one of the other videos (you can get to 9 different videos using the pane at the bottom of each player) which went into detail on Miskolczi’s Law. The video was narrated by one of the IPCC reviewers who shared the Nobel prize and seems to refute the IPCC work.
Is anyone familiar with this Law and what has transpired with it since it was first proposed in 2007?
Thanks.
Maybe they “launchL the ads?
Good to see the truth in a climate story advert. We could do with some like it to counteract the pernicious “Act on co2” rubbish we get in the UK
Good to see.
Hopefully, they will at least cause people to question what has been continually trumpeted as the unassailable “truth” by the lamestream media, and do some research of their own.
This is the sort of af campaign we need in the U.S. Brilliant!
I think that you mean “launch” rather than “lauch” in the title.
[Thanx, fixed. ~dbs, mod.]
Short and simple. I wonder if we’ll get something like that going here in the states?
Starting with 1998, eh? … well as long as you are not cherry-picking …
Nice.
Everybody loves to see the Ken Lays, Bernard Madeoffs, Michael Milkins and Ivan Boeskys get their con games strung out like dirty laundry.
Why?
It makes the honest people feel good about being upright, instead of feeling like a used rag.
Wonder how much a 30sec ad costs here in the UK.
DaveE.
Poptech (07:05:48) :
Yes, send them to FOX News care of Glenn Beck.
Then send them to the GOP, care of Michael Steele.
America loves to see con men exposed. It’s the new National Passtime.
We’re a bit tired of Senators cheating on their wives while campaigning on morality platforms, and failing to pay thier taxes while raising ours.
Anders, where would you choose to start it from?
Would never be allowed in the US. The TV channel’s ownership have far too much invested in “Green” tech that it would countermand what they want. NBC’s “Green Week” on each of their channel properties is a great example of where ads like this would not be allowed. NBC is owned by GE, which bought up several green technology sections off of Enron. It’s in their own best interest to push the AGW idea as it helps them to sell more.
Could have done without a nuclear stack being used as an example of a CO2 outputer. On the whole I would say the 3rd commercial is the most effective.
Any chance one of these can run on CNN or MSNBC?
More rubbish from the BBC, courtesy of model Helena Christensen. She has a photo exhibition in London to show climate change in Peru.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8367039.stm
She bangs on about it, but the only thing is, it doesn’t appear to stand up. Looking at the GISS station data there appears to be a problem.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=309846860003&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Ms Christensen says her village is Pacchanta, and I’m pretty sure this GISS station is the closest. Anyone know any different before I contact the exhibitors and point out they’ve made a mistake?
I applaude the initiative, any initiative to fight back on AGW propaganda hype.
I wonder however if the layman understands the message of each individual commercial.
Number 1 is ok but I think it would have been better to make the link between temperature, Co2 made responsible for non existing Global Warming and the useless but costly ETS scheme so people make the connection.
I like the red threat through all four commercials ending with “You’re conned” very much because that’s exactly where it’s all about.
At the end of the message they should have listed an easy to remember web address for further information. http://www.conned.com would have done a fine job.
I love the “You Have Been Conned” tag line. Maybe it’s something that could be picked up by other political parties worldwide – to help ram home the message?
As I said earlier, I wish the Tories would take that line here in the UK – they’d get enormous support for it.
Instead we get ads of a fictitious fairy story saying we’re to blame. I complained to the ASA, as did many others. As a Government body, I wonder what the outcome of their enquiry will be?!
Anders L. (07:14:22) :
Starting with 1998, eh? … well as long as you are not cherry-picking …
Doesn’t seem too unreasonable to pick as a start date, the end date used by the warmist industry to ‘prove’ we’re all doomed!
Now this article has really made my day.
If there where a credible body that would collect money and pay for ads, I would contribute
While I agree with you that starting with 1998 is a little bit of cherry picking data. The premise of AGW is that we are getting warmer and looking over the past decade, that is clearly not happening. Also, it actually starts with 1997 so that the spike in 1998 can be seen clearly. This is probably the first time a lay person has actually seen this graph. I know I still thought that the hockey stick was viable up until a few months ago. That was the only information that was available!
O/T but I saw on accuweather where the Artic MAY be ice free in 20 years.This is according to a report by Caltin and WWF,World wrestling federation I guess.Isn’t this the same bunch that went up threre back earlier this year and nearly froze to death,keep going around in circle and had to cut thier trip short?To me the is nothing more than recycled news.
