McKibben connects the weather dots on sh** happens

Oh boy. The propaganda gets thicker. It’s a Forrest Gump moment.

Billy McKibben connects the weather dots, except it spells out nothing more than – sh** happens. This is one of the most hilarious propaganda videos I’ve ever seen, showing weather events (and some not weather events), just like have happened for millions of years. Except this time the meme is “there’s something really wrong with our weather”.

The smokestack in reverse at the end is a nice touch, which is a hat tip to the parent organization 350.org

Watch the video:

OK let’s look at the claims, from the front page of climatedots.org

Across the planet now we see ever more flood, ever more drought, ever more storms. People are dying, communities are being wrecked — the impacts we’re already witnessing from climate change are unlike anything we have seen before.

350.org, Bill McKibben’s parent of climatedots.org says:

And what does this 350 number even mean?

350 is the number that leading scientists say is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide—measured in “Parts Per Million” in our atmosphere. 350 PPM—it’s the number humanity needs to get back to as soon as possible to avoid runaway climate change.

And who made the 350 “safe” declaration? Well of course it is everyone’s favorite arrested scientist, James Hansen:

Where did this 350 number come from?

Dr. James Hansen, of NASA, the United States’ space agency, has been researching global warming longer than just about anyone else. He was the first to publicly testify before the U.S. Congress, in June of 1988, that global warming was real. He and his colleagues have used both real-world observation, computer simulation, and mountains of data about ancient climates to calculate what constitutes dangerous quantities of carbon in the atmosphere.  The full text of James Hansen’s paper about 350 can be found here.

It follows then that the date of the “safe” level should be determined. This is easy to do using MLO’s CO2 graph, the most cited graph on CO2 in the world

Source: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

So ~1987 is the year where the atmosphere became “unsafe”.

How about those pre-1987 weather disasters Billy?

I’ve removed the ones after 1987 from the list below

From NOAA in 1999: NOAA RELEASES CENTURY’S TOP WEATHER, WATER AND CLIMATE EVENTS

Click here for background on the weather events listed below.

– Galveston Hurricane, 1900

historic photos: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

– Dust Bowl, 1930s

historic photos: 1, 2, 3

Super Tornado Outbreak, 1974

All About Tornadoes

– Hurricane Camille, 1969

historic photos: 1, 2, 3, 4

Hurricane Camille photo page

– New England Hurricane, 1938

Historic photos: 1, 2

– Tri-state Tornado, 1925

– The Great Okeechobee Hurricane & Flood, 1928

– The Storm of the Century, 1950

– Florida Keys Hurricane, 1935

– New England Blizzard, 1978

Top Global Weather/Water/Climate Events (no particular order):

Click here for background on the climate/weather events listed below.

– Yangtze River Flood, China, 1931

– North Vietnam Flood, 1971

– Great Iran Flood, 1954

– Bangladesh Cyclone, 1970

– China Typhoons, 1912, 1922

– Typhoon Vera, Japan, 1958

– Asian Droughts (India 1900,1907,1965-67; China 1907,1928-30,1936,1941-42; and Soviet Union 1921-22)

– Sahel Drought, Africa, 1910-1914, 1940-44, 1970-85

– Iran Blizzard ,1972

– Europe Storm Surge, 1953

– Great Smog of London, 1952

– El Niño, 1982-83

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

And there are more at this big list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_disasters_by_death_toll

McKibben and his 350.org/connect the dots followers are full of it.

According to Psychology Today, it may just be McKibben’s search for meaning in the emptiness in his head:

Humans have a rocky relationship with randomness. On the one hand, we declare that “shit happens”–an acknowledgment that bad things sometimes occur for no particular reason. But more often than not, our minds resist randomness, searching for meaning even where none exists.

I suppose it is all part of the illogic of climate hysteria.

