Uh oh, somebody in Germany in a position to influence others in the Green movement has started thinking for himself, shrugging off suggestions from a climate scientist that “its all in his head”.
Pierre Gosselin reports about a story by lefty journalist Harald Martenstein of Die Zeit:
“I was ready to open my home to the Schröders as soon as they would no longer be able to take the 60°C heat in the shade. But instead it got colder and colder. At Uckermark in the wintertime it was -20°C for weeks.”
Martenstein also noticed that Britain had endured its coldest winter in 30 years, Florida got covered by icicles, and the cold seemed to be spreading everywhere. So he pleaded that people should emit more CO2 – so that he could stay warm.
His plea, however, prompted an invitation from a “scientist at a very nice climate institute“:
He showed me tables and graphs that clearly depicted it was getting warmer. He believed that I was just a victim of my own subjective imagination. Memory can fool you. One thinks that during childhood it was warm from May to September, but in reality its was warm only 3 days, and it is those 3 days that one remembers intensively. The tables from climate scientists, on the other hand, do not lie.”
Martenstein then recounts the past winter and how it seemed to him as being the longest and hardest he could remember, but telling himself that it was probably just his warped subjectivity acting up again. He writes:
But suddenly I read in the paper that a number of climate scientists had changed their minds. Now they were saying it is not going to get warmer, but colder, at least in Europe. Whatever happened to the tables I now ask myself.”
This kind of science would never fly in biology or physics, Martenstein writes. ”But with climate science it seems they are allowed to get away with everything.”
Read it all here:
Mother Of German Green Weeklies, Die Zeit, Shocks Readers…Now Casts Doubt On Global Warming!
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@richardscourtney you seem to suggest in your comment dated April 20 2013 (Julian Day JD 2456402.500000) at time 2.39 pm that Stan W’s suggestion that one could replace surface temperatures associated with El Ninos or La Nina with some kind of average surface temperature is a MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY. Maybe my mathematics degrees was different to yours, but as far as I am aware it is MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE to replace to replace one number with another. It may not be physically justified, but it I think it is MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE.
@ur momisugly (shudder) Reich — please forgive my expressing my distaste about your given name, but, I’m sorry, Mr. E., that word has such horrid connotations!
Thanks for the affirmation above.
I want to compliment you. Although I disagree with much of what you say, you (and Dirk, too) have an admirably fine command of the English language which I am assuming is not your first language. Good for you to post on an English language blog! For a German (I’m sorry, but I have so much personal anecdotal evidence that I’m a bit prejudiced), you have very good sense of humor.
And, good for you to persevere in posting, despite much opposition, here.
Ich spreche keine Deutsche, ist tut (?) mir lied (?). Aw shucks! Auf wiedersehn.
@Janice Moore
“that word has such horrid connotations!”
‘Das Dritte Reich’ has horrid connotations. Reich is still a perfectly normal word even in German.
“I want to compliment you.”
Well, thanks!
” Although I disagree with much of what you say, you (and Dirk, too) have an admirably fine command of the English language which I am assuming is not your first language.”
Indeed, it is not my native tongue.
” Good for you to post on an English language blog!”
Oh! That’s easy!
” For a German (I’m sorry, but I have so much personal anecdotal evidence that I’m a bit prejudiced), you have very good sense of humor.”
I am not the one to lift your prejudices since I am not German and German is not my first language. However, I do know quite some Germans with an excellent sense of humor (and some who seem to be bereft of humor). Germans as well as citizens of the USA could however learn something from the UK when it comes to irony and being ironic about themselves (I am not from the UK btw!). You should read the article in Die Zeit where this is all about to experience a German who is funny in his writing! After all that was all it was, a satirical fictional piece, not at all having the importance that Watts is giving it in his posting. That is what makes this all extra funny!
Ah! Good try on German. I’ll take away the minor mistakes (hope you don’t mind, not trying to pedantic or so): Ich spreche kein Deutsch, Es tut mir leid. Auf Wiedersehen.
@richardcourtney —
please stop the name calling and insinuations. it is rude.
clearly, obviously, it is possible to substitute one number for another in a time series.
hence, for months when an ENSO occurs (use a 6-mth lag if you want), which skews average surface temperature, substitute in a number more typical of the long-term (decades) temperature.
that’s all. recalculate the trend.
Re: leftofcenter and Stan and Whoa! A troll invasion. Not going to dignify their gas with a response.
@janice — please stop the name calling; you are being rude.
@Janice Moore I’ll happily acknowledge that I was somewhat mocking richardscourtney’s typical style of engagement, but if he can’t take it he shouldn’t dish it out. Not sure how that makes it a troll invasion. Happy to engage politely, if that is what you would prefer.