If this sort of campaign is to take off in places other than Australia, somone has to provide the money. It might be interesting to find out who has stumped up the money for this campaign. I am not suggesting that it is anything nefarious. But maybe we could emulate the process in other places.
Good ad – just the facts stated in an easy to understand way – including the strap line.
Once the media catch on to this, it will erupt big-time. Glad I’m not still in the AGW camp.
Telboy (06:56:11) :
“Good to see the truth in a climate story advert. We could do with some like it to counteract the pernicious “Act on co2″ rubbish we get in the UK”.
I fully concur! However there is not much chance of that happening in the UK now Lord “Mandy” Mandelson has been put in charge of the new “Ministry of Truth”, only this government calls it the Ministry of Information instead. With this particularly slippery character in such an influential position we can only expect more of the same or worse! It will be interesting to see how much “Truth” we’ll get from his department.
WAGTD!
DaveE asks how much a 30second ad costs in the UK. Lots !! But that’s not really the point. For advertising to work, there needs to be regular slots on TV, radio and in the press. In other words, a campaign. The Australians are to be commended on what they have done, but against the slick imagery of Gore’s “Incontinent Truth ” (sic) it unfortunately looks earnest but amateurish and I’m not sure if the message would get through. My thoughts, for what it’s worth, is that a global campaign on a similar professional level to Gore’s is executed. Expensive, yes, however, I refuse to believe that amongst all the contributors to this blog, we don’t have a wealth of creative talent to help put together something of impact. Art Directors, cinematographers, Ad Agencies, Photographers plus a few generous souls to help finance the ad placements. A pooling of creative resources that globally I’m convinced is out there, might just get this thing going. For myself, I’m an advertising photographer with over 30 years experience, anyone else?
Unfortunately, we live at a time when the general public, unlike the folk who inhabit this blog, have short attention spans, and require snappy sound bites.
That’s what makes these commercials brilliant, they tell ordinary folk they’ve been conned.
In the present political climate here in England, we’ve been conned for years by politicians who have been stealing huge sums from the public purse, and for so long, that when it was first mooted, we thought it beyond belief that Members of Parliament could just be common thieves.
In that sort of atmosphere (to coin a phrase), the British Public are now willing to believe anything about our politicians conning the public.
You won’t find these ads on UK TV though. Maybe Daniel Hannan could publicise them — now there’s a thought!
@Anders. You don’t plot a lot, do you? The plot begins in 1997.
Everything I know about cherry picking I learned from trolls and illegal immigrants.
@Tom Birkert (07:51:18)
“Instead we get ads of a fictitious fairy story saying we’re to blame. I complained to the ASA, as did many others. As a Government body, I wonder what the outcome of their enquiry will be?!”
I complained too and got a letter confirming it was being investigated. But as the Chairman of the Advertising Standards Agency is Chris Smith, also Chairman of the Environment Agency and who has recently championed the idea of everyone in the UK having their own Carbon Ration Card, I wouldn’t build up your hopes too much.
Our Political leaders (all three parties) have colluded in stuffing the Boards of every conceivable QUANGO, Government Agency and even Charities with Greenie eco-fascists. They’ve even appointed some of the most egregious specimens as ‘Government Scientific Advisors’. So we all can guess what kind of ‘advice’ they will get.
And even if the Thames outside the Houses of Parliament were frozen over, as it regularly did during the Little Ice Age, would they reconsider?
No way! It would be “Global Warming – Worse than we thought!”
The first video misuses the term “stationary”.
Scrap the 4th video.
Good on yer Leon Asby
The fourth ad, about Dr Miscolzi’s paper should never have been produced. On the one hand they are telling the public not to believe what they are being told, and then completely shoot themselves in the foot by saying Ok, here is the one paper that is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – believe this paper.
This is a very big mistake and will turn off any of those who have been won over by the other 3 ads.
You would not get an ad like this past the Advertising Standards Authority ( I think now called True Cast or some such thing). As we have seen in the Uk, ads posing the opposite point of view, any amount of propaganda is allowed, and complaints regarding them are largely ignored.
If an opposing view were to be put up for approval for airing on TV, the authority would simply tie you up in red tape.
My wife works for an advertising agency, and the arbitary way in which the ASA either gives approval for an ad to run or declines its airing can drive her to distraction.
