Proud moment for warmists: President of real Flat Earth Society believes in the global warming hoax

Obama might do well to research more before he makes snide remarks.

President Obama angrily blasted climate change skeptics during his energy policy speech Tuesday at Georgetown University, saying he lacked “patience for anyone who denies that this problem is real.”

“We don’t have time for a meeting of the flat-Earth society,” Obama said. “Sticking your head in the sand might make you feel safer, but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm.”

Actually, even the Flat Earth Society believes in climate change:

As it turns out, there is a real Flat Earth Society and its president thinks that anthropogenic climate change is real. In an email to Salon, president Daniel Shenton said that while he “can’t speak for the Society as a whole regarding climate change,” he personally thinks the evidence suggests fossil fuel usage is contributing to global warming.

“I accept that climate change is a process which has been ongoing since beginning of detectable history, but there seems to be a definite correlation between the recent increase in world-wide temperatures and man’s entry into the industrial age,” he said. “If it’s a coincidence, it’s quite a remarkable one. We may have experienced a temperature increase even without our use of fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution, but I doubt it would be as dramatic as what we’re seeing now.”

Story here: http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/flat_earth_society_believes_in_climate_change/

Thanks to Tom Nelson

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
SRD

Fossil fuel usage *does* contribute to global warming. Skeptics just argue it is not as much as modeled.

So what does the concept of a warming globe even mean in the mind of a flat-earther? Shouldn’t it be planar warming?

Andy S

Don’t the IPCC model the world as flat anyway?

Weird a president of an organisation not speaking for the entire organisation and its members. What is the world coming to?
President Obama admitting its just his crazy ideas not the entire Federal government.

Konrad

“We don’t have time for a meeting of the flat-Earth society,”
This, from an individual that believes adding radiative gases to the atmosphere will reduce the atmospheres radiative cooling ability. Sad.
“Sticking your head in the sand might make you feel safer, but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm.”
Global warming has been in effect a global IQ test with results permanently recorded on the Internet. Obamaclese has no idea of the size of the coming storm.

John West

Well, if you consider something on the order of a 0.6 C average temperature increase dramatic then , yes, AGW would probably be catastrophic to you. Shoot, you may have to reschedule your cherry blossom parade. Oh, the horror!

Other_Andy

Hey Konrad.
Don’t bother the president, he is doing his bit for glowbull warming…
“The president is traveling to sub-Sahara Africa with his family from June 26 to July 3. The Obamas will be accompanied by hundreds of Secret Service agents and staff, which stack up transportation and accommodation costs. Military cargo planes will bring 56 vehicles including 14 limousines and three trucks loaded with bulletproof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the Obamas will stay. Fighter jets will fly in the air space above the first family to provide round the clock protection. ”
Do as I say, not as I do you worthless proles!

Readers might be interested in the article Tom Harris and I published today regarding Obama’s plan and comments.
http://pjmedia.com/blog/blowing-smoke-obama-climate-speech-riddled-with-lies/?singlepage=true

Kiwi Sceptic

Michael Palmer: “So what does the concept of a warming globe even mean in the mind of a flat-earther? Shouldn’t it be planar warming?”
Now THAT made me laugh out loud! Made my day! Thanks Michael 🙂

Kevin Kilty

What the heck is “detectable history?”

DonV

“Planar warming” HA HA HA HA . . . ouch . . . sideache. . .

Renaldo

Well, yes. Global warming is a fact. But so is global cooling. It warms, it cools, it changes. The real question is what could or should we do about it. As a child of the Ozarks, I will tell you that I do not wish to poop into a hole in the ground, live without running water, live without air conditioning, live without modern medical facilities, live without modern transportation, live without individural transportation, live without FANS. and more. I welcome warming if I can keept the rest!

thingodonta

I don’t blame Obama for getting it wrong about sceptics, he is just badly advised. He doesn’t have time to research all the issues himself.
Same as with Bush and the WMDs, lobbyists have learnt you just need to fabricate evidence that supports a leaders particular prejudices’ or tendencies, and you can get them to say and do what you want. Silly world. Scientists should know better.
“97 of scientists….”. No, actually only a majority of those who expressed an opinion, which was less than 32% of the total. This is not “97% of scientists”. Simply counting only the votes which you think ‘counts’ isn’t a survey, in a democracy this would mean one only counts votes from people who ‘matter’, which isn’t a democracy.