Stan W. says:
April 20, 2013 at 2:18 pm
it is certainly not erroneous to ask how the influence of ENSOs might be removed from a temperature time series. I have merely suggested one way to do it, that is not that sophisticated. there are other ways
OK, I will play your game. Of course the biggest El Nino is from 1998 and people are excited when a trend is started right before this El Nino. But what people do not seem to realize is that there are deep La Ninas on either side of that El Nino and they cancel each other out. Check out the following and note that the slope is essentially 0, both for 16 years and 4 months which includes the 1998 El Nino and for 13 years and 2 months that does not include this El Nino.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1996.9/plot/rss/from:1996.9/trend/plot/rss/from:2000.08/trend
@werner — yes, but your period includes two la ninas in the last few years, one of them large, that temporarily cool the surface.
also werner, i wonder why you choose RSS data.
It differs significantly from UAH in recent years, and given the history of the whole MSU saga it is not clear either of these time series are accurately capturing LT temperatures.
werner, notice the big difference if UAH data is used:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1996.9/plot/uah/from:1996.9/trend/plot/uah/from:2000.08/trend
@Reich.Esterhaus.. “Fair Play” as we say over here, seldom do we see such a straight admission. we all make mistakes on these chat threads. Well I do anyway. Getting caught up in that digression was as you say a mistake on my part also.
@Wamron
Yeah, I was annoyed by being taking up on my name instead of the thread subject and let that comment slip through. Should have waited 10 minutes before posting 😉
Thanks for your reply. No hard feelings! Maybe we’ll cross (s)words again one day!
To the left of centre:
Your post at April 20, 2013 at 2:53 pm says to me (and says nothing else) April 20, 2013 at 2:53 pm
I did NOT say, suggest or imply any such thing.
I said that I had explained (at April 20, 2013 at 2:05 am) the “exercise” Stan W. set for me to conduct is a mathematical impossibility. IT IS AND I DID.
Not content with that blatant falsehood, at April 20, 2013 at 3:02 pm you follow it with this
Absolutely false! I never, not ever, misrepresent what others say.
I quote it and I address it. Your suggestion is untrue and defamatory.
Richard
@richardscourtney Just to clarify; my mocking of your style was based on your use of CAPS (for example) and in no way was I suggesting that you misrepresent what others say. Not quite sure how you interpreted it in that way. Guilty conscience?
By the way, I thought you were intending to respond to any future comments of mine by saying “noted and laughed at” or had you forgotten that?
Stan W.:
I see you are trolling again in your post at April 20, 2013 at 3:13 pm where you say to Werner Brozek
The MSU data provided as the RSS and UAH data sets are the only global measurements of global temperature. Hence, either is the ‘best’ data to cite.
Also, the surface data sets are constantly ‘adjusted’ (almost every month) for no published, known or justifiable reason. For example, try to explain these changes to GISS for measurements made decades ago
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/giss/hansen-giss-1940-1980.gif
Anyway, none of that changes the point made by Werner Brozek which is that the recent ENSO effects negate each other so they have no discernible effect on the global temperature trend.
Now it is nearly midnight so I shall go to bed and leave you trolls to continue your attempts to mislead the public.
Richard
PS I have NOT called you names. I cannot do that here because there are ladies present so I cannot use the appropriate names.
@richardcourtney — of course it isn’t impossible.
let your 500-month surface temperature time series be Y={T1,T2, …,T500}
suppose an El Nino occurs in the months 361, 362, … 372.
obtain a new time series Z={T1,T2,…,T360,S361,S362,…S372,T373,T374…T500} where S361=S362=S363=…=S372=(T1+T2+…+T360)/360
recalculate the 16yr trend for Z, and compare it to the trend for Y for months > 372.
clearly this is possible.
@richardcourtney: yes, you called me a “troll”
“Anyway, none of that changes the point made by Werner Brozek which is that the recent ENSO effects negate each other so they have no discernible effect on the global temperature trend.”
no, he did not make that point — it only negates over certain time intervals, but not others.
To the left of centre:
Your post at April 20, 2013 at 3:23 pm is another falsehood. I did not “misunderstand”. I quoted your words which were clear and unambiguous. You lied, and your claim that you did not is another lie.
Strewth! Trolls are despicable!
Stan W.:
I really need to get to bed but you have replied to two of my posts so I will stay to answer.
Yes the ENSO effects only negate each other over a specific period started by Werner Brozek; i.e. the recent 16 years of stasis which disprove the AGW hypothesis as emulated by climate models.
And I did not call you names. I said you were a troll. Clearly you are. I did not say you were a man because your pseudonym is not sufficient information to know that.
Richard
@richardcourtney – i am not a troll. i am asking legitimate questions in a polite manner, and it is unfair for you to characterize me in a pejorative way just because you do not like the questions themselves. please stop being rude.
