Pielke Jr. Agrees – 'Extreme weather to climate connection' is a dead issue

extreme_weather_dead_jimI wrote the day after IPCC AR5 SPM was released in Thoughts on IPCC AR5 SPM – discussion thread:


On the plus side, contrary to ongoing claims from that alarmist media mill side there are no mentions of tornadoes and hurricanes in the extreme weather events section. They give low confidence to tropical storm activity being connected to climate change, and don’t mention mesoscale events like tornadoes and thunderstorms at all. Similarly, they give low confidence to drought and flood attribution.

They’ve only talked about heat waves and precipitation events and being connected. From Page 4 of the SPM:



This is consistent with what was reported last year in the IPCC SREX report ( IPCC Special Report on Extremes PDF)

From Chapter 4 of the SREX:

  • “There is medium evidence and high agreement that long-term trends in normalized losses have not been attributed to natural or anthropogenic climate change”
  • “The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados”
  • “The absence of an attributable climate change signal in losses also holds for flood losses”

Let’s hope this lack of attribution of severe storms to “man made climate change” in AR5 finally nails the lid shut on the claims of Hurricane Sandy, tornado outbreaks, and other favorite “lets not let a good crisis go to waste” media bleatings about climate change.

Now with two IPCC reports making no connection, and with Nature’s editorial last year dashing alarmist hopes of linking extreme weather events to global warming saying:

Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.

…we can finally call it a dead issue.

There’s simply no connection between droughts, hurricanes, thunderstorms, flash floods, tornadoes and “climate change”.


Dr. Roger Pielke Jr adds in blog post today some points from the IPCC AR5 WGI Chapter 2 on extremes.

  • “Overall, the most robust global changes in climate extremes are seen in measures of daily temperature, including to some extent, heat waves. Precipitation extremes also appear to be increasing, but there is large spatial variability”
  • “There is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century”
  • “Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin”
  • “In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale”
  • “In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms because of historical data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems”
  • “In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century due to lack of direct observations, geographical inconsistencies in the trends, and dependencies of inferred trends on the index choice. Based on updated studies, AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated. However, it is likely that the frequency and intensity of drought has increased in the Mediterranean and West Africa and decreased in central North America and north-west Australia since 1950”
  • “In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low”

And says:

Of course, I have no doubts that claims will still be made associating floods, drought, hurricanes and tornadoes with human-caused climate change — Zombie science — but I am declaring victory in this debate. Climate campaigners would do their movement a favor by getting themselves on the right side of the evidence.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Unfortunately, “diplomat”, John Ashton was there at the Royal Society meeting today on the IPCC AR5 to tell us all that “the science is settled” (again).
And after two days of many presentations going through a plethora of uncertainties, he had the gall to claim that:
“There is a systematic attempt to manufacture disputes and uncertainty because then it isn’t settled.”
No one called him out.

Tom J

‘Let’s hope this lack of attribution of severe storms to “man made climate change” in AR5 finally nails the lid shut on the claims of Hurricane Sandy, tornado outbreaks, and other favorite “lets not let a good crisis go to waste” media bleatings about climate change.’
See, the weather’s completely normal and it’s a nice day out – another sign of global warming!
P.S. I wish I could take credit for the above line but I can’t. I read it a couple years ago. I don’t remember the source though.


Dr. Pielke should consider that the AGW movement has never relied on actual evidence. Why should a movement as successful as the AGW hype movement change a thing?

Craig from Belvidere

This is why I have to believe in God, that there will be an ultimate reckoning for those that have intentionally and with knowledge hurt others. Al Gore has made tens or hundreds of millions of dollars pushing the nonsense that we are all going to die from hurricanes, tornados, droughts and whatever else. I believe that he has made that money with total knowledge that it was all false. I have to believe there is a god that will deliver justice to these false prophets otherwise I just have to give up and stop caring.
When do I get my money back? When do my kids get their economic future back? When do the thieves have to pay back their theft?

That did not stop last night’s NOVA program on PBS from hyping the conjecture that climate change might lead to “fewer but stronger” Atlantic storms made worse by sea level rise that might accelerate.