And since McKibben relies heavily on TV news videos for his propaganda, it confirms exactly what I have been saying here:

Why it seems that severe weather is “getting worse” when the data shows otherwise – a historical perspective

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Urederra

Did you mention the Great Flood?, I think I read it on the Bible, Old testament if am not wrong.
😛

John A

I nominate Bill McKibben to win Olympic gold in the long distance shark jumping and an Olympic record in pointless scaremongering. The backwards steam going back in to the power station chimney obviously means that modern electric supplies clearly suck.
But all of this bloviating means nothing because nobody’s watching other than the already convinced and we observers watching yet another apocalyptic scare smash into the iceberg of Reality.

Jeff

If it’s Rio, it’s not real….

Philip Bradley

Lets not forget the Year Without a Summer, a 194 years ago.
McKibben has no science qualifications, of course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_McKibben
REPLY: Yes but he has feelings, that’s what really counts. /sarc – Anthony

Steve Keohane

Healthy animals excrete away from where they live and eat if possible. These delusionalists claim excretia that isn’t their own as their personal adornment, and demand we all pay to clean up their hallucination.

Taphonomic

Sh** happens.
Sometimes mega-sh** happens.

ahrcanum

Reblogged this on Ahrcanum.

– “I’ve removed the ones after 1987 from the list below” – in your list I see events in 1991, 93, & 98
REPLY: Blogging from home, kids distracting me, I thought I got them all, fixed thanks -A

woznotwoz

There are plenty of events throughout history including the great storm which hit England in 1703 and killed between 8,000 + 15,000 people, the exact figures aren’t known

pat

This attempt to create climate hysteria appears to be failing. In fact it is so unreasoned that it may be creating more skeptics as the call for more and more drastic remedies converges with the reality of a government that is clearly incompetent, if not downright inimical to to its own citizens.

They’re ramping it up. And we have to keep stomping it out. Nonetheless, I’ve come to the conclusion: I’m glad I’m getting old.

Jimmy Haigh

Gordon Bennet.

temp

Isn’t 450 the “absolute” doomsday event for these guys… or is that just the next benchmark on an ever repeating doomsday cultist prediction list.

Jimmy Haigh

temp says:
April 21, 2012 at 9:11 am
We’ll get to 450 on December 21st this year…

noaaprogrammer

temp says:
Isn’t 450 the “absolute” doomsday event for these guys…
It’s carbonheit 459!

Alan the Brit

What on Earth will they make of that great big chunk of rock that will one day smash into Earth, as similar ones have done over millenia? Now that will cause a splash or two, or a dust storm of some significance! I’d like to see the USEPA regulate for that one! With CO2 levels in the atmpshere 20 times higher in the geological past & no runaway global warming happened, how to do they account for that little probem? 🙂

Hugh Pepper

Why the demonizing Mr. Watts? Your tactic begins with the pejorative label, “Billy”, with reference to Bill McKIbbon. Dr. Hanson, acclaimed by his peers and scientific organizations all over the world, has already been shuffled off to the demon den. Obviously, this is a tactic intended to discredit the work of these men, and all the others who assert positions with which you disagree.
I do not detect “hysteria” in the positions taken by McKibbon, Hanson and others. I do hear deep concern and a consistent commitment to base their advice on the best well-researched data available. From a risk assessment point of view, it is far wiser to act conservatively now, as they advise, they to do nothing and risk real hardship later.
There is an immense challenge facing all of us at this moment, to fix problems which are getting worse by the day. We should see this as an unprecedented opportunity and be excited with our prospects to effect real change.

Alan the Brit

What on Earth will they make of that great big chunk of rock that will one day smash into Earth, as similar ones have done over millenia?

