The WUWT Hot Sheet for Monday October 7th, 2013


AR5 heralds the beginning of the end

It’s the beginning of the end. Watch the Giant with Feet of Clay crumble. A train wreck in slow motion. There’s more sense being said about AR5 than would have been imaginable eighteen months ago when drafts were available. In fact some of the media coverage (e.g. Newsnight) has been jaw-droppingly almost balanced in both invited participants and the line of questioning.

As the CAGW frenzy whipped up by the overstatement of zealous believers and compliant shut down of debate in the media was increasingly untenable, reasoned debate has begun to happen and the imperative ‘need’ to blog melted away.

Life Takes Over – from Verity Jones at Digging in the Clay


Being confident means you can ignore other scenarios

The IPCC has a very bad case of confusing the probability inside their argument with the probability of the question as a whole (e.g. 20th century attribution, 21st century projections, climate sensitivity). Dangerous anthropogenic global warming is one possible scenario of the future; there are many other possible scenarios that the IPCC completely ignores (heck, we cant predict solar variations, volcanic eruptions, and natural internal variability so we might as well ignore them).

Confidence levels inside and outside an argument from Dr. Judith Curry at Climate Etc.


Biggest load of plonkers from a celebrity mouthpiece – evar

‘We’re facing a mass extinction event,’ claims Bob Geldof

Live Aid founder and activist Bob Geldof has warned that the human race may be extinct within 15 years because of climate change.

[Fortunately, this prediction can be verified – Anthony]


People 1 wind turbines 0 – Couple win wind turbine ruling

A WINDFARM has been ordered to demolish ten turbines and pay compensation and fines after it was successfully sued by a couple.

Speaking to Le Figaro newspaper, the couple’s lawyer, Philippe Bodereau, said: “This decision is very important because it demonstrates to all those who put up with windfarms with a feeling of powerlessness that the battle is not in vain, even against big groups, or authorities who deliver building permits, that legal options are available to everyone, that we have a right to live in peace and that people can do other things than suffer.”

The couple bought their 18th century listed property, the Château de Flers, in 1993.

A tribunal in Montpellier ruled that the couple had suffered due to the “degradation of the environment, resulting from a rupture of a bucolic landscape and countryside”. It also agreed the couple had suffered from the noise of the turbines and from the flashing lights.

– See more at:


From Nature Geoscience Giant channels discovered beneath Antarctic ice shelf

Scientists have discovered huge ice channels beneath a floating ice shelf in Antarctica. At 250 meters high, the channels are almost as tall as the Eiffel tower and stretch hundreds of kilometers along the ice shelf. The channels are likely to influence the stability of the ice shelf and their discovery will help researchers understand how the ice will respond to changing environmental conditions.


Christopher Booker: Climate Scientists Are Just Another Pressure Group

The IPCC and its reports have been shaped by a close-knit group of scientists, all dedicated to the cause

Last weekend, something very odd happened. On Friday we were told that in Stockholm the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the IPCC) had published a report saying that it was now “extremely likely” that the world faces disastrous man-made climate change. But this was merely a “summary” for politicians and the media of a scientific report that was not published until three days later.

We then learnt that this “Summary for Policymakers” had been argued over for days and sleepless nights by hundreds of politicians, officials and scientists, but, weirdly, that the scientific report it supposedly summarised had subsequently been amended to bring it into line with the summary. One obvious change from previous drafts was the marked downplaying of any reference to how, in recent years, global temperatures have so notably failed to rise as the IPCC’s computer models predicted.

This was an uncanny replay of the first scandal to hit the IPCC back in 1996, when again the “summary” thrashed over by politicians and a few key scientists was made more alarming than the report proper by inserting a claim that there was now “a discernible human influence” on the world’s climate.

Scientists who had approved the report protested that there was nothing in their text to justify this. But, to their amazement, they discovered that their agreed version had been amended to include this very phrase, citing as its authority two papers not yet published by Ben Santer, an American scientist who had also played a key part in drafting the summary.

All this, and the revelation that Santer had deleted 15 passages casting doubt on man-made warming from the agreed text, famously prompted Prof Frederick Seitz, a revered former president of the US National Academy of Sciences, to protest that never in 60 years as a scientist had he “witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process”. Last weekend Dr Santer was again playing a part in the events that led to a virtual repeat of what happened in 1995.


Another FOIA fight brewing – Environmental group sues to get UA records

By Patrick McNamara Arizona Daily Star

A Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group has sued the University of Arizona demanding the release of a cache of documents — including two professors’ emails — related to climate change and global warming.

The Energy and Environment Legal Institute, which until recently was known as the American Tradition Institute, first requested the documents in December 2011. It sued in Pima County Superior Court in September, after the university released some of the documents, but withheld most on what the institute considers questionable grounds.

“The taxpayer is paying for this in many ways,” said Christopher C. Horner, a Virginia-based attorney for the organization.

Horner said the public is entitled to see the emails because employees of the state university system created them as part of their official duties, and they remain stored on publicly funded computers.

UA Professors Malcolm Hughes, of the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, and Jonathan Overpeck, with the department of geosciences and the department of Atmospheric sciences, wrote the emails. They were sent to other academics across the country and in Europe, and to organizations such as the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.


An Oxford academic, takes the Guardian’s – Fiona Harvey – Ocean acid scare story to task

(Ruth Dixon delves into the peer reviewed literature cited)

Dr Ruth Dixon (chemistry)

The Oceans are Not More Acidic Now Than in the Past 300 Million Years

Posted on October 6, 2013

… despite what the Guardian says.

Fiona Harvey’s article in the Guardian on 3 October 2013 Ocean acidification due to carbon emissions is at highest for 300m years misrepresents the scientific literature. This error has propagated across the Twittersphere.