Let me say it if no one else will. Global warming will lead to less extreme weather. Some of the worst storms we have seen in the last 1,000 years was during the Little Ice Age. [temperature gradient thingy]. Desertification was greater during ice ages. We have never had it so good.


Jimbo says:
October 3, 2013 at 3:59 pm
We have never had it so good.
Isn’t that the truth….
We just happen to be here at the most perfect time…
…and these neurotic bozos are doing everything in their power to wreck it


well, the Flannery/Steffen & co Climate Commission may have been disbanded by the new Govt in Australia, but in their new, “rebadged” form, they are already making what seems to me to be EXTREME claims. it’s been cool in south-east queensland, that i do know. hoping someone can check their claims:
3 Oct: Age: Bridie Smith: Climate Council reports warmest September on record
Australians have just lived through the warmest September since records began, according to the rebadged Climate Council.
The latest record also makes the past 12 months the warmest documented, while 2013 is set to go down as the hottest calendar year in Australia, surpassing 2005.
”We’ve got high sea surface temperatures around Australia and that usually leads to warmer than average weather conditions, so if I was a betting man I would say that we are going to get the calendar record this year,” climate scientist Will Steffen said. September temperatures were almost three degrees above the long-term average, according to a Climate Council report released on Thursday…
Professor Steffen, the report’s author, said the frequency and severity of hot days and heatwaves in Australia were increasing as average global temperatures rose. This exacerbated the risk of bushfires, particularly in south-east Australia.
Advertisement ”Although Australia has always had heatwaves, hot days and bushfires, climate change is increasing the risk of more frequent and longer heatwaves and more extreme hot days, as well as exacerbating bushfire conditions,” he said.
Last summer more than 120 extreme weather-related records were broken, including the hottest January and the hottest day ever recorded in Australia since reliable record keeping began in 1910.
”Temperature records are broken from time to time in Australia, but it is the sheer number of records being broken that is really unusual,” Professor Steffen said. The persistent heat has been recorded continent-wide over the past 18 months. The oceans surrounding Australia have also registered record warmth…

chris y

“Climate campaigners would do their movement a favor by getting themselves on the right side of the evidence.”
That leaves nothing to fill the till. No recent warming, no accelerating sea level, heat sucked into the abyss where it does nothing, no change in extreme weather, no vector disease crisis, no global crop failures, global sea ice doing nothing special, Arctic sea ice not irreversible, ocean acidification admittedly unmeasured, climate tipping points remaining ethereal.
The true ‘climate change crisis’ is revealed- what is going to bring in the donations and membership dues at Greenpeace, WWF, UCS, 350.org, etc?

Their models will always fail as long as they are stuck on CO2 and AGW/ACC. They are operating under the assumption they already know what drives climate change, and it is obvious to anyone with at least a double digit IQ, they don’t. When their results are by consensus, we know it is politics – not science.


While AR5 might be less alarmist in regard to extreme weather, I note that the following statement was made in the leaked Second Order Draft:
Two recent reports, the SREX (IPCC, 2012; particularly Seneviratne et al., 2012) assessment and a WMO Expert Team report on tropical cyclones and climate change (Knutson et al., 2010) indicate the response of global tropical cyclone frequency to projected radiative forcing changes is likely to be either no change or a decrease of up to a third by the end of the 21st century.
I can find no similar reference in the current version. It seems to have disappeared in much the same fashion as references to the halt in warming. It seems to me they have discarded factual information that would otherwise be good news. This is only a single instance, I can only wonder if a detailed reading of the science would reveal more cases of discarding good news in favour of the new wording, which is so ambiguous as to be meaningless:
Modes of climate variability that in the past have led to variations in the intensity, frequency and structure of
tropical cyclones across the globe—such as the El Niño Southern Oscillation (e.g., (Zhang and Delworth,
2006; Wang et al., 2007; Callaghan and Power, 2011); Chapter 14)—are very likely to continue influencing
TC activity through the mid-21st century. Therefore, it is very likely that over the next few decades tropical
cyclone frequency, intensity and spatial distribution globally, and in individual basins, will vary from yearto-
year and decade-to-decade

Bernie McCune

Yes Superstorm Sandy is just a hint of what’s to come with man’s production of large amounts of CO2. Huh? Look at the actual evidence.
What is really interesting about this odd proposal is that NOVA actually did a good job of showing clear evidence of natural events coming together to produce this very unusual but natural outcome. A tropical storm following the warm Gulf stream north using the warmer water to stay alive, rather than traveling over cooler water to the north and heading out to sea as is the normal result of off shore jet stream and pressure systems. NOVA showed that Sandy was actually blocked to the NE by high pressure system and then a meandering west flowing jet stream pushed her ashore. As she moved up the coast she merged with a large overland storm heading to the east right into the tropical storm adding to the size if not the intensity of the growing storm. At the very instant in time that Sandy comes ashore, the tidal forces affecting the ocean were at their maximum. And all this occurred at a geographical point that took all the build up in water volume and funneled it up the Hudson. What an incredible series of events to occur at the same time and what an incredible jump to conclusions that blamed it on climate change or man’s use of fossil fuels. It was a major natural disaster and we all better start getting ready for these in the future. Especially the politicians along the eastern seaboard. They should start preparing for these events and stop wasting money on these other prophets of man-made doom.

Paul Pierett

There Are extreme weather events. One I note was the increase in hurricane activity since 1895. We had one storm in 1913 or 1914 and Niagara Falls froze over in 1911.
The hurricane seasons peaked around 2006. For me was 2004. I live in the hurricane triangle of Florida that year with three major Hurricanes cutting across Florida.
Now they are in decline and the science world knows it Why? As we know global temperature has leveled off or even dropped. The cause is our solar minimum. Sunspot Activity has been in decline since 1965. The last three cycles of The 20th century were in decline but warm enough to keep global warming going or should I say maintained.
Now for proof. My work is at sunspothurricanesglaciers.com look at the two conference sites on Hurricanes for details. Is it possible by 2025 to have. Zero tropical storm season, glacier growth and. Robust Arctic in the same sunspot cycle?
Talk about extremes.
Most Sincerely,
Paul Pierett

Rud Istvan

A bankrupt meme increasingly evident.
Yet pal reviewed catastrophe papers keep on coming, perhaps because that is how they generate further grant funding. Takes a train wreck to stop. Let the train wreck begin. Well, it has without any help at all…

pat says:
“Flannery/Steffen & co … EXTREME claims … ”
Yep. Talking Heads Syndrome goes on, but at least we don’t have to pay for it.
Record temperatures has been thoroughly debunked.
Steffen: “The oceans surrounding Australia have also registered record warmth…”
In the models, but in reality, nothing.
I am heartened by climate-related comments in my local rag the Townsville Bulletin. There are now comments other than mine countering the usual alarmist stuff.

Regards bogus claims about extreme weather, I just requested an update on my request for a retraction of Parmesan’ paper that made bogus claim extreme weather caused the extinction of a butterfly population in a logged area but omitted the fact that neighboring populations in natural habitat had their most productive year Read http://landscapesandcycles.net/fabricating-climate-doom—part-3–extreme-weather.html
The editor said it is under review and takes about 90 days, so we can expect a decision within 60 days. Stay tuned

With CO2 ever increasing, but extreme weather falling off a cliff, I guess they had to cut their losses in that area. But notice that their sycophants have yet to get the message.

Theo Goodwin

Katabasis says:
October 3, 2013 at 3:40 pm
You are an excellent journalist. Some of us learned that today at Bishop Hill’s website:
Please submit your work to some non-hostile MSM outlet such as the Wall Street Journal. Maybe submit your work here. Your work is accessible to a broad range of interested people and to all skeptics and lukewarmers. Your work might do to John Ashton and such people just what you want to do to them.

Gail Combs

Katabasis says: @ October 3, 2013 at 3:40 pm
Unfortunately, “diplomat”, John Ashton was there at the Royal Society meeting today on the IPCC AR5 to tell us all that “the science is settled” (again)….
No one called him out.
Sounds like the Royal Society needs to be disbanded along with the IPCC. And no there is no sarc tag. They have disgraced themselves and smeared the name of science.

Claude Harvey

Aren’t we overstating the “dead issue” declaration where Nature is concerned?
Final Nature paragraph: “These caveats do not mean that event attribution is a lost cause.”

Janice Moore

@ Jim Steele (re: Parmesan at 5:33pm) — thanks for the update. I wondered about that. I heard NOTHING back. Better write yourself a note to ask them about it at the 91st day mark, and every 5 days thereafter until you exhaust their pitiful excuses. Good for you to try — hope (and I’m praying!) it is a success.
Gail, I thought The Society HAD been disbanded…. years ago:
To wit:

Let’s hear it for Staffordshire!
Kat A. Basis, I’m sure Theo Goodwin is right and you are an excellent journalist (and, thus, DO follow his advice), but, (ahem), I think — that — perhaps…. unbeknownst to you, you were at a meeting of the (whispering, now): “Royal Society” wink-wink-nod-nod (a.k.a. an adult daycare facility where families can drop off at “the office” their dementia-affected family members in order to get a break from caregiving for a few hours. Mm, hm.) No, nooo! I do not think YOU were dropped off there by YOUR family!

Gail Combs

Janice Moore says: @ October 3, 2013 at 6:20 pm
….“Royal Society” wink-wink-nod-nod (a.k.a. an adult daycare facility….
OH, that is great!
I am laughing so hard the tears are rolling and I can barely type.

We’re in the midst of some extremely nice fall weather here in New England. I’m glad the IPCC folks aren’t here to enjoy it. Then again, perhaps they could add “Increased risk of nice weather” to their warnings.
When “peak foliage” and “peak weather” coincide here, there is no better place on the planet. It makes up for the inhuman perversity of the New England weather the rest of the year.

For origins of the reality construction, we can refer to the book: ‘Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity’ (Hulme 2009). As a former director of the Tyndall Center, currently Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences in the University of East Anglia, Mike Hulme collaborated on influential reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). His well-written book demonstrates how the political realm overwhelms other realities held in science and journalism, especially if these alternative realities convey facts disapproved by the dominant culture. A famous quote from his book, illustrates how journalism and academic inquiry failed to notice and give analysis of coordinated efforts to construct public belief in anthropogenic global warming and the inevitable catastrophe to follow.
The idea of climate change should be seen as an intellectual resource around which our collective and personal identities and projects can form and take shape. We need to ask not what we can do for climate change, but to ask what climate change can do for us.
. . . Because the idea of climate change is so plastic, it can be deployed across many of our human projects and can serve many of our psychological, ethical, and spiritual needs. (Hulme 2009 p. 326)
Despite many journalists being well endowed with an education that is humanities based, postmodernism with plastic realities as central, few have seen how this reality has been socially constructed.
“Directly observed experience can, we argue, have a powerful influence upon belief, but always requires some explanatory frame of reference provided by, inter alia, science, the media, conversation with friends and acquaintances” (cf. Kempton et al. 1995).
“. . . floods and extremely hot and dry weather were directly, intersubjectively, experienced by large numbers of people. In effect, we bring the social construction of reality down to the social construction of daily reality and experience for the average member of a society and its compounding effects on belief.” (Bray and Shackley, 2004)
Bray and Shackley of the Tyndall Center are widely published. Their paper of 2004 (a Tyndall work in progress) cites Berger and Luckmann’s book of 1966, which outlined the use of public relations to create theatrical “fronts” for “Dramatic Realization”. This technique produces public discourse for generating pre determined social, political and economic outcomes. “We need to understand and simulate the point at which related perspectives and beliefs concerning the issue coalesce” (Bray and Shackley p. 3). The result of this is that student journalists and junior reporters are left in little doubt on what they can easily get away with when writing news about climate change. They soon learn that required attribution and source triangulation is unnecessary when news is written in keeping with this dominant narrative.

Jeff Alberts

Craig from Belvidere says:
October 3, 2013 at 3:54 pm
This is why I have to believe in God…

The reasons you state are some of the reasons I do NOT believe there is a god.


