Climate Craziness of the Week – Hollyweird meets Copenhagen

There’s been so many to choose from this week, it has been hard to pick one. Until now.  (h/t to Kate at SDA)

Stephen Taylor of Canada writes on his blog:

I received this from a friend yesterday. It was taken on a mobile phone in Copenhagen where world leaders are meeting today in, as one newspaper amazingly put it, “the most important international meeting since World War II”. “Brad Pitt is saving planet Earth in Copenhagen” is printed on the side of a 20 ft long reflective metallic trailer parked in the streets of Copenhagen.

Here is another image of this monstrosity from (of all places) the America.gov Flickr photostream:

The caption?

“Brad Pitt is Saving Planet Earth in Copenhagen”… a fun experimental project that will feature 12 non-Brads dressing up like the megastar to promote climate change action.

Yes, this comes from a US government social media account.

On the other side of the trailer is a web address which reads “bradpitt.dk”. When I checked the website, I found this awesome image:

In other decidedly non-warming news, Copenhagen was hit with a blizzard last night dumping 4 inches of snow on the Danish capital.

[Oh look, snowball earth:]

Copenhagen, December 17th 2009

Advertisements

44 thoughts on “Climate Craziness of the Week – Hollyweird meets Copenhagen

  1. From The Australian
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/tuvalu-no-longer-small-fry-on-world-stage/story-e6frg6so-1225811159361

    The lead negotiator for the small island nation of Tuvalu, the bow-tie wearing Ian Fry, broke down as he begged delegates to take tough action.
    “I woke up this morning crying,” and that’s not easy for a grown man to admit,” Mr Fry said on Saturday, as his eyes welled with tears.
    ”The fate of my country rests in your hands,” he concluded, as the audience exploded with wild applause.

    The reality:
    page 6 http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO60033/IDO60033.2007.pdf
    Surprise, surprise … no change in sea levels since 1992
    … and no change for the Kiribati scammers either.
    Ian Fry: PhD scholar at the Australian National University actually resides in Queanbeyan, NSW

  2. They are all great pictures, and inspiring, but my favorite is Brad Pitt in outer space hold what looks to me like a fishing pole while the Earth burns up, or at least North America and parts of the Atlantic Ocean.
    That picture moves me. I don’t know what the artist intended, but it is evocative of an emotion I can’t quite pin down: part disgust, part amusement, part pity. Disgoosity?

  3. This video is a classic … WUWT even gets a mention.
    REPLY: Snip yes it’s another Hitler parody video, which I don’t allow here. – Anthony

  4. Snowball Earth – hmmmm – lot’s of crops growing under all that snow parked on the Northern hemisphere….

  5. Dr A Burns (15:44:09) :
    “Surprise, surprise … no change in sea levels since 1992”
    Note page 6 in the report shows anomalies AFTER the trend has been removed. The summary on page 2 and detail on page 26 notes the observed trend as +6.0mm per year, the corrected trend as +5.3mm per year, but also states that “Given the sea level record is relatively short, it is still too early to deduce a long-term trend.”
    Another station shows a trend of +0.9mm per year (summary and pages 28-29).
    Definitely a case of needing more data.

  6. The snowball Earth is priceless. But come on, 4 inches does not a blizzard make. It sounds like the kind of exaggeration we would expect from the other side.

  7. Whenever I read about this stupidity I come to tears. Yes, it’s hard for me to admit it, but I break down. I cry for the stupidity of mankind, to be taken in by such a juvenile farce. My only hope is for the intelligent human beings to laugh outloud at the farsicle evidence displayed so far. I hope there are no errors in this message, I can’t see the screen.

  8. John Cooke, that data reported in page 6 is after trend, but the page 9 result is also relevant.
    If I understand it correctly, the reason for the high numbers is the early period, where large fluctuations are recorded. For later years the sea level rise appears to be quite small.
    If somewhere records a rise of 6mm a year for any length of time the results wouldn’t need satellites to see. I go to the same beaches as I did when I was 40 years younger, and they sure haven’t risen 40 x 6 = 0.24 metres.
    What I don’t get is how sea level rise can not be uniform across the major oceans. Surely each tide moves the water back and forwards enough to rapidly disperse any local effect. How is that meant to work?

  9. Copenhagen is a sideshow. The real plan is this story on Fox: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,580496,00.html
    It’s called the “Belgrade Process” and it’s moving forward regardless of the outcome of Copenhagen. This a a better link to the HTML version of “The Plan”:
    http://74.125.113.132/custom?q=cache:Qj7h3pqI45MJ:www.unep.o
    The plan encompasses the major aspects of Health, Labor, Finance, Agriculture,Energy, and Trade and ties them to environmental issues. It seeks to establish a UN governing body with authority over National governments and laws to force the above into compliance with environmental agendas. I suggest reading it in it’s entirety.
    The Devil is in the details, specifically beginning approx. page 15, where they lay out the “Objectives, Functions, Incremental Changes, Enhanced Institutional Changes, and Broader Institutional Reform”
    They will attempt to implement major portions of this within the next 2 years.

