An interesting new word came up this week on Twitter thanks to Hillary Rosner.
It would seem to be a derivative of the word pecadillo:
I think this is the perfect word to describe many of the disingenuous activists like Al Gore, Joe Romm, Brad Johnson, Mayor Bloomberg, and Bill McKibben who see “human caused bad weather” in every cloud, and try mightily to make others believe the same.
To an extent, they are successful, just as others are able to fool people into crusades to find bigfoot, scan the skies for aliens, or take cover from imagined chemicals raining from the sky in ordinary jet exhaust contrails.
The peccatogenesists want us to believe that our supposed “misconduct” against Gaia, such as emitting to much CO2 over an imaginary “safe” level of 350 parts per million, or failing to care enough about an imaginary temperature target of 2°C which climatologist Phil Jones says was plucked out of thin air is the cause of bad weather.
Now, per that belief, any weather event that can somehow remotely be linked to global warming is used as a propaganda tool by the peccatogenesists, except of course, when that event doesn’t, in which case it’s “just weather”. For example, thousands of new record lows get nary a mention, but when there are a string of record highs, it’s just another example of human caused DOOM even though it can be shown later that its just another weather pattern.
And then there’s severe weather. Yesterday, the great Al Gore declared that his views are being hindered by scientists. Politico reports:
Former Vice President Al Gore lamented today that scientists “will not let us link record-breaking” tornadoes in Oklahoma and elsewhere to climate change because of inadequate record keeping on the twisters.
Oh, the horror! It reminds me of the terrible mistreatment James Hansen claimed he got at the hands of NASA during the Bush era when they wouldn’t let him make unfounded claims.
Of course, some politicians like NYC Mayor Gloomberg Bloomberg don’t let pesky science or mathematics get in the way of a crusade, and embrace peccatogenics as a vehicle for hope and change:
The bad weather patterns should kick in as early as 2020, according to the findings released on Monday.
In that year, the city will see an average temperature of 57 degrees — up from the current 54 — and 10% more rainfall.
That rainfall will come with an alarming, nearly 1-foot rise in the already high sea level — which will likely increase the city’s flood risk.
Adding to the danger will be the amount of the rainy days.
Gosh, rainy days are dangerous? I can’t wait for NOAA to come up with a bulletin type for that. Cue the invention of the urban safety umbrella. Wuebbles gone wild would like that I think.
Of course theses claims of Hell and High Water Fire and Brimstone appear just like an old time country preacher sermon, followed by the obligatory collection plate to fleece the flock. Michael Bloomberg, in his best preaching style, only asked for $20 billion at the end of his sermon yesterday. Surely, that’s a small price to pay for dissing Gaia.
Problem is, like most peccatogenic claims, when you examine them for detail, they fall apart just as easily as the latest bigfoot or UFO sighting. Anybody with basic math skills can see Bloomberg’s claim 1 foot of sea level rise will be lucky to be 1 inch at the present rate.
The reality about the supposed human induced bad weather is that if we are to believe the claims of “consensus” put forth by Oreskes, Cook, Nuccitelli, and other social activists, then the consensus is that there’s no way to connect global warming and severe weather. Some examples of the consensus that severe weather is not attributable to climate change include:
Nature editorial dashes alarmist hopes of linking extreme weather events to global warming:
Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.
IPCC Special Report on Extreme Events and Disasters:
FAQ 3.1 Is the Climate Becoming More Extreme? […]None of the above instruments has yet been developed sufficiently as to allow us to confidently answer the question posed here. Thus we are restricted to questions about whether specific extremes are becoming more or less common, and our confidence in the answers to such questions, including the direction and magnitude of changes in specific extremes, depends on the type of extreme, as well as on the region and season, linked with the level of understanding of the underlying processes and the reliability of their simulation in models.
But, as Gore says, “it’s those pesky scientists” that are preventing the linkage.
I blame technology for the appearance that the weather is getting worse. See: Why it seems that severe weather is “getting worse” when the data shows otherwise – a historical perspective
With this essay, “peccatogenic” is now in the climate vocabulary. Go forth and multiply it whenever you get the opportunity. And, keep that handy Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. bullshit button at the ready.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
peccatum, Latin for “sin”
Al is a peccar-head? I can see that.
And those who breed the Chicken Littles are called peccatogeneticists?
Bloomberg seems to think he can scare the rest (non NY) population with horror stories about rain, sea level rise, and hurricanes. [snip -over the top]
I can think of another word starting with “p-e-c” that sums up Mayor Bloomberg. My mom would not approve.
Agnus Dei
Qui tollis peccata mundi
“Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world”
Could be rendered as:
Deus AGWus
Qui taxes peccata mundi…
A shorter word is statist. As they all yearn for an absolute state that will solve the imaginary problems by the power of expropriation.
It is bad enough that they see human causes for natural events. But what is worse is like the superstitious peoples of the past they want to commit human sacrifice to appease the gods of CO2. These people are not just some harmless nutcases with strange ideas. They are dangerous. Dangerous to our lives our freedoms and our future. They are an oxymoron in that they are the modern evolution of luddites.
whatever you want to call them – they are a dream to work on for the Proctologists ……….
Anthony, your selection of the first 2 of your 3 examples of nonsense is based on ignorance of the evidence, both pro and con, on your part. Chemtrails, there is no evidence. This is the first time in the many years I have been following WUWT that I have experienced your closed mindedness. Sad!