“……..In fact the references make clear that the oceans are currently MORE alkaline than in almost all of the past 300 million years……….”

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 7, 2013 8:43 am

The end is nigh, but not as Bob Geldof thinks (oops, ‘Bob Geldof thinks’ – that’s an oxymoron).

October 7, 2013 9:07 am

I find it interesting that aging ‘celebrities’ are so easily recruited to say idiotic things about climate in exchange for headlines. It is sort of like getting a cameo on Murder She Wrote, except those old stars had actually talent and did not believe the plot true.

October 7, 2013 9:16 am

Bob Geldof must have been talking about the end of the CAGW scare, surely???
But then again he’s not the only UK ‘celeb’ making idiotic statements, Viviene Westwood was hyperventilating about fracking just recently too.

October 7, 2013 9:42 am

I hope 61 year-old Geldof isn’t extinct himself in 15 years, so that others alive then can ask him what happened to save humanity, including his four strangely-named daughters, from his dire prediction. His dad died at 96, but his mom at 41, so who knows?

October 7, 2013 10:10 am

Someone should ask Geldof who he’ll irrevocable bequeathed his fortune to 15 years from today. After all he won’t need it anymore at that point.

Tom G(ologist)
October 7, 2013 10:13 am

“People 1 wind turbines 0 – Couple win wind turbine ruling”
I am waiting for someone who has legal standing here in Pennsylvania to sue over the HUGE wind farms being erected in the northern Pocono Mountains (and elsewhere). According to the Pennsylvania constitution and founding legislation for most environmental laws in the state, Pennsylvanians are constitutionally assured open and scenic vistas. I don’t live near any of these eyesores so I can’t file a complaint. Otherwise I would file immediately, as it is not even a questionable matter as to whether I had grounds to file. Any Pennsylvanians out there who is annoyed by the grand BP (i.e, federal government subsidized) wind farms. step up and be heard.

more soylent green!
October 7, 2013 10:31 am

The IPCC took a poll of everybody who works for the IPCC and they all agreed there is a 95% certainty global warming climate change climate disruption [insert this week’s buzzword here] is man-made.

October 7, 2013 10:39 am

‘Do They Know It’s Christmas?’ might have been a catchy tune, but long-term Live Aid’s done about as much good as windfarms.

M Courtney
October 7, 2013 11:47 am

JEM, I politely disagree with you.
Live Aid’s greatest positive impact was to raise the awareness of the poverty in Africa and how much the continent was falling behind the developed world. Pre-internet – a world of fewer TV channels – such ignorance was inevitable.
Live Aid’s second greatest positive impact was to inspire people that they could make a difference.
Whether they were right at that time or not is open to debate.
But sooner or later one of those inspired people will make the difference.
Live Aid was a net good.

Louis Hooffstetter
October 7, 2013 11:56 am

Let’s all hope the ATI (now the Energy and Environment Legal Institute) gets the University of Arizona emails of Hughes and Overpeck. It will be climategate Christmas all over again!

October 7, 2013 12:02 pm

Louis Hooffstetter says:
October 7, 2013 at 11:56 am
I wonder how many of the incriminating emails still exist. Overpeck may have been able to delete his “We need to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period” message to Deming. Don’t know UA policy on emails sent from work computers, but if the most important temperature data can be “lost”, as at UEA, then why not old emails? Public universities, such as UVA, are supposed to keep emails, but then government supported researchers, like Lonnie & Mrs. Thompson, are supposed to archive their data, too.

Gunga Din
October 7, 2013 7:22 pm

more soylent green! says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:31 am
The IPCC took a poll of everybody who works for the IPCC and they all agreed there is a 95% certainty global warming climate change climate disruption [insert this week’s buzzword here] is man-made.

The “buzzword”? “BS”? I’m 100% sure of that.

Gunga Din
October 7, 2013 7:54 pm

I think I see why Anthony wanted to do this “Hot Sheet”.
I thought it was going to be “just” a collection of stories of interest. But it also connects to some of the not as famous blogs that have been in there faithfully slugging away and doing their part.
Share the wealth.

October 8, 2013 5:50 am

There does appear to be more of an open and moderately balanced dialog now instead of closed alarming monologue.
I remain very concerned that the causes and premises that gave us an irrational movement like CAGW have not been removed from Western Civilization even as the CAGW movement dissipates.
I think none of the causes and premises were even pursued.
PS- also posted at Verity’s blog

October 8, 2013 6:15 am

Gunga Din says:
October 7, 2013 at 7:54 pm
I think I see why Anthony wanted to do this “Hot Sheet”.
I thought it was going to be “just” a collection of stories of interest. But it also connects to some of the not as famous blogs that have been in there faithfully slugging away and doing their part.
Share the wealth.

Along the lines of sharing the wealth, it would be nice if there were a weekly round-up of the best threads on the less-famous blogs, akin the the SEPP’s weekly round-up of stories in the media and studies. It could be compiled by a panel of contrarians selected by Anthony.

October 9, 2013 5:49 am

Thanks for the link to my post.
I hope you’ll be pleased to hear that the headline and first paragraph of the Guardian article on ocean pH have now been changed following email correspondence between Fiona Harvey and me. Credit to Fiona and the Guardian for this response which now means that the article agrees with the cited report. The links in my post now lead to the updated version of the Guardian article which can be compared with the screenshot of the original in my post.
And no, if you are wondering, I wasn’t credited by the Guardian!
Questions remain about the role of the authors in allowing this misinterpretation of their report to stand. The lead author and founder of the International Programme on the State of the Oceans tweeted the article approvingly on 3 October

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights