It seems the debate is getting a bit testy in the land of watercress sandwiches and doilies*.
“Man-made global-warming hypothesis is dead in the water” says Godfrey Bloom MEP, but it gets better, he points a finger at the chairman and shouts “denier”.
Watch.
h/t to Tom Nelson
* Some people thought I was referring to Belgium. No, I was referring to the EU Parliament in Brussels. I had lunch service there in a roomful of skeptics while Climategate raged in my mind, and I couldn’t say anything until it was verified. I recall the lunch service because it seemed to heighten the surreal situation I found myself in. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Gareth Phillips says:
April 16, 2013 at 10:34 am
Ok – let’s just say that your ‘observation’ is correct – how the flip do you explain the past periods of warming AND cooling as demonstrated by inumerous palaeo records? (and indeed the instrumental record, e.g cooling of the 70’s?)
Hint – let’s add the term ‘natural variability’ !!!!!!
Moe says:
April 16, 2013 at 4:06 pm
crass in the extreme!! Neither you or icarus has presented any scientific argument or information!!
Moe says:
April 16, 2013 at 4:06 pm
and another thing – if you cannot provide proper argument – you are clearly also a troll !
with respect (because believe it or not, I do have respect for all views!) I suggest you present REAL argument and facts or risk further ridicule! – your choice!
Friends:
Moe has made the false accusation that people have tried to silence the ridiculous troll posting as icarus 62.
Nobody has tried to silence that troll. But several – including me – have suggested that the troll’s posts should be ignored because the troll’s posts only consist of attempts to disrupt the thread with blatant nonsense.
It seems that the troll posting as Moe is now attempting a similar ploy to deflect the thread.
I commend that Moe also be ignored and for the same reason. The posts of both these two trolls are so daft that they require no rebuttal because no onlookers could be misled by them.
Richard
Moe says:
April 16, 2013 at 4:06 pm
(yaddayaddayadda….)
Moe,
Only the moderators have ‘silencing’ privileges. Another false canard of Moe/Icarus62 disposed of.
However, you and Icarus62 have been challenged to show fact based proofs of continued warming (planetary or ocean), rather than continuing on with your empty yaddayaddayadda assertions. You haven’t done that. You and Ick-r-us are making people think ……that neither of you have data to support your empty assertions… It is looking more and more certain that you can’t.
Please show your data for either atmospheric warming or ocean warming, over the 15 year period ending at the present day. I really think you will fail.
I’ll ‘check in’ on your no data/yaddayadda response tomorrow.
Until then, I’m awaiting your next red herring with baited breath,
MtK
richardscourtney says:
April 16, 2013 at 4:29 pm
Of course! But that is the disruptive intention! ”Look at me I’m being ignored !” a very common ploy amongst those with no substance to their ‘argument’. Sorry, but to me it’s the same as those who play the race/colour/gay/fiscally challenged/etc ‘card’ as and when it suits! Neither have produced the info required – end of…….
M Courtney says:
April 15, 2013 at 11:35 pm
—–
Absolutely right, you must – that is, simply m u s t vote if you are eligible.
Write your own name in, if needs be – if the offered selection is too exotic or too compromised for you.
But d o vote.
Hey – applies to all readers, everywhere. democracy is a sensitive, even fragile, flower.
Go vote; even if it’s for the new dog-catcher. Even if you write your dog’s name in . . . . .
If you can – please V O T E
Smiles.
Auto
“danke.” Priceless.
Godfrey Bloom has the lowest attendance record, balanced by one of the highest expenses troughing records out of the English MEP’s in the European Parliament. As can be seen in this Parliamentary session, Bloom and UKIP are taken to task Vicky Ford MEP, where she calls UKIP’s bluff on the Financial Transactions Tax.
Nigel Farage, the leader of UKIP, invited to the recent UKIP conference as a keynote speaker, a deeply unsavoury character, Bulgarian MEP Slavi Binev, about whom former US Ambassador in Bulgaria James Pardew, who is also a former military intelligence officer, wrote in a cable available via Wikileaks…
“I. (C) MIG GROUP (also known as COOL PASS[3]) The MIG GROUP,
headed by SLAVCHO PENCHEV BINEV (Bulgarian citizen born 10 December
1965, also known as “SLAVY”), owns more than 30 nightclubs, bars, and
restaurants in Sofia, including the popular nightclubs BIAD, DALI, and
BIBLIOTEKA. GEORGI STOYANOV (Bulgarian citizen) and MIHAIL STEFANOV
(Bulgarian citizen) are “Slavy” Binev’s two deputies. The group’s
business interests also include construction and tourism; it operates a
travel agency as part of its COOL PLACE entertainment complex. The
group’s criminal activities include prostitution, narcotics, and
trafficking stolen automobiles.”
The fight against the CAGW scam should avoid tying itself to corrupt politicians from fringe political parties…
I gather he congratulated the French on sneaking into my country with explosives, blowing up a boat and killing people. Having a raving loony support you position is a good thing?
@ur momisugly Kev-in-Uk says:
April 16, 2013 at 4:09 pm
Gareth Phillips says:
April 16, 2013 at 10:34 am
Ok – let’s just say that your ‘observation’ is correct – how the flip do you explain the past periods of warming AND cooling as demonstrated by inumerous palaeo records? (and indeed the instrumental record, e.g cooling of the 70′s?)
Hint – let’s add the term ‘natural variability’ !!!!!!
——————————————————————————-
You miss my point Kev. I am not arguing for any particular cause and I believe one of the factors is variability. I am just saying that either argument can be demonstrated by how the facts are presented. If you are saying that the climate has cooled or warmed or not changed at all I could point you to lots of information which shows all opinions are potentially wrong. What we see very little of in this debate is the influence of subjective interpretation of grounded observations. I’ve got other examples if you are interested in a qualitative approach to climate science.
@ur momisugly richardscourtney says:
April 16, 2013 at 3:14 pm
Gareth Phillips:
Your post at April 16, 2013 at 10:34 am is either deliberately disingenuous or very mistaken.
The fact that global warming stopped at least 16 years ago is extremely important.
Please read my above post at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/15/fireworks-in-the-eu-parliament-over-the-pause-in-global-warming/#comment-1276907
As I said there, the fact needs to be stated and explained at every opportunity. Clearly, Godfrey Bloom MEP understands the importance of this fact which you say you do not.
I repeat, please read my post which explains the matter which you say you do not understand.
Richard
———————————————————————————-
Richard, read the post again. I am not contradicting you ( unless you are claiming that temps are now falling to levels last seen 30 years ago) I am trying to point out that subjectivity is a critical element and pretty well any stance can be ‘proved’ by using the right time frame or even the right research.
Here is another example.
In 1980 unemployment rocketed to 3.5 million in the UK
In the late 80s it fell to 2 million
In the late 90s it fell to a million.
As a result of the recession it has gone up to more like 2 million over the last few years.
So the question is, is unemployment rising or falling? It’s lower now than in the 1980s, but higher than 5 years ago. It’s subjective on what political party wants to use the data. Same with climate, shift the timeline and you can shift your results.
so,
Warming has slowed dramatically over the last 16 years. (so must have stopped)
But it has not cooled ( So must be still with us)
But the trend is for stabilisation( so warming has stopped)
buts thats only 16 years ( so warming is still with us)
but we know about climate variability ( so this is nothing critical it’s happened before)
but its happening faster than previously experienced ( so it must be a problem) etc etc etc
The critical thing is not to close your mind to any new or useful info, and beware of sites like Skep Science who shout down anyone who seeks to promote that idea.
Hi kev and Richard Courtney. Typical attempt to intimidate, but Richard you would know that I won’t be intimidated as you have suffered my persistence in pointing out your errors in the past.
But as I said before, the sea has continued to increase in temperature. There have been several studies that have shown that the majority of the heat energy trapped on the earth by greenhouse gases has landed up warming the seas.
Some people, without foundation you caste doubt on these studies by spuriously claiming the measurements are incorrect.
Well, we don’t need instruments to measure this change there are many instances where warm water fish species are moving to areas where they have never been seen before as it was too cold for them. These fish don’t rely on thermometers so it can’t be due to inadequate measurements.
I know this is contrary to many who visit and post on this site think, but the evidence (not special cherry picked evidence) is showing you how wrong you have been. I imagine it will just be a matter of time before the skeptic in you makes you see how you conclusions are wrong.
Gareth Phillips:
I replied to your first post saying you were either very mistaken or being deliberately disingenuous. I pointed you (with a link for your convenience) to my post which explains the matter.
Your post at April 17, 2013 at 12:41 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/15/fireworks-in-the-eu-parliament-over-the-pause-in-global-warming/#comment-1277781
indicates you were being deliberately disingenuous. It ignores my post I cited, and it provides pure obfuscation fashioned from illogical twaddle.
The reality is
1.
The IPCC made a prediction
2.
The prediction was for “committed warming”
3.
The “committed warming” has not happened and discernible global warming has stopped.
4.
This demonstrates beyond any possibility of doubt that climate model predictions of global warming are wrong.
I understand how painful it can be to have your beliefs shown to be plain wrong. And I understand that you have a superstitious belief in AGW. So, you have my sympathy for your pain, especially when – as in this thread – you are reacting to refutation of your superstition by a politician in a Parliament.
But reality has refuted your superstition. Your superstitious belief is your business. Reality affects everybody. Politicians need to consider reality.
