Of course we all know about that other ill-fated unabomber billboard last year that went over like a lead radiosonde balloon, but I like this one by CFACT (minus the date controversy of course).
Drive by this!
Science tells us that there is nothing out of the ordinary about today’s weather. There have always been droughts, floods, fires and storms and they will continue no matter what we do. A little historical research shows us that today’s weather is not even particularly extreme and by some measures is unusually tame.
NOAA and the U.K. Met Office, the two main sources of temperature data the UN’s IPCC rely on most, report that any warming there may have been has been limited to only three quarters of a degree in a century! Three quarters of a degree! Hardly the sort of thing to make a noticeable difference in extreme weather.
Further, the Met Office’s data shows no warming for the last 16-17 years! Our new billboard plasters the Met Office data in an easily understood graph right up in the sky.
It shows no warming for over 16 years 15 years. I’ve sent them a correction notice.
If you want to chip in to get one in your area, visit the link below. Billboards are surprisingly inexpensive.
http://www.cfact.org/donate/support-cfacts-billboard-campaign/
UPDATE: the 15/16 year issue discussed in comments is a matter of perception. If you count years, 97,98,99,00,01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12 you get a count of 16 years.
If you do the math, you get 15 years:
http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=08&d1=31&y1=1997&m2=08&d2=31&y2=2012&ti=on
Note the extra day in that report. The issue has to do with defining the start point as zero or one. Counting years, like counting days, can give you can extra day. The timeanddate.com website allows for this by allowing you to not count the end day:
http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=08&d1=31&y1=1997&m2=08&d2=31&y2=2012&ti=off
Either way, te lack of warming over the time period is a compelling argument.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I am not paranoid; I just can’t be bothered to give out my details as well as my money. If there’s a PayPal tip-jar somewhere I’ll contribute. Not otherwise.
If they can’t accept a donation without telephone number matching their arbitrary validation process, they loose. In my part of the globe, phone number is 12 or 13 digits depending if you include the internationalisation.
I think calling out Al Gore by name seems a tad unprofessional. I would have liked the billboard more if it had left personalities out of it.
If they want a huge billboard, they should at least be internally consistent. They say “No global warming for 16 years!” But then they show a graph clearly labelled from August 1997 to August 2012. That is only 15 years!
If they want to show 16 years, they should use RSS:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1997/plot/rss/from:1997/trend
oldspanky says:
February 27, 2013 at 7:56 am
Sean Houlihane says:
February 27, 2013 at 7:57 am
###
I guess you guys are a bit clueless about the lefties propagandist tactics that necessitate the processes that you are whining about. Think a little bit before posting next time.
The tip jar is awkward. I definitely agree with oldspanky.
AW: “Billboards are surprisingly inexpensive.”
CFACTS: “This kind of advertising is expensive”
You might want to align the message.
REPLY: Well right there is proof there is no organizational aligned messaging as some people assert. Compared to television advertising (which I’m most familiar with) billboards are in fact quite cheap. – Anthony
That ‘inconvenient truth’ tag was bound to bite him in the derriere again and again!
Now that the Arctic ice has rebounded be ready for, ‘it’s the wrong’ type of ice alarmism from the Warmistas!
@DesertYote: I disagree. It is very important to be objective and precise when trying to get your message out. Otherwise you are no better than the side you are criticizing.
I also would contribute if PayPal were an option, if the billboard took out the ad hominem attack on Mr. Gore, and the data that was presented showed the same time period as the text. Otherwise the “message” looks mean-spirited and foolish.
The interval from Jan 1997 through Dec 2012 IS 16 years, as advertised.
REPLY: no, it isn’t. Read the inset box lower right for dates, then see the results of this date calculator:
http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=08&d1=31&y1=1997&m2=08&d2=31&y2=2012&ti=on
Anthony
That billboard will will look better in a couple of years, if it starts cooling, because then the “start” date can be kicked back further.
When you include the year 1997, it does add up to 16 years. Or figure it this way, 2000 to 2012 is 13 years, then add 97 – 99. So the billboard is actually – correct.
REPLY: no, it isn’t see http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=08&d1=31&y1=1997&m2=08&d2=31&y2=2012&ti=on
-Anthony
” …should at least be internally consistent.”
There is no contradiction. Obviously the graph highlights two points with the identical temperature, while the statement is supported. The dates are clearly marked, and the intent of supporting the statement has been achieved.
Any message can be nit picked, and total agreement will never found.