Make no mistake this organisation will toe the government line.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html#ref=nlint
[Note: when posting a link, please provide a short explanation. ~dbstealey, moderator]
Unfortunate cherry-picked graph there in the article. ‘Recent trends’ actually show around 0.2C per decade of anthropogenic global warming, same as for the last few decades –
https://sites.google.com/site/europa62/climatechange/15ytt2008
I don’t suppose they mention the fact that this is the warmest decade in recorded history. I doubt they speculate about the effect on global average temperatures when the current unusually prolonged solar minimum cycles back to solar maximum in a few years.
Perhaps the AAM/AGW/MMCC believers would like to sue these deniers of the orthodoxy through the Australian courts?
Then again perhaps not eh?
Martin Brumby
“I do what little I can. I regularly send e-mails and letters. Today I’ve sent letter to my local Tory MP saying that the UKIP will be getting my vote unless they change their policy on the environment. UKIP have the only sensible policy at the moment.”
I have also e-mailed Bloomsbury and The Publishers Association to complain about the cover to Gore’s book, as well as complaining about The Telegraph’s web editorial about Copenhagen which is basically propaganda.
The more people complain, the more they will have to take notice.
Wish we had David Cameron standing up in parliament stating “Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant” like the opposition did in Australia…
Icarus,
You talk about cherry picking, then fail to define ‘recorded history’.
If by recorded history you mean from 1979, when we started the first accurate record of global temp measurements, you are correct.
But if by recorded history you mean human history, the Medieval Warm Period easily exceeds current temperatures.
Cherry picked from 9,000BC
http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/FOS%20Essay/HoloceneOptimumTemperature.jpg
Cherry picked from over 400,000 years ago
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/temp/vostok/graphics/tempplot5.gif
Icarus (10:01:26) :
Most folks here have seen charts beginning many thousands or hundreds of thousands of years ago, so we fully understand where temp has risen and fallen. It takes a lot of study to arrive at an understanding of what averages most likely were at places along the way. There’s a lot of overstated warming reported around the world.
This campaign merely points out that the current trends are not up, but down. And after you’ve read about 5000 documents, you may well expect, as many others here, that the unfolding downward oscillation has a few decades left to run.
Icarus (10:01:26)
how did NOAA manage to remove the cooling trend till 1970 from their data.
you should ask them, why they differ increasingly from satellite data even hansen’s upward biased giss.
this has become a untrustworthy organisation led by extremists. see here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/05/pielk-sr-responds-to-ncdcs-talking-points-about-surfacesations-org/
Der understatement from Der Spiegel: The AGW Mirror and mea culpa gulpa and the “stagnation”.
“Perhaps we suggested too strongly in the past that the development will continue going up along a simple, straight line. In reality, phases of stagnation or even cooling are completely normal,” says Latif.
But, Goreacle says don’t worry, here is our AGW out-clause:
“Even though the temperature standstill probably has no effect on the long-term warming trend,”.
Wait! There’s more: “it does raise doubts about the predictive value of climate models, and it is also a political issue.”
And: “This has prompted many a climatologist to treat the temperature data in public with a sense of shame, thereby damaging their own credibility.”
And: guess who is “gloating” all over the ‘net?
…-
“Stagnating Temperatures
Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out
Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years. Some attribute the trend to a lack of sunspots, while others explain it through ocean currents.
At least the weather in Copenhagen is likely to be cooperating. The Danish Meteorological Institute predicts that temperatures in December, when the city will host the United Nations Climate Change Conference, will be one degree above the long-term average.
Otherwise, however, not much is happening with global warming at the moment. The Earth’s average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium, and it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.
Ironically, climate change appears to have stalled in the run-up to the upcoming world summit in the Danish capital, where thousands of politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, business leaders and environmental activists plan to negotiate a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Billions of euros are at stake in the negotiations.
Reached a Plateau
The planet’s temperature curve rose sharply for almost 30 years, as global temperatures increased by an average of 0.7 degrees Celsius (1.25 degrees Fahrenheit) from the 1970s to the late 1990s. “At present, however, the warming is taking a break,” confirms meteorologist Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in the northern German city of Kiel. Latif, one of Germany’s best-known climatologists, says that the temperature curve has reached a plateau. “There can be no argument about that,” he says. “We have to face that fact.”
Even though the temperature standstill probably has no effect on the long-term warming trend, it does raise doubts about the predictive value of climate models, and it is also a political issue. For months, climate change skeptics have been gloating over the findings on their Internet forums. This has prompted many a climatologist to treat the temperature data in public with a sense of shame, thereby damaging their own credibility.