From the ” I have a kite and access to this blog, spaceweather, wxmaps and satellites department ”
The concentration of atmospheric gases is determined by atmospheric heights and water temperatures. Atmospheric heights are determined by the interaction of the earth’s magnetosphere with solar magnetism. When such interaction is greatest, the expanse of the ionosphere is maximized. When the relationship of magnetism between earth and sun is minimal, the ionosphere is shorter and the intraplanetary magnetic field is denser. The density of this field accomplishes two feats (1) it regulates atmospheric compression (2) it determining the rate at which infrared radiation is released (adiabatic lapse rates are considered only formulaic constants).
There are a number of self evident and well-studied factors indicative of proof for the hypothesized role of earth bound magnetism as the primary regulator of temperature (1) Seasonality- lower sun angles and shorter appearance durations have been verified to reduce heights (2) The correlation of latitudinal location with atmospheric height potential (3) The rate of movement of atmospheric pressure regimes in step with fluctuations in the rate of earth directed CMEs by the sun (4) There is an albedo response in higher latitudes for atmospheric heights (actually limits arctic sea ice minimums because without albedo heights fall>pressure falls>precipitation falls>temperatures fall>ice reforms and snow falls) (a) The East Coast will experience a taste of this example because iof the Greenland Albedo response (-North Atlantic Oscillation=Greenland high pressure Block) during the next few weeks (until tropical and subtropical Height fields overtake its capacity for effect).(5) Desert Sands albedo feedback (a) deforestation encourages similar atmospheric pressure products and temperature/precidpiation responses
Anyway, the point to this comment is that if you are concerned about the rising concentration of Greenhouse Gases, then such concern is better used by focusing concerns upon the problems associated with Global Cooling since CO2 and methane actually decrease in concentration when atmospheric heights are rising and the planet is warming (because their rate of natural production is significantly less than Nitrogen (60% concentration), Oxygen (20% Concentration), and Argon (.%) (their concentrations increase as heights and warming increase because their natural rates of production is substantially greater than CO2 (3%) and Water Vapor (4%)…
*Noteworthy notes to find WUWT references for*
1> The role volcanic aerosols in increasing atmospheric magnetism/ionosphere height potential is also noteworthy because at present the AGW community denies SO2’s magnetic properties and their effect on Earth’s Radiative Budget Equation by attributing to it the quality of infrared energy reflectivitiy (thus denying ERBE)
2..Another interesting reference point for Earth/Sun magnetic field interactions is Oceanic surface water alkalinity and temperature variance
3. Comment is already running long ……………………………

Hoser

People don’t live long enough to have a true perspective of climate. The young-dumb have no clue and are the first targets of the propaganda. It takes decades to recover from leftist damage. Next on the target list are the moms who typically hyperventilate at anything remotely threatening their kids.
Today, people lack even basic science education and have virtually no ability to filter claims; consequently, emotions rule. Because counterfeit authorities are promoted, people have a hard time trusting anyone. How long until they reach the point where they actively attack science as a threat? Since some technologies actually are serious threats (e.g. genetically modified organisms replacing traditional food crops – at least the way Monsanto has put it into practice), how do we avoid all science being lumped in the same category?
Propagandists are busy re-assessing past events, diminishing the importance of some, ignoring others, changing data. That can only happen when the scientists and the propagandists are one in the same.
Does Gresham’s law (economics) now apply in science?

BarryW

You left out the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 and a bunch of other floods prior to 1987. McKibbon basically either lied or is incompetent.

Hugh Pepper says:
April 21, 2012 at 9:40 am
Why the demonizing Mr. Watts? Your tactic begins with the pejorative label, “Billy”, with reference to Bill McKIbbon…………
=======================================================
Lol, “Billy” is a pejorative? Really? I would have come up with something more provacative, like dingbat Bill, or maniac McKibbon, but you take exception to Billy? Let’s not pretend skeptics aren’t demonized across this land by Billy and the minions of maniacal misanthropists. Anthony is a frequent target……. goose/gander and all of that.
While civility would have been the best way to go about discussing climate issues, the alarmists lost the claim to any such attempt many, many years ago. Skeptics tried, but we were met with some of the most vile name calling and worse. People object to pejoratives now? They should have said something way back when. I haven’t forgotten the days before sites like WUWT or Climate Audit. Nor, will I ever.
As we start to move away from the precipice of darkness, poverty, hunger and depravity the alarmists tried to push us over, we shouldn’t pretend that they didn’t almost get us there. “Billy” is about the kindest moniker I would attach to McKibbon and his ilk.