I like the billboard, it sends the message loud and clear, and discussion about internal consistency will serve to underscore the main message. As far as mentioning Al Gore, as someone else commented on, he was not just the producer of the misleading movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, he was also the star actor and is identified with the message of doom that is the point of the movie. The image that comes to mind is AG standing in front of a graph just like this one, except on his the tail sticks up like an exxxxxxx and is coloured red.
A bit of controversy doesn’t hurt, provided it doesn’t insult the very people it is designed to persuade, it actually helps.
Well done on the billboard.
If it is not warming, why has the temperature stayed at a high level for the last decade and a half? Shouldn’t it be cooling? I really don’t understand the skeptic argument here. Since it got really, really warm in 1997, we haven’t seen cooling. Seriously, what do you think is happening?
PRD says:
February 27, 2013 at 8:45 am
When you include the year 1997, it does add up to 16 years. Or figure it this way, 2000 to 2012 is 13 years, then add 97 – 99. So the billboard is actually – correct.
If it was including yearly averages from 1997 thru 2012 then it would in fact have 16 years worth of data. But it is not – it is starting with the month of August of 1997 and going through the month of August of 2012 which comprises 180 months of data – 15 years worth of monthly data.
Good that this gets corrected before the billboards go up. Otherwise, the error would become the CAGW focus and divert from the inconvenient truth.
batpox says:
February 27, 2013 at 8:33 am
“I also would contribute if PayPal were an option, if the billboard took out the ad hominem attack on Mr. Gore, and the data that was presented showed the same time period as the text. Otherwise the “message” looks mean-spirited and foolish.”
Could you show us the ad hominem attack, batpox? I don’t see it. Is “An Inconvenient Truth” a mortal insult in Amerenglish?
In some respects the actual technical ‘correctness’ of the ad is irrelevant since it is well within the spirit of post normal science but wouldn’t it be nice if they could actually get it right. It makes us look incompetent.
It’s right to name Gore as, I guess, this is aimed at the chattering classes not the true believers, the rent boys of cake science or someone who might know what Svante Arrhenius contributed to the state of affairs.
I’m using the term ‘chattering classes’ in it’s original meaning as the educated left liberal elite who believe that they have the right to be the arbiters of consensus (the meaning of the term in the U.S. is a bit different). The rent boys of cake science are the likes of Mann and Jones.
Perhaps the glorified disc jockey’s presenting BBC programmes might start to think before calling us deniers.
The 16 year error is brilliant, 15 or 16 years, the warmists will slam this “error”, while failing to realize they concede there has been no warming.
2nd I am amazed by their misery over the planets failure to warm.
If I had been deeply concerned that catastrophic harm through warming was a real consequence and then reality showed me to be mistaken, I would be giddy with joy.
What is the mood from team global warming?
Happy? Joy Joy?
Wow if I put up a billboard like that where I live, the greenie protesters would haul out the pitchforks, the local tv station would show videos of the blasphemous billboard, the police would be called and my son would do a face-palm. The face-palm is the worst.
I suspect it doesn’t really matter, but there are 16 Augusts in the 15 years since August 1997. I will leave it to the folks who deal with this data set whether that is 16 or 15 years. I do know that when you compare annualized data such as crime statistics you would compare 2012 data to 1998 data for a 15-year trend.
“I think calling out Al Gore by name seems a tad unprofessional. I would have liked the billboard more if it had left personalities out of it.”
There is just no response to this.The Gorbull calls us crazy,and you think it is fair? And how much is he paying you?
This billboard may have set a record for the ultimate cherry pick — I wonder why they didn’t pick April 1997 to April 2012 (+0.24 C) or May 1997 to May 2012 (+0.24 C)?
And actually, HadCRUT4 has Aug2012 – Aug1997 = 0.1 C.
And actually the surface temperature (“14 C”) isn’t computed, only the anomalies. But then, there isn’t the impression this billboard really cares about the science. Too bad.
He who sows (Gore) shall reap. What`s wrong with that? Send the graph around widely.
kindlekinser says:
February 27, 2013 at 9:01 am …. I really don’t understand the skeptic argument here…
The message might have been more clear if the graph also included the undoubtedly rising CO2 levels over the same time period. CAGW theory says that as CO2 levels rise, temperature will rise as well. Skeptics argue that all we are seeing is natural variation, which can include rising, falling, or even temperatures.
kindlekinser @ur momisugly 9:01
I read it. I read it again. I don’t understand.
=================