“It cannot be denied that this is one of the hottest issues in the scientific community,” says Jochem Marotzke, director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg. “We don’t really know why this stagnation is taking place at this point.””
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html
Smokey (10:16:30) : , Icarus is a little loose with his certainties, as I’m sure you must have noticed. He also thinks that it is readily apparent that the atmosphere warms the ocean. The picture of a gigantic butane torch pointed downwards to warm the ocean from the top somehow keeps coming into my mind.
“Our Political leaders (all three [UK] parties) have colluded in stuffing the Boards of every conceivable QUANGO, Government Agency and even Charities with Greenie eco-fascists.”
UK voters should take hope from the fact that the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), which came second in terms of UK vote share in recent Euro elections, has a sound Energy and Environment policy. I served on the committee drawing up the policy.
http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies/418-energy–environment-ukip-policy-2009
With the current turmoil in UK politics UKIP will, hopefully, have an influence on the composition of the next Parliament and may be able to have an effect on reversing climate policy.
Sorry for the political plug.
Tom Birkert (10:14:20) :
I too have started complaining about mis-information, and only telling half the story. The latest was emailing Richard Black at the BBC regarding the chart at the bottom of this article:
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8364926.stm
which I regard as being a particularly fine example exaggerating the trend to your advantage.
I sent him a chart with full axis which made the changes far less dramatic. So far there has been no reply.
Vincent (09:19:03) “The fourth ad […] is a very big mistake and will turn off […]”
Agree 100%.
Ad 4 is exactly what I would expect from alarmists posing as deniers to subvert & undermine.
I would show no mercy to the designer of that ad. Fired.
Sounds here like the UK needs another round of pirate broadcasting. Anybody here remember the offshore pirate radio vessels of the 60s which dragged the BBC, kicking and screaming, into the age of rock and roll? How about using the same tactic to drag it out of mindless support of AGW?
Oh well, probably get sunk by the EU Navy. Pirating ain’t what it was when the UK was a society of laws which guaranteed individual freedoms.
Alan Love
Unless the Tories change their environmental policies then UKIP will certainly be getting my vote.
It’s the most common sense proposal I’ve read.
Keep up the good work, and I’d suggest using it more prominently in party political broadcasts as I think it would strike a chord with voters.
Telboy (06:56:11), Nick T (09:25:19)
There have, supposedly, been hundreds of complaints to the ASA about the ‘Act on CO2’ adverts, though whether anything’s come of them I don’t know. The latest one claiming cars to be the biggest contributor of CO2 is factually inaccurate. But the head of the Environment Agency, Lord Smith, ex Labour MP and all-round government toadie, also happens to be chairman of the ASA, an example of what’s described in Alan Love’s (11:07:12) post.
Smokey (10:16:30) : Icarus, You talk about cherry picking, then fail to define ‘recorded history’. If by recorded history you mean from 1979, when we started the first accurate record of global temp measurements, you are correct.
I meant since instrumental records began –
https://sites.google.com/site/europa62/climatechange/sngtaco21870
Icarus,
OK, Since the late 1800’s. Thanks.
There your are (as a playlist):
http://fiel-inimigo.blogspot.com/2009/11/4-vacinas-contra-o-maior-embuste-em.html
.
DonS (11:24:13) :
Anybody here remember the offshore pirate radio vessels of the 60s which dragged the BBC, kicking and screaming, into the age of rock and roll?
Oh yes.
‘Radio Caroline’
Loved it.
RealClimate claims to debunk Miskolczi’s work here:
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi
On the exact same Wiki site though they claim to “debunk” the lag of CO2 behind T in ice cores. They do so using bizarre hand-waving arguments that are quite embarrassing:
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=CO2_doesn%27t_lead%2C_it_lags
Really sad stuff in the later. And only one paragraph in the former. Miskolczi’s work has indeed not been challenged well if a single tiny blurb is the only counter argument. That his theory seems impossible to spell out intuitively though may explain why it is not well known. A TV advert that flashes page after page of differential equations is not exactly convincing. In the context of a TV ad it becomes an undesirable Proof by Verbosity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_verbosity
They think they are being conned, do they? It’s easy to think that if you’re not intelligent enough to understand science. The first ad simply presents yet again the extraordinarily stupid idea that the last ten years is all we need to look at. They are conning themselves.