BC
“Former Vice President Al Gore lamented today that scientists “will not let us link record-breaking” tornadoes in Oklahoma and elsewhere to climate change because of inadequate record keeping on the twisters.”
Clearly, Al has never, ever hear of the tri-state tornado:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tri-State_Tornado
“The Great Tri-State Tornado of Wednesday, March 18, 1925, is the deadliest tornado in U.S. history. Inflicting 695 fatalities,[2] the tornado killed more than twice as many as the second deadliest, the 1840 Great Natchez Tornado. The continuous ≥219 mile (≥352 km) track left by the tornado was the longest ever recorded in the world as it crossed from southeastern Missouri, through southern Illinois, then into southwestern Indiana. Although not officially rated by NOAA, it is recognized by most experts (such as Tom Grazulis) as an F5 tornado, the maximum damage rating issued on the Fujita scale.”
Remember, according to the peccatogenesists, NO record-breaking severe weather EVER occurred prior to the year of their birth. In fact, never, ever in the history of the earth, and certainly never ever before doppler radar. And, of course, we can’t trust the writings and reports of our ancestors since they weren’t trained NOAA spotters, and likely exaggerated the intensity of the storms… \sarc
So we need to change AGW to PGW?
Why spend a five dollar word on two bit snake oil salesmen?
http://www.someecards.com/usercards/viewcard/MjAxMy02NzE4YzlhZTNlMWQxNWY0
Funny card. LOL.
I have never objected to being snipped prior to now. I object!!! All I wrote was the truth. Most of the non NY population could care less what happens to NY.
Since when is WUWT PC. What a shame if that is true.
Usually when I comment in a way that I feel might be snipped I include the words “Anthony” or “moderators” to give them a heads up to check this. I have no wish to sully the most wonderful website on the earth. Yes I will push the envelope, but I in no way felt this comment required alerting the mods. I am perplexed. Yes, I speak directly, more directly then Anthony might sometimes want, but that is me. I have made manful strides in my comments here to avoid tampering with the wonder that is WUWT. I bite my keyboard many times. Just not this time.
My word for Gore is not one I wish to have here. (tw-t may cover it but there is your choice of vowel to fit).
“Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.”
“FAQ 3.1 Is the Climate Becoming More Extreme? […]None of the above instruments has yet been developed sufficiently as to allow us to confidently answer the question posed here. Thus we are restricted to questions about whether specific extremes are becoming more or less common, and our confidence in the answers to such questions, including the direction and magnitude of changes in specific extremes, depends on the type of extreme, as well as on the region and season, linked with the level of understanding of the underlying processes and the reliability of their simulation in models.”
You may notice in these quotes that, although they reluctantly admit that there is no evidence that recent changes in the climate have led to more extreme weather events and “questions about whether specific extremes are becoming more or less common” have almost universally been answered with “less”, they really in their heart of hearts WANT the answer to be “more”.
If they can just get some more money to build better instruments, better models, and edit those “inconvenient” answers, they are confident they can finally come up with the proper response they have been seeking, no matter what the actual evidence has to say on the matter. It’s such a lovely way to do science.
Re being worried over environmental threats to NYC:
As a 4th generation resident of “fly-over country”, I always figured that the enormous economic infrastructure that was built up over the centuries in NYC and the rest of the Eastern seaboard ended up there because TPTB (the folks with all the resources and money) wanted it there. The northeast is less prone to hurricanes, tornadoes, killer heat waves, and severe earthquakes than the rest of the continent.
The timing of the mayor’s hand-waving makes me think he just wants to re-direct the attention of the media away from the places where weather really happens (drought over the western half the country, tornado outbreaks and flooding in the midwest and now the northern part of the midwest) to his neck of the woods. I’m guessing he wants people who are making donations to charity to think first of NYC?
What is it they say about publicity? It doesn’t really matter what they say about you as long as they spell your name right? In other words, he wants “a piece of the action”.
Ego-centric arguments, such as AGW, are belief based, not science.
“JohnWho says: Why spend a five dollar word on two bit snake oil salesmen?”
Especially since it doesn’t mean what she thinks it means. It would simply mean “sin causing.” An “ist” would then be someone who favors causing sin, I guess. Nice try, but be careful or it could become another crowning illiteracy like “homophobe.”
And if I can be forgiven for saying a word in favor of the Fire and Brimstone preacher, contributions to his collection plate are a voluntary exercise. Taxes aren’t.
Barry Cullen says:
June 13, 2013 at 7:48 am
“Anthony, your selection of the first 2 of your 3 examples of nonsense is based on ignorance of the evidence, both pro and con, on your part.”
Which 2 out of 3 examples? Anthony cites many more. How did you count? What do you mean? The clipboard is your friend.
stan stendera says:
June 13, 2013 at 8:29 am
“Since when is WUWT PC. What a shame if that is true.”
What are you talking about? Disappointed that Anthony doesn’t believe in Bigfoot?
See also: oikophobia.
There is another description: Moral Entrepreneurs who are people and groups who try to create moral panics. At some point they’re just in it for the money but they still manage to convince the people that they have the moral high ground.
I would say, that taken as a whole, these people and organizations are a net drag on society.
Whether they are called ‘peccatogenesists’ or ‘moral entrepreneurs’ it is important that the public comes to attach the name to them and learns to see them for what they are.