Tuvalu PM Criticises Demands for Climate Evidence

A beach at Funafuti atoll, Tuvalu, on a sunny day. Author Stefan Lins, source Wikimedia
A beach at Funafuti atoll, Tuvalu, on a sunny day. Author Stefan Lins, source Wikimedia

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sosene Sopoaga has criticised demands for evidence that his country is suffering harm caused by anthropogenic climate change.

According to the Australian ABC;

Paris climate talks: Tuvalu PM Enele Sosene Sopoaga criticises demand for evidence of claims

Tuvalu’s prime minister says his country is being expected to provide unreasonably robust scientific evidence to prove it is a victim of climate change to qualify for international support.

Enele Sosene Sopoaga issued another stark warning to fellow negotiators at the Paris climate talks that without a binding deal to limit global warming, his tiny Pacific island nation could be wiped out.

He said the required evidence was hard to come by in a nation of only 12,000.

After a meeting with the president of the climate talks French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, Mr Sopoaga said climate change was a challenge for the whole world.

“I think there’s a moral challenge to people of the world,” he said.

“Are we going to allow this to happen to some of our fellow nations?

“If we can reach the planets and … the Moon, and we cannot save our own kinds, this is a shameful world.”

Mr Sopoaga said that the deck had been stacked against small countries, like his, which do not have enough delegates to attend the vast numbers of working groups happening at the conference.

Read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-05/tuvalu-pm-criticises-demand-for-evidence-of-climate-change-claim/7004090

While we obviously sympathise with Mr. Sapoaga’s inability to finance flights to Paris for the entire population of Tuvalu, this isn’t the first small time small island nations in the Pacific have faced difficult questions about climate change.

When failed Kiribati climate refugee Ioane Teitiota was finally deported back to to Kiribati, the reporter who did the followup discovered the surprising fact that New Zealand is struggling to fill places in a citizenship lottery offered to residents of Kiribati. Upon being asked about this oddity, President Anote Tong of Kiribati explained that is because things aren’t desperate enough yet.

Having visited New Zealand, I can assure readers that life in New Zealand is probably quite enjoyable. The weather is a little cold for my taste, but the water of Lake Taupo, a vast inland lake which sits in the caldera of one of the world’s most active super volcanoes, was pleasantly warm when I went for a swim.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike Bromley the Kurd
December 4, 2015 11:02 pm

….a New Zealand Super-volcano that, no doubt, will super-volcano again. Makes Tuvalu’s quiet Guyot seem rather bucolic.

Reply to  Mike Bromley the Kurd
December 5, 2015 2:01 pm

I believe that Tuvalese farts cause my head-aches.
I demand $ Lots n lots [my lawyers will decide the quantum of zeros – likely seven or eight].
I hate being expected to provide unreasonably robust scientific evidence to prove I am a victim of Tuvalese faring.
Accordingly – Triple damages, please, judge.
PS mods – and the passing reader with no Irony-gene – this is Mega-Sarc.
/Sarc to the fourteenth degree.
And any money received from Tuvalu will be re- purposed well.

December 4, 2015 11:04 pm

And I am sure he is making everything to make his people desperate, cause that’s what a politician should do.

michael hart
December 4, 2015 11:09 pm

How much is he asking for (cash, that is)?

Reply to  michael hart
December 5, 2015 1:37 am

Tell him he’s dreaming.

Reply to  robbo_perth
December 5, 2015 4:46 am

🙂 😉 + 1000 😉
had to wipe the screen

DC Cowboy
Reply to  michael hart
December 5, 2015 3:13 am

I believe somewhere around $100 billion

Fly over Bob
Reply to  DC Cowboy
December 5, 2015 5:46 am

That piddling amount? Or is that weekly?

Hot under the collar
Reply to  michael hart
December 5, 2015 4:32 am

He can always ask Roger Harrabin at the Biased Broadcasting Corporation for some free propaganda:

Reply to  Hot under the collar
December 5, 2015 5:34 am

Did anyone see Harribin’s BBC Report earlier this year where he was standing up to his waist in shallow warm seawater off a NE Australia bed showing gas bubbles spiralling up to the surface from the sea bed in discrete columns. His report was on CO2 induced ocean acidification. He mentioned the gas bubbles but didn’t specifically define the gas but then showed bare coral reefs, apparently dead, and talked of the decline in fish and crustaceans. Implicit in what he was reporting was that the gas was CO2. What he didn’t say was the gas was venting up from undersea volcanoes and contained CO, H2S and a variety of other poisonous gases. There is no other explanation for such discrete spirals of gas and no known mechanism for atmospheric CO2 somehow re-appearing as spiralling columns of CO2 bubbles emerging from the sea bed. Typical blatantly biased and disreputable reporting from the BBC!

spangled drongo
December 4, 2015 11:31 pm

“He said the required evidence was hard to come by in a nation of only 12,000.”
If it was really happening the evidence would be out there in spades and the alarmists would be shouting it to the rafters but it is hard to fake.
Even for experts.
The ABC interviewed the president of Kiribati recently who went on in a similar tone and it also was an evidence-free discussion.
Someone needs to tell them their problem is deck-space not freeboard.