Billy

Why is the powerplant emitting so much steam? Is it operating as a spinning reserve and venting to back up windmills?

edit coming Moderator. I ask for the removal of this and previous post

I aspire to emulate people like Hugh Pepper from now on. I’m quite sure that reading the first two or three sentences and then chiming in with a predetermined response will make my life much simpler than having to actually deal with each point in an article.

Eric Huxter

@Hugh Pepper
From the best well-researched data available the problems which are getting worse by the day (no hysteria there then) have more to with human geography than human influence on the atmospheric system.
The real change that you seem to favour risks impoverishing our children rather than offering any realistic benefits.
The reliance on CO2 as Occam’s Razor to cut through the Gordian knot of climate complexity leaves an awfully large number of loose ends and I would prefer decisions affecting the future of the human race to be based on real science.

Mark Hladik

To Alan the Brit:
To the CAGW warmist/alarmist, it is not the fact that there was higher CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere in the past, but the “fact” that we are increasing the concentration at an “unprecedented” rate, and the temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere is also “increasing” at a commensurate “unprecedented” rate.
Never, NEVER let any facts get in the way of a good narrative; we know that the Vostok/GISP/EPICA data showing that the climate transitioned into, and out of, a glacial episode, at a rate of about three-or-four-degrees-Celsius in a few decades, is just ancient history, and not applicable to today.
Remember, to the warmist/alarmist, until man started “changing” the climate, it has never EVER changed in the past. Mikey proved that the past 1500 years (give or take) has been COMPLETELY stable, doncha know?
Written with some /sarc, discernable to the educated.
Regards to all,
Mark H.

Hoser

Hugh Pepper says:
April 21, 2012 at 9:40 am

From a risk-management perspective, there is far greater risk of human suffering when you force people to live in third-world conditions. Green policy ultimately leads to poverty. High per-capita energy consumption freed people from slavery, ended the use of draft animals, created the middle class, and led to the greatest expansion of science and technology that now supports 7 billion people on our planet.
Although the left will never admit it, sooner or later Green policy will force people to live under harsher conditions, eat poorer quality food, receive poorer quality healthcare, live shorter and far less pleasant lives. It will force people into collective labor in a command and control economy directed by centralized government planners. There will necessarily be less freedom.
Socialims always has a utopian allure, and green politics is just the latest example. Socialism always fails. Individuals empowered with freedom and abundant inexpensive energy can do amazing things. We have the ability to produce inexpensive energy in large amounts for centuries, but we are prevented from doing so by governments with another agenda. Centralized planning leads to a ghetto life where everyone suffers equally, except for the elite few who reserve the best for themselves.
Hansen, and the rest are elitists. Since when does a civil service employee get to take home over a million dollars in prize money? Even for just the appearance that Hansen is in it for the money, he should be fired.