OT – WUWT @ 162,394,271 views now. Word is out. WUWT is only one source. IPCC report is the most current driver. The end is near! The truth is coming to a reality near you/all.
Sanity will rein in the future.
OK – A little cheer leading on my part. 😉
On a more serious note – The IPCC report has now staked its claims in writing. No backing out now. You just gotta love it!

Janice Moore

Thank you, Gail! #(:)) That you whom I highly admire for her sharp mind found it humorous made me glad. Thanks for telling me. Laughter is always wonderful, but, it’s so much more fun when someone is laughing along with you.
Hi, Jeff Alberts,
You will probably get really mad at me (once again) for telling you (not for doing it, how I spend my time is likely not of the slightest concern to you) this, but, I have been praying to God that all was well with you recently — you’ve been gone longer than usual. Hope all is well.
You are in my prayers nearly every day, as a matter of fact. That you so ardently take every opportunity that arises to slam people for their belief in God tells me that you very likely DO believe in God and are furious with Him about something tragic that happened. Otherwise, you would just shrug and shake your head and not bother. Here’s the thing, Mr. Alberts, do you know where you are going when you die? If you are trying to believe that you will simply cease to exist, it doesn’t appear to be working. Keep pursuing truth and peace in your heart about your eternal destiny. I say this because I actually care about you. And I believe that such a genuine search for truth will lead you to God and to Jeshua or I would not bother to say that to you.
Before you yell at me, please stop a moment and think: I am not writing to you because I do not care; I am writing because I love (agape) you.
And I would not be writing ANY of this if you had not written what you did. Just fair play. Pax?
Take care,


So how are we going to be doomed, now? We must be doomed somehow.

Pielke still things we need to do something about climate change though. He is testifying to that before congress. He also is warning them that weather extremes could become more frequent. I don’t understand how he reconciles that with the empirical data. So his stance is basically “No no no, just because she can swim doesn’t mean she’s a witch. But lets burn her just in case.”

Chad Wozniak

@Katabasis, Theo and Janice –
Katabasis should also go to Fox News – I recommend contacting Neal Cavuto, who has previously hosted Marc Morano of ClimateDepot. Fox, at least, seems somewhat open to skeptics, though they could and should do more.

Janice Moore

@ Shenanigans — I agree. Pielke is either blinded by some emotional commitment to AGW or is afraid of losing his job. He is too bright a man to not be ABLE to recognize the truth.

Janice Moore

@ Chad — sounds good.


Let’s hope this lack of attribution of severe storms to “man made climate change” in AR5 finally nails the lid shut on the claims of Hurricane Sandy, tornado outbreaks, and other favorite “lets not let a good crisis go to waste” media bleatings about climate change.

We can dream.

Chad Wozniak

@Janice Moore –
While I am a nonbeliever, I respect people who do believe in God – if one is to be honest with oneself, one must call ’em as he or she sees ’em, and that won’t be the same for everyone, and a reasonable person will accept that and be neither offended nor threatened by differences of belief. One of my biggest quarrels with the AGW crowd is their complete intolerance for other points of view. I ask of the alarmists that they respect my skepticism, and I am always willing to listen to any real evidence they might find to support their arguments (although it is convincingly evident that it is unlikely they will ever be able to do that, even in a small way). A big part of this whole controversy is their abandonment of the agreement to disagree, which is absolutely essential not only to human liberty and a civil society, but also to honest and effective science.

Janice Moore

Conclusion of Katabasis’ excellent report:

“‘Wouldn’t climate scientists’ time be better spent reining in those in the media producing irresponsible, hysterical, screaming headlines?’

Tumbleweed followed for several seconds. Then Matt said:
‘Not my responsibility’.
(Katabasis here: http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2013/10/2/a-report-from-the-royal.html; emphasis mine)
Matt’s obviously a union man.

Chad Wozniak

@Janice Moore –
Have been very busy with the second volume of my trilogy, which incidentally features some commentary on the AGW fallacy – on my fictional planet, crops and trees grow so much faster in an atmosphere with 10 times the CO2 of Earth’s, and there is no runaway warming.
A bit off topic, perhaps, but I think this is a way to help get out the truth about CO2 and global warming.