Science or Fiction
Reply to  spangled drongo
December 5, 2015 12:52 am

If there really were evidence – skeptics would be shouting about it.

DC Cowboy
Reply to  Science or Fiction
December 5, 2015 3:15 am

Difficult to prove a negative, isn’t it?

Reply to  spangled drongo
December 5, 2015 1:04 am

Why should they produce evidence, it is up to the rest of world to prove that they have NOT been affected by climate change. This is just Trenberth’s reversal of the null hypothesis. Simple “new science” logic.
My home was destroyed by climate change, and I lost my job. I demand the developed countries give me loads of money is due reparations. Unfortunately I do not have any money to fly to all these conferences and attend working groups, so why should I have to prove my claim?! Just give me the money.
Heck, next time I have a car accident someone is going start asking me to prove the damage to the vehicle before they pay for the repairs. Outrageous.

RobertBobbert GDQ
Reply to  spangled drongo
December 5, 2015 1:59 am

BBC Online 5.11.15.
An article about The man rejected as a Climate Refugee… What they (The Court) didn’t accept was that the dangers were imminent, or that they were due to “reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion,” as the refugee convention requires.
…But there hasn’t been a dramatic exodus just yet. The New Zealand immigration department sets aside 75 places a year in a lottery for migrants from Kiribati, and at the moment it can’t fill them!!!
President Anote Tong suggests that is because things aren’t desperate enough yet.
“It’s not a critical issue yet. I think if there are people who migrate now, I hope they would do it out of choice. But as to the question, is it so critical that people would be regarded as refugees? My answer would be no, not at this point in time.”
And yet, the annihilation of his country is something he discusses more than any other head of government…
And at Government funded sites here in Australia they keep banging on about the current dangerous occuring threat ignoring Kench 2010 and and 2014 and the sea level rise data (Simon Donner Canadian climatologist, ‘So far, most atolls winning the sea level rise battle’ Pacific Institute of Public Policy 11.05.15.
This Kench and Donner material and The NOAA sea level rise data gets up the nose of the alarmaramas as they have nothing other than their emotive ‘we are so moral and halo deserving’ fantasy.
Cheers from The Land of The Drongo and proud to so say.

Reply to  RobertBobbert GDQ
December 5, 2015 4:14 am

I hear Germany is seeking some new peoples.
Look, in a sane world every would just point out the obvious history of the Earth, and how these atolls do not just happen by random coincidence to be situated close to sea level. They stay near sea level as a consequence of the physical geography of such tropical corals atoll islands. Always have, very likely always will. And there is plenty of dry land to move to in case they do not.
The climate jackasses would have people believe that our nincompoop politicians can control sea level, but if only a sufficient level of will power can be mustered, widespread consensus achieved, abject subjugation of our economic freedom can be imposed, and delegation of power/money to the UN can be finagled.
These bungholio liars must be shouted down and discredited once and for all, if for no other reason than they are getting the weak-minded and gullible all up in a tizzy.
And as to our inability to control the sea level of a planet, even while we know how to send a rocket to space…this is the sort of false paradox which people should not cloud their mind with. I could as easily say that since we can build a tractor, we should be able to make it rain where and when we want. But saying it does not mean it makes any sense at all.
Bullsh!t profundity is not an avenue to solutions to impossible abilities.
It is simply bullsh!t.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 1:20 pm

Menicholas comments on the fatuity of the King Canute premise (“The climate jackasses would have people believe that our nincompoop politicians can control sea level”), then goes on to observe:

These bungholio liars must be shouted down and discredited once and for all, if for no other reason than they are getting the weak-minded and gullible all up in a tizzy.

As I age ever more experienced with these “bungholio liars” and as a result ever more bellicose, I become convinced that the only proper rejoinder to be made when they noise-off is the sound of a 12-gauge shell being racked into a pump-gun’s firing chamber.

“I is a great believer in peaceful settlements,” Jik-jik assured him. “Ain’t nobody as peaceful as a dead trouble-maker.”

— Keith Laumer, Retief’s War (1966)

Reply to  spangled drongo
December 5, 2015 5:50 am

Tuvalu is a Greenpeace operation: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6360
Interview with Ian Fry, Tuvalu negotiator
Q. How did you, an Australian native, become Tuvalu’s lead climate negotiator?
A. I’ve been on the job for 11 years. I was working for Earth Negotiations Bulletin and Greenpeace before that. I met the prime minister of Tuvalu at a meeting and provided him with a briefing on climate change. He then invited me to come onto their delegation at [the 1997 climate negotiations in Kyoto, Japan]. It evolved from there. I now work full time for the Tuvalu government as an international environment advisor.

