Skeptics get a seat at the table.
IPCC 5th Assessment Review Meeting starts at 9.30am GMT
Witnesses
- Professor Sir Brian Hoskins, Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, Professor Myles Allen, University of Oxford University, and Dr Peter Stott, Met Office
- Professor Richard Lindzen, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Nicholas Lewis, Climate researcher, and Donna Laframboise, Author
Live feed link follows.
Purpose of the session
Topics being examined include:
- IPCC AR5 key findings on climate change;
- Consensus and uncertainty about climate change;
- Reliability of climate models used by the IPCC;
- Areas of scrutiny (climate sensitivity, the hiatus etc.); and
- The structure and practices of the IPCC.
Watch here: http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14741
The ECC home page: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/energy-and-climate-change-committee/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Tom says:January 28, 2014 at 3:46 am
“He is a supporter of homeopathy, …”
Abraham Lincoln, upon having the homeopathic theory of dilution explained to him, paused and said : “That sounds like trying to fertilize a field with a fart!”
Well. I watched it and was impressed by the mere fact that it was held at all. I did feel the chairman was biased against Lindzen over the hottest decade ever definition but that simply showed his ignorance. The positive however is that some of the parliamentarians were being exposed to another point of view which explains the apoplexy over at the Guardian newspaper. Lindzen the scientist tried to tell the pollies that no action was better than wrong or useless action (think wind turbines) while the pollies feel obligated to “do something”. Mind you if they did do nothing they would have to explain that AGW was a false alarm and all that money they spent was actually wasted. Not likely to happen just yet.
There will probably be a gradual disengagement from climate matters but like all addictions it will need to be replaced. How about nuclear energy? That should keep everyone at each others throats.
Thought I read recently that Tim Yeo’s local constituency party had had declined to nominate him for re-election…………maybe because of his willingness to lobby Parliament for a fee………or maybe because he’s a complete pillock.
So is Mr. Yeo really not getting the part of the record high at the plateau, or was he just pretending to be thick in order to troll on record?
JP:
Yeo really is that thick. He does not need to pretend. If you do the search by name I suggested as part of my answer to your question, you will see that it is common knowledge as is his sleaze.
Richard
I would have loved for rgb to be on one of the panels. That would have been highly entertaining.
I did stay up to watch this live, and it’s been interesting to “hear” the views of others – particularly (earlier today) Judith Curry’s amazing reportage. So I would definitely second Theo Goodwin’s exhortation:
Here’s the link. You might want to skip the 300+ comments – far too many of which emanate from the angry keyboard of David Appell and other known thread-derailers and/or sneer ‘n smear artists.
A few background items that I haven’t seen mentioned in the comments here that I believe one should keep in mind. In addition to the oral evidence presented, I believe that the Select Committee’s report will also incorporate** the written evidence submitted by the witnesses (as well as evidence submitted by others), some of which were predictable, but many of which are definitely worth reading.
Paul Matthews has a post in which he provides an overview of the written evidence provided as of Jan. 8.
** IMHO, it is not unreasonable to suggest that when the report is written, it will cover all the Terms of Reference (TOR) – not only the 5 topics listed for this session. Since “oral evidence is ongoing”, there will be at least one additional session before the report is written. It’s also worth noting that, notwithstanding the December 10, 2013 deadline for written submissions, there appear to be at least seven submissions that were probably received after this deadline.
Perhaps those who feel that some points could have been expanded on by “Team Triple L”, might want to make their own follow-up submissions
I’ve never appeared before a Parliamentary committee, but I have been on the witness stand at a quasi-judicial tribunal (and in the hot seat on live TV!) So, I know from experience that no matter how well one knows one’s subject matter, one never knows what questions one might be asked – or how boorish and ill-informed some of one’s interlocutors might be! Unless, of course, one has the “benefit” of some “coaching” sessions – as did the UEA/CRU “witnesses” prior to the U.K. parliamentary enquiry pursuant to Climategate.
If you study the TOR for the current enquiry, I’m sure you’ll recognize that there is an implicit recognition of the issues that have been raised by skeptics over the years. This being the case, to borrow and rephrase the immortal words of Poor Phil, I cannot imagine that Lilley and Stringer will permit the report to be written without the inclusion of many significant arguments presented by the skeptics in their written submissions.
P.S. @richard Courtney, in your msg to RGBatDuke, you wrote:
I believe you may be mistaken; to the best of my knowledge all three of “Team Consensus” are Brits, as is Nic Lewis; Richard Lindzen is American, but, like me (although I’m a transplanted Brit) Donna is Canadian 🙂
richardscourtney said:
JP:
“Yeo really is that thick. He does not need to pretend. If you do the search by name I suggested as part of my answer to your question, you will see that it is common knowledge as is his sleaze.”