Janice Moore

Dear Chad,
Thank you. Your respect and courtesy are much appreciated (and have been over the past several months).
But, still, I ask, how are you?

Janice Moore

Ooops, we cross-posted, Chad,
I AM SO GLAD to hear that you have been happily busy — writing. Cool. How about a post on WUWT, sometime, of selections from your book — I, for one, would love to read it.
Thank you, so much, for responding. First, because I’ve been concerned. Second, because I’ve tried several times to make contact and was afraid I’d offended you to the point that forgiveness wasn’t even possible.
Take care.

Our gracious host:
[W]e can finally call it a dead issue.
I know you are ever the optimist, but the Weather Extreme meme is alive and well. As Jr. noted, the ramblings of “Zombie science” linking human-caused climate change to extreme weather will continue in earnest. Just last month remember we were treated to that paper from NOAA where they found the human “fingerprint” in half of the extreme weather events of 2012 that they studied. The president throws it out there routinely and the list of current advocates is very long.
So while there may be occasional lapses of illogic such as AR5 and the Nature piece, rest assured these guys are just getting started. As I noted in one of my blog posts about the subject, this latest report is just another stepping stone on their path to claiming a human fingerprint in almost all extreme weather events. Don’t forget who we are dealing with here.
I do agree that the meme is hurting and flailing, but when has that ever stopped them? Seriously. They are still in denial about the MWP and plenty of other coffin nails that expose the AGW theory as a failed ideology. There’s simply too much as stake and there is no way that they will go gentle into that good night. You may call it a dead issue, but some of these folks have been beating dead horses for years. Plus, they only linked half of the extreme weather events. My model suggests (high confidence) that this meme will someday allow for 100% linkage of extreme weather to human-caused climate change raising its profile to “unequivocal.”

stan stendera

You go Janice. Bravo!!!!!! As Chad I am an agnostic, but I value when believers pray, not for me but for anyone. Sometimes I even sneak in a little prayer, usually of thanksgiving.

Janice Moore

Thank you, Stan! I guess, given Libby and all (smile), you can’t say, “Hi” much like you used to. I miss your kindly responses, though. SO, it was GREAT to hear from you this evening. Thank you, so much, for the affirmation. Did I tell you that you are one of my “regulars” on my prayer list, too? Yup (and Libby).

Chad Wozniak

@Janice Moore –
I’d be happy to send you a copy of the first volume, titles After the Peace, if we can somehow make connections. I do not have a Facebook page or Twitter account – I avoid social media for a number of reasons, and WUWT has not granted my request to forward my email address to you – perhaps Anthony could be persuaded to relent on that.
The first volume doesn’t specifically address climate issues, but does touch on many other related political questions.
And no, I NEVER reject someone’s prayers for me. Prayers do help even for unbelievers, because they convey that someone cares – and that matters.

Jimbo [October 3, 2013 at 3:59 pm] says:
We have never had it so good.

Latitude [October 3, 2013 at 4:17 pm] says:
Isn’t that the truth. We just happen to be here at the most perfect time
and these neurotic bozos are doing everything in their power to wreck it

Dittos to the both of you!

Paul in Sweden

shenanigans24 says: October 3, 2013 at 8:55 pm
Peilke Jr. drives me bonkers with that. He sits on all these panels testifies to the actual facts, literally rubbing the noses of the eco-nuts in the wallow but then smiles and says but, but maybe, perhaps, possibly likely, sometime in the future…..