Great work for two reasons. Firstly to get the truth out there. Secondly it will make politicians sit back and take stock that this isn’t going to be a lay down mazair after all and that their butts are on the line!
Also if you are Australian and want to write to a senator there email addresses are listed here on Steve Fielding’s site;
http://www.stevefielding.com.au/forums/viewthread/466/
Also anti ETS rally tonight in Sydney Roseville Returned Services Memorial Club – 64 Pacific Highway Roseville 6pm Friday 20th November – radio discussion here;
http://www.2gb.com.au/index.php?option=com_podcasting&task=view&id=2&Itemid=41
All you need to do is put the question in the mind of the viewers, they will then seek out the answers. Especially when their hip pocket is involved!
M White (10:32:36) :
“Cherry picked from over 400,000 years ago
http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcdiac.esd.ornl.gov%2Ftrends%2Ftemp%2Fvostok%2Fgraphics%2Ftempplot5.gif”
A very interesting plot from Vostok. It would seem that homo sapiens, from the start of recorded history around 8k years ago, have been living in fairly mild conditions.
” chillybean (12:15:28) :
DonS (11:24:13) :
Anybody here remember the offshore pirate radio vessels of the 60s which dragged the BBC, kicking and screaming, into the age of rock and roll?
Oh yes.
‘Radio Caroline’
Loved it.”
Loved it too, brings back memories of my 2yr stint in London, at the tail end of Pirate radio. Then the BBC came in with a limp copy after they were banned.
Wasn’t it “Radio Caroline 199” ?
I love hearing the alarmists (ie Icarus) discuss “cherry picking”, it opens the discussion of the junk science used to “prove” AGW. Alarmists have no choice but to cherry pick and cherry plant facts. Always start by asking about the very special and very few trees (not cherry) used to manufacture false temperature records, it had both of their favorite cherry flavors.
Polar bears and BBQ sauce (10:48:33) : Icarus (10:01:26) :
Most folks here have seen charts beginning many thousands or hundreds of thousands of years ago, so we fully understand where temp has risen and fallen.
Indeed, but none of that has anything to do with anthropogenic global warming. We weren’t capable of having any significant effect on the climate that long ago.
This campaign merely points out that the current trends are not up, but down.
And it’s clearly mistaken, as anyone can see – the current trend is a warming of around 0.2C per decade, and has been for several decades.
Today I am a proud Aussie. And when a silly rag like Spiegel is starting to shift position, you wonder about even sillier rags like the Guardian and NYT. Watching those two try to move away without losing face will be sheer spectator sport for me.
twawki (12:38:22) :
Thanks for the last link to the Alan Jones site. Alan Jones is a Sydney radio commentator and is syndicated across the eastern states and is politically very influential. Look at pages 2 and 3 for interviews with Andrew Bolt and Prof.Lindzen. Unfortunately Jones never shuts up long enough to let the good Prof. speak more than one sentence at a time but this exposure is good.
Our outspoken Senator Nick Minchen last night in parliament said that calling Carbon a pollutant was simply “insane”.
Things are moving rapidly down here, the heat wave must be raising our metabolism.
Keith Minto
Wasn’t it “Radio Caroline 199″ ?
A later 70’s incarnation but still admirable.
maz2 (10:59:07) :
“Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years
…
Otherwise, however, not much is happening with global warming at the moment. The Earth’s average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium, and it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.”
Clearly none of this is true –
https://sites.google.com/site/europa62/climatechange/yvtayto200
Nothing in the last ten years looks like any change at all from the warming trend of around 0.2C per decade. Just look at the data.
Now, perhaps in 10 years’ time, if we haven’t seen any new record high global average temperatures, you could legitimately claim that there has been a significant change to the warming trend, but right now there is no difference at all between the last ten years and any other ten year period you care to choose in the last several decades. There is just the normal interannual variation superimposed on the warming trend.
The political climate is becoming interesting here in Australia…the opposition is starting to talk tough against AGW. Lets hope they dont throw in the towel in the upcoming senate vote.
Thanks Anthony for posting our ads and all the comments everyone has made. This campaign has been made on a shoestring and fresh air. I accept some of you are not happy about ad 4 but think about it. In the mainstream media how many people have been exposed to even 1 sceptical paper. We took the risk of showing this paper because to our knowledge it has not been successfully rebutted.
In a day and age when every second news story is about another scientific report that agrees with AGW we just had no choice but to be controversial and lead with our chin.