Jimmy Haigh.

I always said that the industrial revolution happened because the climate got warmer and not the other way around.

Eve

Suggest to Obama that if he wants to walk the walk, no more electicity for any government installation including the White house. They can live and work with fireplaces and candles. Kind of an Earth Hour forever. Do you think he believes that much?

Janice Moore

Of course.

See, the president of the Flat Earth Society is as nutty as the Mad Hatter! 🙂

Eve says:
June 26, 2013 at 10:23 pm
Suggest to Obama that if he wants to walk the walk, no more electicity for any government installation including the White house. They can live and work with fireplaces and candles. Kind of an Earth Hour forever. Do you think he believes that much?
—————————————–
Let’s ask him.
Oh wait – he’s on his $100M vacation in Africa.

Jimmy Haigh. says:
June 26, 2013 at 10:20 pm
I always said that the industrial revolution happened because the climate got warmer and not the other way around.
————————-
I remember a curious bit of information that proposed that introducing coffee into England and Europe made a big difference in the productivity of the average worker.

Konrad

Other_Andy says:
June 26, 2013 at 9:20 pm
—————————————–
Maybe he can buy some Nigerian Carbon Credits while he is there to “offset” his inanity 😉

cromagnum

Wonder if he has “time for a meeting of the flat-Economy society”?

Jimmy Haigh.

Michael Palmer says:
June 26, 2013 at 9:03 pm
“So what does the concept of a warming globe even mean in the mind of a flat-earther?”
Yup. I liked that one too! I do wonder how they get their heads around that one

Me

Now that’s funny!

SandyInLimousin

Renaldo says:
June 26, 2013 at 9:43 pm
As a teuchter I couldn’t agree more.
http://uk.ask.com/wiki/Teuchter

Ed Zuiderwijk

If the Global Warming Challenge has now become part of an IQ test, things are not looking good.

george .e. smith

“””””……SRD says:
June 26, 2013 at 8:59 pm
Fossil fuel usage *does* contribute to global warming. Skeptics just argue it is not as much as modeled……”””””
Well it is very simple. The sun provides the earth with a certain amount of energy, which does fluctuate slightly. The earth radiates energy to space to roughly keep a balance between in and out: natural variability.
Over various time scales, months, years, decades, centuries, millennia, megenia, whatever, energy is also stored, in grass, trees, coal etc.
Natural processes (forest fires) release some of this stored energy: more natural variability.
Then humans also release stored energy, by burning grass, wood, coal, oil natural gas, or by nuclear fission etc.
Clearly the human release of stored energy, over and above natural releases, must warm the planet.
The planet has a natural feedback regulator, that opposes Temperature ( the evap/precip cycle.)
It doesn’t have infinite gain, so it doesn’t completely erase the human variations.

In the old colonial mother land, the history sometimes repeats itself
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET1690-1960.htm
but again that was some time before the Boston tea party, so it may not count.

Stonyground

@Renaldo
Being a type 1 diabetic, I don’t have much of a choice when it comes to living without modern medicine. Without daily insulin injections I will become ill and die.

Larry in Texas

Tim Ball says:
June 26, 2013 at 9:24 pm
Great article, Professor Ball. Keep fighting the good fight against the liar-in-chief of the United States.