  10. I estimate when this whole global warming myth goes away, it will save the taxpayers and consumers over a 10 year period, $7,687,352,483,666.02

  11. Bart Nielsen (16:01:46) :
    Who is Brad Pitt, anyway?
    Once he was some cute young actor with acting-out problems who later married some other actor’s daughter who had not spoken to that other actor in years…. eminently qualified to lead the way on AGW.

  12. [quote] Note page 6 in the report shows anomalies AFTER the trend has been removed. The summary on page 2 and detail on page 26 notes the observed trend as +6.0mm per year, the corrected trend as +5.3mm per year, but also states that “Given the sea level record is relatively short, it is still too early to deduce a long-term trend.”[/quote]
    The problem with the “trend” analysis is that the “trend” is determined by including the first year of operation that just happened to begin during an ENSO event (much like taking a trend line beginning in 1998 for temperature is not always the best as the start point is artificially high). In this case the start point is artificially low.
    Taken from NOAA: “There is another El Niño in 1991-1992, and you can see the warm water penetrating towards the east in the northern hemisphere spring of 1992. The El Niño in 1997-1998 is a very strong El Niño. ”
    http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/el-nino-story.html
    In addition “Since installation, at least two cyclones have passed through Tuvalu, but only one, Tropical Cyclone
    Gavin, was registered as extreme low pressure on the SEAFRAME at Funafuti.” This cyclone is 1998.
    If you take out the anomalies, there is not trend at all in this data. In fact if you disregard the first year and start in 1994 instead of 1993 then you can include the 1998 issues and there is STILL no trend.
    The claim that there is a 5 to 6ml positive trend in this data is at best statistically in error and at worse fraudulent. Considering the jumping up and down of warmists who claim that “the no warming at the moment is just a product of picking trend line starting dates” I find it highly amusing that no-one (in MSM etc) points out that “faster than expected sea level rise” also just happens to depend entirely on picking an anomolous year to start their trends on. Not to mention that finding this out requires looking for reports, that are not widely advertised, sifting through 30 odd pages for the one place in the entire report where th actual data is shown rather than the “we believe this” and “We believe that”.
    My guess is that there is a very specific purpose for putting a very visible disclaimer on the first page of the report: “Disclaimer
    The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID).”
    Original latest report for Tuvalu: http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO60033/IDO60033.2007.pdf
    Analysis of how trends were made in this data and other stations: http://icecap.us/images/uploads/spsl3.pdf
    Another discussion on the issue of the trends: http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/paperncgtsealevl.pdf

  13. (Moderators, when i add a comment i usually see the comment and that its waiting moderation – i just submitted but its not there so resubmitting just in case. If its duplicate please delete this one)
    REPLY: posts with 3 or more links and/or posts with a high word count often end up in the spam filter. We gete several hundred spam comments per day that are automatically removed. About 95% are removed correctly. – A

  14. One might expect that the “Climategate Files” could provide rich fodder for a dramatic film like “JFK,” but I suspect there is little interest in Hollywood for any such project.

  15. Let’s see. Brad and Angelina have 6 (I think) kids right now. Three are biological and three adopted. Nuff said about the carbon footprint involved in having 3 biological moppets. The three adopted children were previously living a life of saintly third world poverty and thus not leaving much of a carbon footprint. Add to that, the fact that leaving them in their birth circumstances may have also resulted in their early death (Gaia be praised), thus further reducing their carbon footprints.
    But Brad and Angelina had to go and adopt them, thus turning them into western-style CO2 belching monstrosities. And they’re wealthy western CO2 belching monstrosities too.
    I just ran bing on “Brangelina kids” and came up with this representative story about their lifestyle:
    http://www.tmz.com/2009/01/23/brangelina-more-homes-than-kids/
    They fly all over the place with their brood, no? To multiple homes in different parts of the world. I know they own quite the nice spread in France.
    Brad Pitt is saving Planet Earth, my *ss. Just another example of “Do as I say, not as I do.” Useless, hypocritical tw*t.

  16. John Cooke (16:46:38) :
    John, you are correct. I should have posted this link, page 15:
    http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/spsl3.pdf
    “If the depression of the 1998 cyclone is ignored there was no change is sea level at Tuvalu between 1994 and 2008; 14 years, despite 14 separate tsunami events The claim of a trend of + 6.0mm/yr is without any justification.”

  17. San Francisco City Council does not really believe in AGW with it’s threat of sea level rise!
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/17/BA6R1B5BR3.DTL
    (12-16) 16:21 PST San Francisco — Mayor Gavin Newsom struck a deal Wednesday with the U.S. Navy to transfer Treasure Island to San Francisco for a $55 million guaranteed payment over several years. Additional considerations could make the package worth more than $105 million to the federal government.
    The agreement paves the way for the city to undertake one of its most ambitious development projects – remaking the closed naval base on a man-made island in the middle of San Francisco Bay into a model of sustainable development.
    The planned development would transform an isolated patch of flat land with sweeping city views into a neighborhood with 6,000 homes, a gleaming 60-story high-rise and a new commercial town center – all with a goal of being the most environmentally friendly development in the country.
    There would be at least six residential towers, a new ferry terminal, organic farm and 300 acres of open space.