With more money and resources we can make a big difference in Australia. Already today the winds of change are blowing through the Coalition and Malcolm Turnbulls leadership is in it’s deaththroes. It is to the Climate Sceptics credit that all the lobbying and conversations we have had with many Liberal and National politicians is bearing fruit.
It’s time all of us stood up and said to our Governments no more. The con is over.
I regularly read this site and I am Australian but I do not watch TV so without coming here I may not have ever known about the adverts. Thanks for sharing, I will pass it on to people I know. Keep up the good work!
MikeP (11:03:05): Icarus is a little loose with his certainties, as I’m sure you must have noticed. He also thinks that it is readily apparent that the atmosphere warms the ocean.
If you have an Earth which is in equilibrium, and you heat up the atmosphere, some of that heat *has* to go into the oceans. SLoT and all that. Agreed? To suggest otherwise would be to deny the laws of physics.
I have to say I think they are very amateurish productions – popping microphones, bad sound, unprofessional Voice talent and camera work.
Very dissappointing.
Icarus
Do you seriously believe we have a genuine global temperature, let alone have the accuracy to parse it to 0.2C?
Tonyb
Spoof version of the UK CO2 Ad.
Kath (12:53:28) :
“M White (10:32:36) :
“Cherry picked from over 400,000 years ago
http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcdiac.esd.ornl.gov%2Ftrends%2Ftemp%2Fvostok%2Fgraphics%2Ftempplot5.gif”
A very interesting plot from Vostok. It would seem that homo sapiens, from the start of recorded history around 8k years ago, have been living in fairly mild conditions.”
And the time spent at 0.00 degrees is ‘momentary’, a upward blip of probably a few thousand years followed by a stretched out decline between -2 to -8,lasting 100kyrs. Our 8kyrs is indeed long and we may be in line for a fall.
This pattern on this graph at least is regular (peaks at 75-100kyrs),so we are indeed fortunate to be thriving in this long interglacial and expressing our full genetic potential as a creative species. Think of the small numbers of HS huddled in caves for those long ice-age periods, with the same brain power, feelings and potential as us, and think about the current trivial complaint about Global Warming.
The need to push for an audit of the BOM climate model.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/trendmaps.cgi?map=tmax&area=aus&season=0112&period=1940
There is a big warming right up the middle of WA where people and records are scarce so it has been filled from somewhere..
How it can show the warming it does for Kalgoorlie , Marble bar and Meekatharra from 1910-1920-1930-1940 to 2008 is nonsense.
http://members.westnet.com.au/rippersc/kalcomb.jpg
http://members.westnet.com.au/rippersc/mbar.jpg
http://members.westnet.com.au/rippersc/murchison.jpg
Here is a map of the stations
http://www.bom.gov.au/weather/wa/wa-observations-map.shtml
From 1940 it shows 0.15 – 0.2 degrees per decade of warming (1.02 – 1.36 dgrees total) when the temperture in all three spots has decreased.
The model is seriously flawed in my opinion.
I think a dozen other ads should be created using the format of the first three. I.e., each should stress only a single point. Put the ball in the opponents’ court, and let them try to return the serve. Here are some topics to discuss–I urge others to add to my list, and even to suggest scripts.
Sea levels
Hurricanes
Polar bears
Tropospheric hot spot
Antarctica
Glaciers
Kilimanjaro
Hockey stick
Ripper:
I agree! Have a look at the map of Reference Climate Stations for Australia at
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/reference.shtml
While there is a good geographical scattering of stations, notice the density in the south east, especially the southern coast. There are more stations in each of Victoria and Tasmania than the whole NT. One good reason not to rely on surface data, stick to satellites.
Pretty hot here now, and inland and southern areas many degrees above average- normal for summer! And the all time temperature records are in the remote north and northwest- Cloncurry and Marble Bar- and were set in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Oh come now – –
If we are unwilling to accept trends drawn from 30 years of Arctic satellite data, then it goes without saying that three, five, or seven years is absolutely meaningless.
PLM – Slightly OT, buy speaking of modeling and trends this just out from Spiegel Online:
Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html
“Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years. Some attribute the trend to a lack of sunspots, while others explain it through ocean currents.”
Congrats Steve, Jeff & Anthony!
“Perhaps we suggested too strongly in the past that the development will continue going up along a simple, straight line. In reality, phases of stagnation or even cooling are completely normal,” says Latif.”