William Astley

It will be interesting to hear how the White house and the EPA explain global cooling. It will be interesting to hear the EPA trying to explain why they deep sixth their own senior analysis’ review that explained why current observations and analysis does not support the IPCC’s predictions. The flip side of the fact that there was been no warming for the last 16 years (tropics resists warming by increasing or decreasing clouds thereby reflecting more or less radiation off into space) is more than 50% of the warming in the last 70 years has caused by something else. Solar magnetic cycle changes caused the warming which means the at least 50% of the warming is reversible (planet can and will cool). … ….The assertion that solar magnetic cycle changes caused the majority of the warming in the last 70 years does not sound like a ‘flat earth’ hypothesis. Name calling is not a substitute for logic and reason.
Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years
http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/nature02995.pdf
Solar cycle 24 is an abrupt slowdown in the solar magnetic cycle
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/comparison_recent_cycles.png
There are cycles of warming and cooling in the paleo record all of which correlate with solar magnetic cycle changes
Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/GISP2%20TemperatureSince10700%20BP%20with%20CO2%20from%20EPICA%20DomeC.gif
The fact that there has been no increase in warming for 16 years indicates there are fundamental errors in the general circulation models that were used by the IPCC.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/global-warming-slowdown-the-view-from-space/
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-global-LT-vs-UAH-and-RSS.png
This is a link to a review paper that was prepared by EPA’s own scientist that supports the assertion that research and analysis does not support the extreme AGW paradigm. The EPA buried the report.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/endangermentcommentsv7b1.pdf
“Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act”
“I have become increasingly concerned that EPA has itself paid too little attention to the science of global warming. EPA and others have tended to accept the findings reached by outside groups, particularly the IPCC and the CCSP, as being correct without a careful and critical examination of their conclusions and documentation. If they should be found to be incorrect at a later date, however, and EPA is found not to have made a really careful independent review of them before reaching its decisions on endangerment, it appears likely that it is EPA rather than these other groups that may be blamed for any errors. Restricting the source of inputs into the process to these two sources may make EPA’s current task easier but it may come with enormous costs later (William: Curious no one in the White House is aware of the enormous costs to the green scams and the 10,000 EPA regulations. Death of US industry by 10,000 cuts.) if they should result in policies that may not be scientifically supportable. … ….The failings are listed below in decreasing order of importance in my view: (See attached for details.)
1. Lack of observed upper tropospheric heating in the tropics (see Section 2.9 for a detailed discussion).
2. Lack of observed constant humidity levels, a very important assumption of all the IPCC models, as CO2levels have risen (see Section 1.7).
3. The most reliable sets of global temperature data we have, using satellite microwave sounding units, show no appreciable temperature increases during the critical period 1978-1997, just when the surface station data show a pronounced rise (see Section 2.4). Satellite data after 1998 is also inconsistent with the GHG/CO2/AGW hypothesis 2009 v
4. The models used by the IPCC do not take into account or show the most important ocean oscillations which clearly do affect global temperatures, namely, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the ENSO (Section 2.4). Leaving out any major potential causes for global warming from the analysis results in the likely misattribution of the effects of these oscillations to the GHGs/CO2 and hence is likely to overstate their importance as a cause for climate change.
5. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility of indirect solar variability (Section 2.5), which if important would again be likely to have the effect of overstating the importance of GHGs/CO2.
6. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility that there may be other significant natural effects on global temperatures that we do not yet understand (Section 2.4). This possibility invalidates their statements that one must assume anthropogenic sources in order to duplicate the temperature record. The 1998 spike in global temperatures is very difficult to explain in any other way (see Section 2.4).
7. Surface global temperature data may have been hopelessly corrupted by the urban heat island effect and other problems which may explain some portion of the warming that would otherwise be attributed to GHGs/CO2. In fact, the Draft TSD refers almost exclusively in Section 5 to surface rather than satellite data.”
“2.9 The Missing Heating in the Tropical Troposphere
Computer models based on the theory of GHG/CO2 warming predict that the troposphere in the tropics should warm faster than the surface in response to increasing CO2 concentrations, because that is where the CO2 greenhouse effect operates. Sun-Cosmic ray warming will warm the troposphere more uniformly. … ….The UN’s IPCC AR4 report includes a set of plots of computer model predicted rate of temperature change from the surface to 30 km altitude and over all latitudes for 5 types of climate forcings as shown below. … …The Hadley Centre’s real-world plot of radiosonde temperature observations shown below, however, does not show the projected CO2 induced global warming hot-spot at all. The predicted hot-spot is entirely absent from the observational record. This shows that most of the global temperature change cannot be attributed to increasing CO2 concentrations.”
William: Peer reviewed research also shows the tropical troposphere is not warming.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/DOUGLASPAPER.pdf
“ A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions
We examine tropospheric temperature trends of 67 runs from 22 ‘Climate of the 20th Century’ model simulations and try to reconcile them with the best available updated observations (in the tropics during the satellite era). Model results and observed temperature trends are in disagreement in most of the tropical troposphere, being separated by more than twice the uncertainty of the model mean. In layers near 5 km, the modelled trend is 100 to 300% higher than observed, and, above 8 km, modelled and observed trends have opposite signs. These conclusions contrast strongly with those of recent publications based on essentially the same data.”
William: Analysis of satellite measured top of the atmosphere radiation changes Vs ocean temperature indicates that tropical region cloud cover increases and decreases to resist forcing changes.
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/236-Lindzen-Choi-2011.pdf
“On the Observational Determination of Climate Sensitivity and Its Implications by Richard S. Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi

Mike from the Carson Valley where we know about cold and hot

lame duck, lame climate viewpoint

DirkH

““We don’t have time for a meeting of the flat-Earth society,” Obama said. ”
Can’t the Flat Earth Society just meet over Skype? I mean it hasn’t warmed in 17 years so some time during Obama’s remaining term should do. Or maybe the president could lend them Air Force One instead of going on his Africa vacation with it. That would also save a lot of carbon pollution, just fly it round the country and pick the members of the Flat Earth Society up, here can’t be that many.

DirkH

thingodonta says:
June 26, 2013 at 10:04 pm
“I don’t blame Obama for getting it wrong about sceptics, he is just badly advised. He doesn’t have time to research all the issues himself.”
He doesn’t even have time to tell his daughters to walk the dog for that matter. He has a dog handler with a wage of more than 100,000 USD a year for the photo op prop dog.
He also doesn’t have time to read the instructions for his DVD player. He’s got a projectionist 24 hour a day waiting for him or one of the kids to want to watch a movie.

Patrick

“Michael Palmer says:
June 26, 2013 at 9:03 pm”
Ohhhh very good! Had me chuckling. This has to be a candidate for (A great) quote of the week?

Bloke down the pub

Ric Werme says:
June 26, 2013 at 10:29 pm
See, the president of the Flat Earth Society is as nutty as the Mad Hatter! 🙂
Actually, I was thinking how sane he sounded when compared to the POUSA.

johnmarshall

It is unfortunate for this lack luster President that his much lauded GHE ”causing” climate change is based on a flat earth. See K&T in AR4 as the flat earth needing the GHE to help warm the planet. An unnecessary process doing an impossible job.

tango

did the President sign the Agenda 21 agreement if he did he is just following instructions

Sunspot

Personally politicians probably don’t care if man made global warming is true or not. Just act dumb and play the game. Impose a carbon tax.

Owen in GA

thingodonta says:
June 26, 2013 at 10:04 pm
I don’t blame Obama for getting it wrong about sceptics, he is just badly advised. He doesn’t have time to research all the issues himself.
Same as with Bush and the WMDs, lobbyists have learnt you just need to fabricate evidence that supports a leaders particular prejudices’ or tendencies, and you can get them to say and do what you want. Silly world. Scientists should know better.

The WMDs have been found. Assad is using them on his people now. There were many reports during the build-up to the war that convoys of Iraqi banned weapons were crossing into Syria. Ambassador Wilson’s “report” on the yellow cake was a farce – he wasn’t allowed to meet with any of the people in-country that knew the details, and even the rumors he reported on were muddled, though the report he submitted to the White House was supposedly much more succinct than his public pronouncements.
However, your point on elected officials not knowing about the details of the issues is in general correct. I have heard officials make some of the most inane, contradicted by fact, outside of reality statements when they aren’t on a teleprompter (and sometimes when they are – speech writers are mostly just wanna-be pols). (Guam tipping over due to the addition of 20,000 Marines for instance.)
The problem is the whole population is just as bad. The more we turn to continuous affirmation devices like Twitter and Facebook, the less we actually know. Narcissism can not substitute for study, but that is what modern society reinforces and our shallow, crass, and uneducated politicians are a direct result of that societal decay of the mind.

BillD

Well if president of the “Flat Earth Society” believes in it, then it can’t be true. I wonder whether the President of the Flat Earth society believes in “gravity?” Perhaps a somewhat warped belief in gravity is behind the views of that society.

Joe

I’ve got to say, going by those two comments, the president of the Flat Earth Society sounds far more scientifically intelligent than POTUS

Whats truly sad is that his pronouncement, speaking as the titular head of a “scientific” society, is better then those produced by some of our professional scientific societies with staff, committees, and presumably internal review.

Do Research??? That is the anathema to the religion! it is enough that he spouts thoroughly debunked statistics and data (no facts, just propaganda).
The good news is that defeating the alarmist in honest debate just became a lot easier. The bad news is like cockroaches, they will now spread their disease of misinformation.