  18. Always good to see one’s tax dollars at work.
    Perhaps the Brad Pitt tin-box incident may go down in history as the last straw which led sensible people worldwide to secede from the bizarre world of The UN and AGW.
    I wonder if the demise of Phlogiston theory engendered such political and show business interest?

  19. OT but the BBC needs your help with its “Climate Change Glossary”. A useful but as yet incomplete guide to climate change terminology. No mention of notable periods of past climate change such as the Medieval Warm Period, the Little Ice Age or the Roman Warm Period yet. “Climategate” strangely also not on the list. Link to submission form here:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8329823.stm

  20. When our descendants stand shivering in the throws of the inevitable next ice age, they will look back at this extraordinary display of their ancestors’ foolishness with utter disdain. What a “ship of fools” we will appear to them!
    What a “ship of fools” we appear to ME! I’m ashamed of my generational identification.
    CH

  21. Brad Pitt – actor. That’s a pretty term for skilled, smooth, and accomplished liar. He fits right in with this whole movement.

  22. Were I Brad Pitt I’d probably say that the planet was warmer too if all of my properties and location shoots were conveniently located in warmer areas of the world.

  23. “the BBC needs your help with its “Climate Change Glossary”. A useful but as yet incomplete guide to climate change terminology. No mention of notable periods of past climate change”
    Thanks for the heads-up, Phil Hambly – I have added
    Medieval Warm Period
    Little Ice Age
    Roman Warm Period
    What happened to the hole in the ozone layer that was going to kill us all, not long ago?
    What happened to the 1970s predictions of a global cooling that would result in “famine” and widespread “death and misery” in the US by the year 2000?

  24. brad pitt is a MK Ultra victim, who does anything he is told. they can use him for any goal, advertisement, movie, etc. they want! just like other superstars like madonna, MJ, britney, miley cirus etc..
    they come in handy to push an agenda!

  25. Planet Earth to Brad Twitt and brethren: I am doing just fine, thank you. Stop worrying already. Oh wait, this isn’t really about saving me, is it? It’s all about making more money, at the expense of others, right? Never mind.
    “”The lead negotiator for the small island nation of Tuvalu, the bow-tie wearing Ian Fry, broke down as he begged delegates to take tough action.
    “I woke up this morning crying,” and that’s not easy for a grown man to admit,” Mr Fry said on Saturday, as his eyes welled with tears.””
    Those are nothing but crocodile tears, Mr. Fry, and you should be ashamed. Admit it, this is all nothing but a giant shakedown, isn’t it Mr. Fry? Ah, but maybe you are pushing for a future Academy award – the audience seemed to like it anyway. Brad Pitt, look out!

  26. Looking at the whole “Brad Pitt” website, I don’t think the actor has anything to do with it, other than having someone use his name and image (probably without Pitt’s permissin). Pitt usually doesn’t try to use his celebrity to voice opinions.
    In one interview (Time magazine, 10/13/97) he said: “You shouldn’t speak until you know what you’re talking about. That’s why I get uncomfortable with interviews. Reporters ask me what I feel China should do about Tibet. Who cares what I think China should do? I’m a f—ing actor! They hand me a script. I act. I’m here for entertainment. Basically, when you whittle everything away, I’m a grown man who puts on makeup.”

  27. Hanko (18:46:31) : U.S. Navy to transfer Treasure Island
    One: I suspect San Francisco will use stimulus money or other federal funds for this so this is just accounting – nothing really happening;
    Two: Why would they not convert this into a natural/wild resource? Why does S. F. need a new subdivision “with sweeping city views … 6,000 homes, a gleaming 60-story high-rise and a new commercial town center”?
    Just the thing to cause me to loose all respect for the good folks of San Francisco!

  28. Hanko (18:46:31) :
    The agreement paves the way for the city to undertake one of its most ambitious development projects – remaking the closed naval base on a man-made island in the middle of San Francisco Bay into a model of sustainable development.
    The planned development would transform an isolated patch of flat land with sweeping city views into a neighborhood with 6,000 homes, a gleaming 60-story high-rise and a new commercial town center – all with a goal of being the most environmentally friendly development in the country.
    A gleaming 60-story high-rise on a man made island in the middle of San Francisco Bay? What could possibly go wrong with that plan? Unstable soils. unstable bedrock, 60 story building, yeah, I can see how that could work out just fine. Anybody want to place a bet?

  29. Anybody want to place a bet?
    On whether the 60-story high-rise starts sinking vertically before they complete the twentieth floor, or whether the completed building becomes a breakwater when it topples sideways?

  30. Michael (17:52:36) :
    “I estimate when this whole global warming myth goes away, it will save the taxpayers and consumers over a 10 year period, $7,687,352,483,666.02.”
    I suppose your cost estimate is every bit as accurate as the temperature projections from the models, including the two decimals. ;o)
    .
    .
    On topic: I was catching up on comments and I noticed that this thread only had 42 comments (I had pretty much skipped this post and thread). It looks like the WUWT readers don’t have a lot of interest in Hollywood climate scientists.

Comments are closed.