MIke O (06:52:11) :
There has been an open challenge for two years since Miskolczi`s Law was presented to disprove its math. Until now no one has. I have seen a claim by the commenter Icarus that it is flawed because it makes a wrong assumption. I asked Icarus several times to present his proof work for this. He never did do it. It appears he was only repeating something he found in a blog or in Wikipedia. But I could be wrong.
Miskolczi`s Law still stands today. If there is someone who has done the math and found it to be wrong then please present your entire case to the math and science world. Your work will have to be scrutinized thoroughly before you can claim to have disproved Miskolczi`s Law.
As proud member #82 of The Climate Skeptics Party I tip my hat to Leon. By founding the party he has drawn togther a bunch of highly skilled and qualified people. These include scientists, statisticians and highly motivated and well educated men and women from all over Australia. This should be noted by Rudd and Wong that not all Australians agree with the ETS unlike he would have us believe.
For those who can get to Alan Jones site, listen very carefully to his interview with Lord Christopher Monkton.
If Rudd signs anything in Copenhagen he should be charged with treason against Australia and it’s citizens.
Jamama
To a point you are correct. The ads are not Cecil B Demille productions because as a new organisation our funds (we get no funding from big oil) are pretty limited. However please feel free to make a donation and we;ll see if we can come up with something a bit better.
Ok men, form ranks, we have a job to do.
Ian
“If we are unwilling to accept trends drawn from 30 years of Arctic satellite data, then it goes without saying that three, five, or seven years is absolutely meaningless.”
The full PDO cycle is 60 years, and arctic temperature records and/or testimony supports such a pattern. So it’s correct to dismiss 30 years as only half the story.
The recent flat-lining of the global temperature trend is meaningful, because:
1. It coincides with a downturn in the PDO and Atlantic oscillations.
2. It undermines the logic of the alarmists’ case, because their models failed to predict it, and their models claim a fairly tight linkage between increasing CO2 and rising temperatures. They made lots of hay about the correlation in the 90s, so turnabout is fair play. I.e., if correlation counts in their favor, lack of correlation counts against them.
Ripper:
“The need to push for an audit of the BOM climate model.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/trendmaps.cgi?map=tmax&area=aus&season=0112&period=1940
There is a big warming right up the middle of WA where people and records are scarce so it has been filled from somewhere..
How it can show the warming it does for Kalgoorlie , Marble bar and Meekatharra from 1910-1920-1930-1940 to 2008 is nonsense.”
As a West Australian, I’ve been wondering about that as well. I have Western Australia temp records from 32 locations from pre-1900 to the present at http://www.waclimate.net. I don’t maintain Meekatharra data because the town’s records don’t go back far enough, but the BoM stats for Kalgoorlie are:
1901-1930 at Kalgoorlie Post Office
(elevation 361m, 30 years)
Average mean minimum 12.0
Average mean maximum 25.8
1921-1950 (30 years) / min 12.2 / max 25.7
1931-1953 (23 years) / min 12.2 / max 25.4
1941-1953 (13 years) / min 12.2 / max 25.2
Relocation to Kalgoorlie/Boulder Airport
(elevation 365m, 4km distance)
1942-1970 (29 years) / min 11.2 / max 25.1
1951-1980 (30 years) / min 11.5 / max 25.1
1961-1990 (30 years) / min 11.7 / max 25.2
1971-2000 (30 years) / min 11.8 / max 25.2
Kalgoorlie 12 months from November 2008 – October 2009
Mean annual minimum 11.98
Mean annual maximum 25.43
… and for Marble Bar (reputedly the hottest place on earth)
1901-1930 (30 years surveyed)
Average mean minimum 19.7
Average mean maximum 35.6
1921-1950 (30 years) / min 19.6 / max 35.5
1931-1960 (30 years) / min 19.7 / max 35.4
1941-1970 (30 years) / min 19.6 / max 35.2
1951-1980 (30 years) / min 19.9 / max 35.1
1961-1990 (30 years) / min 20.1 / max 35.0
1971-2000 (30 years) / min 20.4 / max 35.1
Marble Bar 12 months from November 2008 – October 2009
Mean annual minimum 20.37
Mean annual maximum 35.42
Gene Nemetz (21:37:46) “Miskolczi`s Law still stands today.”
Regardless of one’s view on this, which for many will be apathy & indifference….
If the aim of ad 4 is to say, “We are goofy hyperpartisan freaks”: Success.
If ad 4 isn’t a plant made by an undercover alarmist operative, it is grounds for both dismissal of an incompetent nonalarmist operative and questioning of the lieutenant who put a joker on the front line in a serious battle.
.
Can someone set up a fund to put an ad in the UK or the USA. I would contribute.
.
.
And while you are at it, why not throw $50 at Mr Watts – he deserves it.
http://www.surfacestations.org/donate.htm
.
>>There is a big warming right up the middle of WA
>>where people and records are scarce so it has been
>>filled from somewhere..
>>How it can show the warming it does for Kalgoorlie ,
>>Marble bar and Meekatharra from 1910-1920-1930-
>>1940 to 2008 is nonsense.”
Have you not noticed that they put these great warming events in the remotest of places, so people cannot object that it is not happening. The last one was in northern Siberia.
.
Paul vaughn; your comments are pretty irritating; you substantiate none of your cheap shots; Miskolczi has been bloged to death; none of the big shots who purported to shoot holes in his concepts have been peer reviewed; and the fact is M has been verified by optical death, ERBE, SH and cloud data. As Michael says the public in Australia, courtesy of the terrible msm, with few exceptions, and especially the taxpayer funded ABC, has been fed absolute drivel pro-AGW papers like Mann, Briffa, Steig etc; it’s about time they told there is an alternative that has been legitimised.
John Egan (21:04:17) :
Oh come now – –
If we are unwilling to accept trends drawn from 30 years of Arctic satellite data, then it goes without saying that three, five, or seven years is absolutely meaningless.
Oh come now —
30 years ago we were just coming out of a cooling period, so that’s just a convenient cherry pick for you Alarmists. Thankfully, we have warmed up a little since the end of the LIA. Can’t you people just be thankful for that and stop with the hand-wringing already?
cohenite (02:50:06) “Paul vaughn; your comments are pretty irritating”
This is serious business cohenite. Sloppiness will turn a potentially constructive offense into a messy defense.
From the comments I sense trigger-happy giddiness. Before charging into battle, I advise sobriety. The cost of sloppy first steps could be quite formidable. I get the clear sense that many folks around here think it’s time for hiring clowns & resting on laurels.
So according to Nick Minchin Carbon dioxide is harmless? Just his opinion, arent we all some people elected him?
, Umm, what was one of the problems on apollo 13, here’s something from NASA.
If you go and view Leon Ashby’s propaganda presentation on climateskeptics.com.au it even gives a ridiculuous graph of plant growth going up to 2400ppm, these people are dangerous.
Someone ought to these simple farmers explain that in this country, that water is the limiting reactant in the photosynthesis equation, carbon dioxide, there is plenty of!
sorry forget the nasa link to problems with too much co2: http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/apollo-13/apollo-13.html
Climate Change Debate Sky TV – Piers Corbyn & John Ackers – 19th Oct 2009
Note the dignity & composure with which Corbyn conducts himself.
Interesting interview.
Ackers raises an interesting point about “organization” of nonalarmist forces.
Karl, what is dangerous about being a climate skeptic?
Also it is obvious you haven’t done much research into elevated levels of CO2.
A quick look through the research papers (google plant growth and CO2) and you will find that plants (biomass) increase condiderably at 1000, 2000 and even up to 5000 ppm CO2. You will also see that plants grown in such conditions need less water and become more resistant to droughts. Just what we need in Australia don’t you think?
The levels of CO2 that the Apollo 13 astronaughts had to deal with will never
happen in our atmosphere
Ian, you and other skeptics are dangerous.
Human physiology measurably suffers once we get past 800ppm and you are talking about how well some plants love 5000ppm?
Of course CO2 is not a poison in the quantities we have now, but you play with that balance that has been maintained for the last 100000 years, increasing it by 30% such as we have done in the last 100 years, and we are going to change how things work here on earth, and we dont know all the possible consequences.
Australia’s plants dont seem to be doing any better on the increasing diet of CO2 now do they! Please look up the photosynthesis reaction, you’ll find that its CO2 +H20 that is needed. Throwing more CO2 wont change the reaction if it is limited for water.
So perhaps you can get all the farmers to plant these crops(come in all the things we eat do they?) that just require CO2 and no water. Get real.
I live in Melbourne Australia and haven’t seen the ads yet. However I do only watch TV after 5:00pm. I do believe a 30 second ad costs around $40,000 AUD. I have never believed in Global Warming/Climate Change from day one just from a common sense point of view. Yet I didn’t know it was going to cost me and my family money. Finally I think the tide is turning.