edit
From the ” I have a kite and access to WUWT, spaceweather.com, wxmaps and satellite maps department ”
The concentration of atmospheric gases is determined by atmospheric heights and water temperatures. Atmospheric heights are determined by the interaction of the earth’s magnetosphere with solar magnetism. When such interaction is greatest, the expanse of the ionosphere is maximized. When the relationship of magnetism between earth and sun is minimal, the ionosphere is shorter and the intraplanetary magnetic field is denser. The density of this field accomplishes two feats (1) it regulates atmospheric compression and its resistance to local changes in atmospheric pressure regimes (2) it determines the rate at which infrared radiation is released (adiabatic lapse rates are considered only formulaic constants).
There are a number of self evident and well-studied factors indicative of proof for the hypothesized role of earth bound magnetism as the primary regulator of temperature and climate
(1) Seasonality- lower sun angles and shorter appearance durations have been verified to reduce heights
2) The correlation of latitudinal location with atmospheric height potential
(3) The rate of movement of atmospheric pressure regimes in step with fluctuations in the rate of earth directed CMEs by the sun
(4) The albedo response in higher latitudes for atmospheric heights (actually limits arctic sea ice minimums because without albedo heights fall>pressure falls>precipitation falls>temperatures fall>ice reforms and snow falls)
___ (a) The East Coast will experience a taste of this example because iof the Greenland Albedo response (-North Atlantic Oscillation=Greenland high pressure Block) during the next few weeks (until tropical and subtropical Height fields overtake its capacity for effect).
(5) Desert Sands albedo feedback
___ (a) deforestation encourages similar atmospheric pressure products and temperature/precidpiation responses
____(b) Painting roofs white as a means to saving energy is generally a bad idea because of the climate feedback response to the albedo effect.
Anyway, the point to this comment is that if you are concerned about the rising concentration of Greenhouse Gases, then such concern is better used by focusing upon the problems associated with Global Cooling since CO2, Water Vapor, and methane actually decrease in concentration when atmospheric heights are rising and the planet is warming because their rate of natural production is significantly less than Nitrogen (60% concentration), Oxygen (20% Concentration), and Argon (.%).
a) CO2 (3%concentration), Water Vapor (4%),…
b) Now think about how albedo effects atmospheric drying by increasing the concentration of Nitrogen & Oxygen and decreasing the concentration of Water Vapor
*Noteworthy notes*
1. The role volcanic aerosols in increasing atmospheric magnetism/ionosphere height potential is also noteworthy because at present the AGW community denies SO2′s magnetic properties and their effect on Earth’s Radiative Budget Equation by attributing to it the quality of infrared energy reflectivitiy (thus denying ERBE)
2..Another interesting reference point for Earth/Sun magnetic field interactions is Oceanic surface water alkalinity and temperature variance
3. Comment is already running long ……………………………

gnomish

why on earth should we swap fossil fuels for facile fools? stupid is unsustainable.
but, gasp, i’m here for the hangings. when do these crooks get some comeuppance?
that’s the weather vane i’m watching; that’s the climate change i wish for.

Daryl

Take a minute and dislike the video at Youtube. It would be nice to see more dislikes than likes for it. Let them know how well this type of propoganda is received.

Billy Liar

Hugh Pepper says:
April 21, 2012 at 9:40 am
Why the demonizing Mr. Watts? Your tactic begins with the pejorative label, “Billy”,
I resent that remark.

Billy Liar

I would have said ‘I resemble that remark’ but warmists have no sense of humor.

Proof that Hugh Pepper has no clue:
“I do not detect ‘hysteria’ in the positions taken by McKibbon [sic], Hanson [sic] and others.”
“Coal trains of death” isn’t at least a little bit hysterical, Hugh?
And:
“There is an immense challenge facing all of us at this moment, to fix problems which are getting worse by the day.”
The only real problems are the raping of the taxpayers by the rent-seeking climate charlatan clique and the UN, and the mass extermination of wildlife by windmills. In fact, all of the real problems are caused by the eco-fringe.
But none of the other so-called ‘problems’ are problems at all: Arctic ice is rebounding, there is no evidence of ocean acidification, the planet is in a perfect “Goldilocks” climate, there has been no statistically significant warming for a decade and a half, hurricanes and tornado intensity is clearly decreasing, the number of weather related deaths is way down, corals are doing fine, the sea level rise is slowing dramatically, etc., etc.
So what are those ‘problems’ that are ‘getting worse by the day’? Could one of them be that Hugh has run out of his meds? Quick, get a refill, Hugh!

Hoser says:
April 21, 2012 at 10:26 am
Since when does a civil service employee get to take home over a million dollars in prize money? Even for just the appearance that Hansen is in it for the money, he should be fired.

If he received it in recognition of his NASA/GISS work, he had to turn it over to the feds. Back in my day, any gift with a monetary value of $25 or more automatically became government property — with one exception: the gift had to have been a token of appreciation or personal friendship from the donor, and in that instance, the recipient could keep the gift but would have to reimburse the government for the dollar value of the gift.
Fortunately, the most expensive gift I ever got during ny years in that gig was a $5 Zippo lighter with my name and some relevant dates engraved on it. I can’t imagine inflation has hit hard enough for Hanson to justify claiming a million bucks as a token of appreciation…

gnomish

http://l.yimg.com/os/152/2012/04/20/penny-wide-jpg_212921.jpg
we’ve fallen a long way, baby.
once upon a time, the motto of america was ‘liberty, parent of science and industry’
now, clearly, it’s ‘never give a sucker an even break’.
and setting off the sirens still brings the eloi to the dinner table.
evolution in action. apparently the world is overpopulated with suckers and this is how they get culled.
stepping into the chute at the processing plant requires a deliberate effort on the part of the cow. how dare the cow complain after making that choice.

gnomish says:
April 21, 2012 at 10:51 am
why on earth should we swap fossil fuels for facile fools? stupid is unsustainable.
but, gasp, i’m here for the hangings. when do these crooks get some comeuppance?
that’s the weather vane i’m watching; that’s the climate change i wish for.
===========================================================
Indeed, there is no earthly reason to swap fossil fuels. We’ve more than we’ll ever use…… http://suyts.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/oil-sigh-why-are-they-so-incredibly-stupid/

WTF

This amounts to a flaming bag of dog crap on the doorstep of science. The problem is he is ringing his own doorbell and stepping on it before running away. ;-))

Richard G

More like “Connect the Dolts”.

Clive

Anthony
Historical ‘references’ about wonky weather.
National Geographic November 1976 … 36 years ago.
WHAT’S HAPPENING TO OUR CLIMATE?
That’s just one year after the infamous Newsweek item about the pending ice age, below. ☺
And …
National Geographic December 1977 … 35 years ago.
THE YEAR THE WEATHER WENT WILD
And of course there is the Newsweek item, The Cooling World, from 1975. The article is old hat to most here and been cited many times. Note the last paragraph quoted … back then, the tornadoes of 1974 were associated with cooling. ☺
Nothing new to see here folks … ☺ Same old.
Clive
The Cooling World
By Peter Gwynne
Newsweek
28 April 1975
There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production — with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas — parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia — where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.
The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that
meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually.
During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a
degree — a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.

Snotrocket

Alan the Brit says: April 21, 2012 at 9:38 am

“What on Earth will they make of that great big chunk of rock that will one day smash into Earth, as similar ones have done over millenia?”

Don’t worry Alan, it’ll never happen, the Greens will just slap a tax on it and it will go away. /sarc (as-if)

Snotrocket

@Hugh Pepper: Hi Hugh! Can I call you Hughie? Just that I feel I know you so well by now…And wow! You put up such a well-researched argument. No, really, you do, Hughie. I mean, this guy Hanson: what a great man. I know of a John Hanson who starred in the ‘Desert Song’ (of course, it wasn’t a desert before AGW, in rehearsals it was ‘Show Boat’)
But, what the heck, you have a point. Just one question: why 350? I mean, is that +/- anything, or absolutely precise? Serious question, Hughie…Hughie….you there, Hughie….?

NetDr

There is simply no increase in extreme weather events.
Despite the steady drumbeat of misinformation there is no trend visible.

Daryl said:
Take a minute and dislike the video at Youtube. It would be nice to see more dislikes than likes for it. Let them know how well this type of propoganda is received.
So I thought this was a good idea but I didn’t want to dislike it w/o actually watching it. Unfortunately it was as bad as I thought it would be and I feel dumber for having watched it. But at least I got my “thumbs down” vote in…

Hugh Pepper

Hoser claims that a Green revolution will drive us all into poverty. Well Hoser, perhaps you haven’t noticed, but half of the world goes to bed hungry every night.The world’s food supply is threatened, with countries like Bangladesh (a huge producer of food) experiencing floods every other year, and huge floods occurring in PAkistan and Australia. Weather events are threatening agricultural production in SE Asia (changing monsoon patterns) the USA (drought); and elsewhere. We have depleted our soils, and overused our groundwater everywhere on the planet and climate change is exacerbating these problems, This is not socialism, Hoser. This is atmospheric physics, demography and human behaviour.
By the way Hoser, Professor Hansen receives rewards for outstanding work in science. He is acknowledged by his peers and distinguished Scientific bodies to be a leader in his field. You could read his books, and the scores of publications on which many of the basic notions of climate science are based. He is not alone in this regard, however. There are, in fact, thousands of related research publications which together constitute the state of knowledge in climate science. All of this information s available and should be read by everyone.