Keith

Sandy in Limousin mentions teuchters.
This teuchter is usually in Dubai but presently in Calgary. Various people on various threads on WUWT have stated that skeptics are winning. We have to acknowledge that when POTUS comes out with 97% and “denies” it is hard to say we’re winning. Doesn’t the man have any real scientific advisors?

vigilantfish

My husband once took a course from the founding president of the Canadian Flat Earth Society – a philosophy professor at St. Thomas University. Here’s what Wikipedia has to say about this group:
“The Flat Earth Society of Canada was established on 8 November 1970 by philosopher Leo Ferrari, writer Raymond Fraser and poet Alden Nowlan.[25] The society was active until 1984.[26] Calling themselves planoterrestrialists,[27] their aims were quite different from other flat earth societies. With obvious humorous overtones, they claimed a prevailing problem of the new technological age was the willingness of people to accept theories “on blind faith and to reject the evidence of their own senses.”[26] They did not actually believe Flat Earth theories, considering their proponents to be cranks, and indeed did not accept such people into their society, which was composed of quite a few prominent members of Canadian literary and political circles.
They published a newsletter, The Official Chronicle and promoted their ideas more widely through television and press. Its primary aims were “to combat the fallacious deification of the circle,” “to restore man’s confidence in the validity of his own perceptions”, and “to spearhead man’s escape from his metaphysical and geometrical prison.”

This group was distinct from the British group of the same name and had quite different goals – but I suspect, knowing the make-up of this group, that these individuals would also have accepted global warming, despite claiming to be skeptical of theories generally accepted on blind faith. Leo Ferrari was quite flaky; Alden Nowlan was famous locally as a great New Brunswick poet.

TomB

Perhaps someone needs to remind The Dear Leader that ‘Flat Earth’ was the consensus at the time. I expect the AWG consensus will look just as silly to future generations. I only hope he gets the credit he deserves for fostering it….

If the president would listen, I’d tell him this:
Mr President, you have surrounded yourself with two sorts of people, neither of whom you should trust.
The first are yes-men. They will nod to whatever you say. You cannot trust them because they will not lift a finger to oppose your direction, even if you are walking off a cliff in the dark.
The second are greedy men who are only enamored of the money you can print at will. You cannot trust them because they are men who can be bought.
Truer friends will tell you when you are wrong, even if it angers you, and even if it makes them poor. They are loyal, but are a loyal opposition.
When you belittle such people, Mr. President, calling them flat-earthers and saying you have no time for talk with them, you are not only ignoring a principle of the two-party-system, but you are denying yourself good advice, and perhaps even the only genuine friends you have.

Jimmy Haigh.

SandyInLimousin says:
June 26, 2013 at 11:34 pm
“As a teuchter I couldn’t agree more.”
I am a proud teuchter too.

DirkH

Owen in GA says:
June 27, 2013 at 4:17 am
“The WMDs have been found. Assad is using them on his people now. ”
You sound quite certain.
Just one question: have you managed to produce a picture of at least one Sarin dead in Syria by now?
You know, I don’t follow the progression of the PsyOp campaign that closely so it is possible I missed some fabrication.

Mumble McGuirk

Other_Andy says:
June 26, 2013 at 9:20 pm
Hey Konrad.
Don’t bother the president, he is doing his bit for glowbull warming…
“The president is traveling to sub-Sahara Africa with his family from June 26 to July 3. The Obamas will be accompanied by hundreds of Secret Service agents and staff, which stack up transportation and accommodation costs. Military cargo planes will bring 56 vehicles including 14 limousines and three trucks loaded with bulletproof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the Obamas will stay. Fighter jets will fly in the air space above the first family to provide round the clock protection. ”
Do as I say, not as I do you worthless proles!
___________________________________________________________________________
So POTUS has ‘no patience’ with us, then jets off on a little family vacation with a carbon footprint the size of King Kong’s. I’d say he either believes what we do, that CAGW is a big bluff and he’s just using it as a front, or he believes that his carbon dioxide is ‘different’ than ours. The way he believes his t*rds are emeralds. I say we all play up his vacation as the Obama Carbon Pollution Tour and emphasize how much CO2 he’s spewing on this trip.