If any alarmist of any stripe attempts to pass off a disaster as “being caused by evil humans” we just need to copy and paste the relevant parts of the Ipcc.
I don’t expect these creatures to go quietly into the night but from one portion of the Internet to the rest and to mass media and even to politicians I do expect us skeptics to hound them to the far ends of the earth calling them out on their stupidity until the shame is so great that they will not dare speak to another soul. It has already started with the shriller alarmists and the dumber media heads being shown to be morons from “boiling oceans” to 200 degrees of heat . Just like always the solution is in the hands of those who dare to speak up otherwise evil of all stripes will win.
I am not attempting to be grandiose or even claiming each one of us is powerful, but namely that as a group of intelligent humans we do have the power in ourselves to stop the nonsense and criminal waste ourselves without violence. We all have a responsibility to speak up often and give our two cents. So lets not despair or get down on the stupidity and perhaps doubt god over a bunch of lunatics who lack brains but rather take back our government, take back out media, and above all else take back science. All of this is possible through hard work, patience, and forcing shame onto anyone who lies, condoned lies, or even pays lip service to the preposterous notion that every disaster is the fault of man.
And here is where we must be tough. Until we shame everyone involved in the circle of incompetence and Tom-foolery, it will go on. So instead of getting depressed, spend your energy on writing a letter to your representative. If they don’t respond write two more. If they do respond, write two more. Be patient, polite but firm. Than start writing in the same format to the media. Repeat all and start writing letters to everyone in the university system.
Make yourself heard. The reason this nonsense is not dying is because a lot of us spend too much of our energy feeling hopeless and feeling like there is no way to fix it. Sure there is. We just aren’t finding the correct tools to use thus far. The only way we end this war is by giving up or being thrown in a concentration camp for our beliefs so let’s start forcing the issue by getting more political and force it. Most people who are skeptics realize how close we really are, so lets end it ASAP before this dying creature makes a bigger mess.
Folks, it’s not about the science or even a lack if knowledge. It never was, as Gail and anthony and many others have shown countless times so let’s not get boiled down into pointless arguments about what the real impacts of co2 are or even argue whether Luke Warmers are wrong or not, but rather lets all chase those creatures into the night with fire in our veins with our simple quest being to force an end to hype that is unwarranted and frankly wrong. Until we all call out shananigans whenever and wherever it is proper, liars will get away with their lies and as long as they can profit from it they will do so.
Ok I am finished and my fingers are sore from typing this on my iPhone. And yes this was much longer than I wanted it to be, but above all else we need to stop being depressed and start acting like responsible and intelligent adults who can problem solve and figure out how to kill this nonsense once and for all.

R. de Haan

“Pielke Jr. Agrees – ‘Extreme weather to climate connection’ is a dead issue”
Since when is the Extreme Weather to Climate connection a claim serious enough to respond to.
Are we really going to make a polite conversation out of every moronic claim they come up with?
When are we going to say: Piss off you morons, we have had it with your endless stream of alarmist garbage!
I don’t say this because I am losing my temper. I’m just getting incredibly board.

For those of us who believe in God:http://revfelicity.org/2013/09/17/god-in-climate-change/
Ultimately I’m sure we have nothing to fear but there is going to be a lot of headbanging required to counter the “oh dear the planet is sick and must be healed” brigade.
Kevin O’Brien


Trust me on this: It is extremely unlikely that the final draft will have this graph.
We skeptics keep thinking that if the AGW believers see that the IPCC is crass shallow and transparent political work they will lose their faith in the IPCC.
They will not.
When the final draft domes out, either dropping this altogether, or changing it dishonestly, Revkin and the rest of the so-called science/enviro journalists covering this will not question it at all, and will still ignore the growing list of working and academic scientists who are skeptical.
The reasoning of ‘journalists’ goes like this:
AGW climate crisis consensus is real, therefor AGW is real.
Since it is real, no real scientist can legitimately question it.
Journalists should only interview real scientists.
And since the IPCC is written by real scientists,
The IPCC must not be questioned.

Geoff Sherrington

Went looking for extremes in maximum temperatures where I live in Melbourne Australia. The graph shows how many super hot days there have been each year, super hot meaning greater than 16 deg C above each yearly average. By this simple method of counting the days, the extremes in hot days appeared to be more common in the late 1800s.
This exercise is very easy to do for your own home city. I’d really like to see more like this from wherever you are, in case this one is atypical.

Berényi Péter

Why, in ancient times catapulting dead bodies into the enemy’s fortress was standard practice. In media wars it still is.