Thanks for the links, Richard, I had already checked them and they were very useful. Unfortunately, I have not found any primary school grades that allowed me to estimate his mental constraints.
JP
M Courtney says:
January 28, 2014 at 3:20 am
FYI: Mr Tim Yeo (Chair) is a Conservative. Rt Hon Graham Stringer MP is Labour.
See in the UK it really isn’t a Left-wing / Right-wing issue.
I pointedly choose not use the Rt Hon in Yeo’s case.
_____
I don’t think either MP may properly be styled “Rt Hon”; both are “Mr”.
Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001):
At January 29, 2014 at 1:57 am you write
Many thanks for this correction. I genuinely appreciate it.
I misunderstood that Ms Laframboise was an American.
I intended no offence to anybody by this mistake and I wholeheartedly apologise for it.
Again, thankyou.
Richard
I’m sorry that I can’t seem to get over this, but if Mr. Yeo is, how shall I say it, clearly not the brightest light bulb, excuse me, CFL in the shop, AND he has strong eco-green commercial connections, how ON EARTH did he end up chairing that particular committee?? I admit I know relatively little of UK politics, but as far as I understood, the UK was not on the list of banana republics. {Suppressing the urge here to extend the metaphor towards green banana’s}
The hearing is now available on YouTube:
J.P. Sorry about Tim Yeo. He is an embarrassment to the UK.
In fairness, the British people are aware of his failings and are trying to get him sacked.
But he has contacts with the influential and a long history near the trough of power and so he is hard to scrape off.
Tim Yeo is in the last throws of his tenure as an MP in the UK. He is under tremendous pressure to stand down and his constituents are planning to de select him. A range of scandals surround this chap, he is not a straight shooter. How he got the chair of this committee needs to be investigated given his fiscal ties to the great green machine.
JP:
At January 29, 2014 at 7:08 am you ask
It is a long thread so it is easy to miss things. I answered your question here Please note the third of my three reasons.
Richard
Now having just sat through the whole thing, I must disagree with the person who thought the warmists were the most impressive. Richard Lindzen on his own wiped the floor with them, but the sceptics as a whole came across as altogether more clued up, serious and considered despite some barracking. But it’s not just them: the warmist MPs came across as plainly partisan and clueless. I think anyone with no axe to grind would agree with me.
The biggest liability on the warmist side was Tim Yeo, who made a complete twerp of himself, but aside from that, in Britain it’s well known he’s a shifty customer, and that he has a financial interest in promoting green issues. It’s quite likely that he will be deselected as an MP by his constituency, who are (quite rightly) teed off with his absenteeism from that constituency, not to mention his miraculously having been let off on the charge of breaking parliamentary lobbying rules. Check this out if you don’t know the story–won’t take long to get the gist:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/09/tim-yeo-tory-mp-filmed-by-undercover-reporters_n_3410857.html
All in all, I’m pleased by the performance, and I can’t say I was very optimistic at the outset.
Richard S Courtney, You make a common mistake when you confuse the Crown with the King or queen of England. It is the Crown of the City of London, whose vast tentacles held many lands in sway back when the map of the globe was nearly covered with pink and the sun never set on the British Empire. Thus the Queen bows to the Lord Mayor of London when she enters the City.
Why are my comments today in Mod limbo?? No sense to it and inconsistent also.
DavidG:
re your post at January 29, 2014 at 4:03 pm.
I will not get into your silly argument about the Crown or the Sovereign.
Suffice it to say that the armed forces swear loyalty to the Sovereign, and the Crown Estates are “Property owned by the Sovereign of the United Kingdom “in right of the Crown” “.
Post whatever else you want to on the matter. I will ignore it.
Richard
Guido Fawkes, far and away the UK’s biggest political blog, has published a sketch on the hearings:
http://order-order.com/2014/01/30/sketch-unsettling-the-settled-science-of-climate-change/#more-159718
All UK politicians and hangers-on read every word that goes up on Guido, some of them will be finding out some interesting things for the first time…
So the Hearing is being discussed on the World’s Most Viewed Climate Blog (WUWT) and the UK’s Most Viewed Political Blog (Guido Fawkes). Quite a combination. As Jonathan Abbott states above, the Guido Fawkes blog is closely watched by all on the UK political inside track. I believe it was even quoted by the Prime Minister during a Commons debate. Public awareness of the growing doubts over CAGW is accelerating.
It is for good day
Everbody dance now
Клара у клавы1