Richard
Moe:
re your post at April 17, 2013 at 1:03 am
Noted, and laughed at.
Richard
Richard, nervous laughter?
Moe:
re your post at April 17, 2013 at 2:54 am
Noted, and laughed at with gusto.
Richard
PS I am eagerly awaiting the return of Mac the Knife to enjoy his response to what he calls your yadayadayada.
So Richard you don’t accept that the seas are warming? It is the position you would have to take if you think global warming has paused.
Still you have been shown to ignore evidence that doesn’t fit your narrow view before. So you are working to your standard MO.
@ur momisugly icarus62 says:
April 16, 2013 at 3:28 pm
You have ignored my comment and questions. Why?
This comment to richardscourtney shows you have been here. You have shown in this particular comment a unwillingness to do more than simply repeat your assertion. That’s all.
That is evidence of rote learning, nothing more. Is that all there is to you? Reading from a prepared sheet?
Please have the consideration to answer the questions posed.
Moe:
Your lie that I ignore evidence and your refusal to accept the fact that global warmning stopped at least 16 years ago are noted and laughed at.
Your clowning is becoming tiresome.
Richard
Hey Moe, and you too curley (or icarus… whatever)
The heat is no more “going into the ocean” than there was a fifth gunman on the grassy knoll. Why, they figured it all out with an instrumentation package left on the moon by Apollo 22 in 1981. There is no “consensus” that the radiative imbalance is exactly 0.6 gizzlogs, or any other measurement.
I don’t know exactly what planet you two live on, but it’s unlikely to be this one. Welcome! We call our world “Earth”. What color is the sky on your world?
@ur momisugly Moe says:
April 17, 2013 at 3:12 am
I have no great interest in discussing details of this or that paper or study, as plainly you don’t either, since referring to something is not equivalent to evaluating it. I am confident from your manner of presentation that your have limited capacity for that, and that such a process is not your role.
Along with icarus62 above, you seem to have a formulaic element to your expectations and what you can actually deliver. Naturally, styles differ. There is an element of the vainglorious to you which has the character of someone never actually having been exposed to any meaningful test.
The proceedural nature of both you and icarus62 indicates that what you retain at any one time is the result not of independently arrived at conclusions, but of talking points that have been worn smooth and absorbed by repetition and confirmation in a “work-shopped” manner. Is this how you have come by what you would be inclined to call your understanding?
Is this an expression of a collective position not an individual one?
Are you an example of someone whose interest in this issue is reflected in an involvement with a particular group? Or by having undertaken a course of instruction relating to “communication” around this issue? Do you make money from this issue in any way?
To not address these questions might be called evasive. Given your contributions here, they are relevant and at least to me, obligatory. Part of understanding this issue is understanding the nature of those who make claims.
To address these questions but not to answer them accurately, is of course dishonest. A dishonest person might be inclined to do just that in such a forum, thinking this could not be seen, but could in fact reveal themselves.
In any case, they must have the undeniable personal knowledge that they are an intrinsically dishonest person.
The world has experienced over 330 consecutive months (28years!) of higher than average (pre-oil) temperatures. That’s like flipping heads 330 times in a row. The odds this is just chance is equal to one divided by the total number of stars in the universe.
In a stable climate, there would be about the same number of warmer and cooler than average months.
Just as in a climbing stock market there are short term “downs” , but the trend is upwards. You can always find a small period of down temperature fluctuations, but the trend is upwards. It HAS to be, given the nature of CO2 and the increasing CO2 emissions, close to a trillion tons into our fragile atmosphere; the trapped energy must go somewhere.
Richard, I don’t know if you ignore evidence that doesn’t suit your mindset, but you just don’t accept it.
I’ve asked you if you accept the oceans are warming. Simple question which requires asimple answer.
I notice that you would rather try some ‘put downs’ than answer. Which I take to mean you know the consequences of this information to the idea that global warming has paused.
Jc what is your point? Is it because people ignore the fact that the oceans are warming means people are dishonest to say global warming has paused based on surface temperature?
Or are you saying that people are dishonest when they pretend to be scientists, but can’t even interpret the simplest of graphs correctly?
@jfreed27 says:
April 17, 2013 at 4:42 am
This is starting to get REALLY interesting.
First the entity icarus62. Seemingly having exhausted any meager offerings, POOF! GONE!
Then Moe, apparently, or possibly, still watching. What next from this one?
Now you, with this.
Is this evidence of a “strategy”? Passing the baton? Tag-team? The Collective Brain of AGW?
Are you the third string? The last available? The pool exhausted?
Its hard to imagine there can be a fourth, your contribution is skirting the truly imbecile. It gives the sense you only have one shot in your armory. And they gave you the absolute junk to work with.
More please! I want to see the fourth! How is it possible to physically dribble in the written word?