I contend that the “sh** happens” line owes its origin to the scene in
John Ford’s “Stagecoach” where Ringo, played by John Wayne, says
“Things Happen” to explain his stink in jail. What a great film.

Paul Coppin

Ah, Hughie. The only pejorative around when you refer to Hansen, is the term “scientist”. And McKibben(on) is simply, a nutbar – psychopathic or psychotic, take your pick. About that risk managment thingy – you know, of course, in order to actually do risk managment, you have to have correlative events with associated causation, right? You do know that, right? You can’t risk manage anything that doesn’t have a measurable consequence associated with the causation. Have a chat with your insurance broker sometime. There are no measurable consequences associated with increased C02 on a global scale. Hell, you can’t even say CO2 is increasing on a global scale. AGW and CO2 levels are still conjecture, globally.
I can, however, measure and risk management the impact of liberal policy on a whole strata of systems and people, and in that, I concur with your expressed need to risk manage. EPA CO2 mitigation strategy, White House and other government energy policies, alternative energy pipedreams and the like in the US, Britain and elswhere, do have measurable correlative/causative properties. So sure, lets risk-manage these doables right out of existence. To not do so, makes the future look awfully risky.

gnomish

all hail pope hansen. better than the borgias, ain’t he?

Gunga Din

Maybe they’re already on the list but if not you could add “The Divine Wind” that saved Japan from an invading horde. (Mongols?) And I believe the Spanish Armada had some no small difficulty with “wind power”. (I guess the storm must have been caused by all those Brits breathing so hard when they heard the Armada was coming.)
I’ve lived in a number of states (Kentucky, Ohio, Texas, Kansas, New Hampshire, Indiana) before anybody was talking about AGW. In all those states the locals said, “If you don’t like the weather, wait a few minutes. It’ll change.” or something like it. They all said it as if it was something unique to where they lived. I haven’t heard anybody say that lately, not since somebody figured out a way to tax hot air!
(That always reminds of something I saw on the History Channel. It seems in the early history of mechanical clocks, before they were common, the British government tried to “tax time”. If you owned a clock you had to pay some kind of periodic tax!)

Paul Coppin

Hugh Pepper says:
April 21, 2012 at 12:32 pm
Hoser claims that a Green revolution will drive us all into poverty. Well Hoser, perhaps you haven’t noticed, but half of the world goes to bed hungry every night.The world’s food supply is threatened, with countries like Bangladesh (a huge producer of food) experiencing floods every other year, and huge floods occurring in PAkistan and Australia. Weather events are threatening agricultural production in SE Asia (changing monsoon patterns) the USA (drought); and elsewhere. We have depleted our soils, and overused our groundwater everywhere on the planet and climate change is exacerbating these problems, This is not socialism, Hoser. This is atmospheric physics, demography and human behaviour.
By the way Hoser, Professor Hansen receives rewards for outstanding work in science. He is acknowledged by his peers and distinguished Scientific bodies to be a leader in his field. You could read his books, and the scores of publications on which many of the basic notions of climate science are based. He is not alone in this regard, however. There are, in fact, thousands of related research publications which together constitute the state of knowledge in climate science. All of this information s available and should be read by everyone.

OMG! Hugh, I really hate to pick on the intellectually diminished, but, son, you’re dumber’n a sack of hammers. Are you even out of high school yet? I’m all for cheerleading for the right reasons, but you really need to spend some time reading some Monckton. Don’t head off to school by yourself, you might not find your way home.