@richardcourtney – the last 16 years certainly not do disprove AGW.
there are multiple, nonexclusive reasons why such a “hiatus” could exist: natural variablity, particularly ENSOs and the PDO; an increase in Chinese aerosols; an underestimation of LT trends by UAH and RSS, incorrect forcings in climate models (especially for aerosols, particularly the indirect effects), the modeling of clouds, etc etc etc.
blaming it all on an incorrect forcing attributed to CO2 is scientifically inaccurate. some of the best physics resides in the treatment of the GHGs.
Dear Mr. R. Eschhaus,
Thank you for kindly correcting my flaying attempt at Deutsche. I would not label your politely correcting me as “pedantic” (overly picky, usually in an attempt to demonstrate supposed superiority of intellect). Your ability to speak at least 3 languages is impressive.
Yes, I read the English translation of the Die Zeit article (and I have noted that, per above posts, there were some mistakes in the translation). Even if translated flawlessly into English, however, I think it loses much of the humor it has for someone who can speak German well. Yes, it was somewhat humorous to me, but, weak, very weak (to me, I mean, a one-language American). The irony was too subtly expressed (assuming it is really in there). The explicit humor was too simple. I will try to remember to not judge one German (as I try not to judge anyone) based on the actions of other Germans and give them all the benefit of the doubt as to their sense of humor.
Yes, indeed, the British do seem to have a genetic predisposition for wit and humor. I find, though, that while I can laugh heartily at most British humor, [oh, boy, this thread is REALLY unravelling, now!], I don’t always “get” it (and I don’t think that’s always due to my IQ). American comedians (I wonder why (eye roll)), such as Dennis Miller, are far and away my favorites. We who believe in free markets and truth in science are, nevertheless, in agreement on what matters most.
To paraphrase Melanchthon: “In essentials, unity. In [humor or humour] liberty. In all things, charity.”
Janice
@Janice
Hi Janice!
First let me be overly pedantic with myself! (being pedantic with oneself is a good thing, being pedantic with others not necessarily so). Before “Es” there is a comma not a period, therefore it should be “es”. Small matter you may think, but post the whole sentence on some German comment thread and you may be called out for it! (People who call others out for such things are called Grammar Nazis btw, which is an example of German humor 😉 )
“Yes, I read the English translation of the Die Zeit article (and I have noted that, per above posts, there were some mistakes in the translation).”
Do you have a link to an English translation? Or did you use google translate or a similar service?
” Even if translated flawlessly into English, however, I think it loses much of the humor it has for someone who can speak German well. ”
Yes! This is a general problem. Lost in translation…
” Yes, it was somewhat humorous to me, but, weak, very weak (to me, I mean, a one-language American). The irony was too subtly expressed (assuming it is really in there). The explicit humor was too simple.”
It wasn’t his best piece, pretty lame actually. But there we are back to the point. Read all his weekly columns and you know they are not serious. They are not describing any true opinion. Polar bears in the Uckermark? 😀
“Yes, indeed, the British do seem to have a genetic predisposition for wit and humor.”
I prefer the explanation that they culturally grew up with it! Otherwise there is no hope for the rest of us.
“We who believe in free markets and truth in science”
Markets are regulated everywhere. When they are not regulated (drugs), war is declared on them. Science works by review and replication of results (not by releasing data and having someone do the same analysis on it)
In re the articole in Die Zeit:
The problem is that the Obamas and the Gina McCarthys have too much invested politically and financially in AGW for them to retreat from it. They can be counted on to hang on to it even long after it finally explodes in the media. They certainly, definitely, absolutely, incontrovertibly know it is a lie but that doesn’t stop people of their moral character from pursuing it – in typical leftist fashion, the truth is irrelevant, and they have no compunction about using lies to gratify their lust for power and their personal financial greed. They will keep going with it until they are stopped by superior force.
Unfortunately, they are capable of doing tremendous harm before they are stopped and brought to account – fleecing the middle class, crippling the economy, and making people freeze and starve to death.
I believe that there are no unintended consequences of actions by government. If harm is done, harm was intended to be done. The AGW crowd, and its toadies in the government, do know that what they are doing will impoverish, injure and kill people, and they do mean to do that.
The Alarmist-Judge-Jury-and-Executioner-in-Chief and the Self-Appointed Congress of the United States (McCarthy, that is) talk about a “level playing field,” but what they mean by that is that everyone (that is, except themselves, their corrupt crony capitalist friends, and the “researchers” feeding at the public trough) shall be reduced to Third World living standards. Oh, but the Third World has such bounteous supplies of excrement for cooking food!
It’s an odd kind of playing field where those who produce must give to those who don’t. That would seem to rank those who do nothing above those who do something – not very level if you ask me.
Kleptocracy rules!
@chad — how exactly would changing our production of energy from fossil fuel sources to renewable sources kill anybody? electricity will still be there in the wall socket.
Moderators? Awaiting moderation? because I mention Nazis? What?
[Reply: “Nazi” automatically diverts your comment into the Spam folder. — mod.]