Reply to  dennisambler
December 5, 2015 9:06 am

From where has his salary come for the past 11 years? How much is his salary? Now multiply that by all the other people around the world engaged in such fruitless activities!

Reply to  dennisambler
December 5, 2015 12:52 pm

The GDP of Tuvalu in 2013 was a little over 38 million USD. Mr Fry may perhaps be taking starvation wages out of his love for the people of Tuvalu, but said love would make him use telecommunication rather than jets.

george e. smith
Reply to  spangled drongo
December 6, 2015 12:25 pm

Much cheaper to give each of the 12,000 Kiribatese a free condo, on the French Riviera, than to worry about what happens to the atoll they leave behind.
Then I would have a nice tropical fishing spot to visit now and then.

Reply to  spangled drongo
December 9, 2015 1:45 pm

You’re attacking one the UN’s primary agendas in achieving its totalitarian fascist kleptocracy – pitting developed nations against developing nations and fostering the greed and dishonesty of their leaders.

December 4, 2015 11:43 pm

Enele is right.
Just send the cash.
How much cash do we send?
Don’t you worry about that.
Enele will tell you when you have sent enough cash.

December 4, 2015 11:45 pm

Tidal Gauges at Tuvalu since 1977…

Reply to  denniswingo
December 4, 2015 11:57 pm

See – this was predicted by the theory of climate change.
Some things will go up and some things will go down and other things will stay the same.
This tidal gauge chart is a clear demonstration of global saming – where a weird and unprecedented absence of trend is caused by climate change.
In the past zero trends such as this were almost completely unknown.
It might look like nothing is happening, but it’s a mistake to think that.
There is a worrying lack of a worrying trend.
Something is clearly amiss!!! 🙂

DC Cowboy
Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 3:18 am

I think it is more properly classified as ‘extreme saming’ so it can be used as yet another example of ‘climate extremes’ caused by AGW.

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 9:10 am

“The more things stay the same, the more they change.” – double speak?

Gary in Erko
Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 2:07 pm

It’s an unprecedented absence of an average anomaly.

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 12:05 am

Clearly there is no increase in the rate of change of the sea level, in fact that shows there is no increase in the sea level, let alone a change in the rate of change. It makes you wonder what evidence they use to reach their conclusions. This documentary demonstrates how nonsensical the “science” is behind man made climate change.

Reply to  co2islife
December 5, 2015 9:14 am

I guess all the H2O from the melting ice is escaping from the atmosphere into space instead of flooding our oceans.

Reply to  co2islife
December 6, 2015 8:59 am

shhhhhh skeptics are siphoning it into our new swimming pools, which are really just sink holes created by us siphoning water out of the ground to drink. Big oil is financing the whole thing ! *sarc*

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 1:11 am

Hey, that tide guage record is very interesting. There are dips that correspond quite well with El Chichon and Mt Pinatubo eruptions and another matching 1998 El Nino.
The the latter is a hot event the drop may correspond to the drop in west Pacific sea level as warm waters flow eastwards out of the west Pacific warm pool.

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 2:02 am

Yep. Unprecedented Catastrophic Swamping Event. The White Guilt industry will be all over this. 🙂 (for a fee of course)

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 3:33 am

This data has not been homogenised.
When the data has been homogenised, it will be obvious that sea level is going up like a rocket.

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 4:22 am

Sea levels have been recovering from the large El Nino decrease in 1997/8, but the recovery is hyped as “rising sea levels”. Long term, there is even a decreasing trend. The usual dishonesty.

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 4:25 am

Looks like a permanent el nino should give them what they want.
The way I see it, a long long time ago, some people got stranded on a spit of land in the middle of an ocean. They have been stuck there for so long they forgot they are stranded in a place that no one should want to spend more than a week or two on. They should all move somewhere else…somewhere that is not a glorified sand bar in the middle of nowhere.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 6:35 am

12,000 of them would fit on three boats. No big deal.

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 1:25 pm

What happened to the last 14 – 15 years?

Reply to  Nudge
December 5, 2015 3:56 pm

Anent “Tidal Gauges at Tuvalu since 1977,” Nudge asks:

What happened to the last 14 – 15 years?

Oh, you can’t see those yet. They’re out being “adjusted.”

Reply to  Nudge
December 6, 2015 3:45 am

Available here:
not very frightening really….

Reply to  denniswingo
December 5, 2015 2:12 pm

This is before the right adjustments were performed on the dataset

December 4, 2015 11:49 pm

I am sure this will be most inconvenient of these island nations to prove their problems are climate related. It is easy to blame Climate Change instead of acknowledging detrimental land use policies and having populations that over extending existing resources. Isn’t Kiribati the nation building a new, international class airport a meter above sea level in the interest of tourism? What about your people?

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  Aussiebear
December 5, 2015 1:12 am

Kiribati has 2 international airports. One is 3 metres above sea level, the other is 1.5 metres above. Both provided courtesy USA in 1944 about. Google the airports and try to find the habitations. One on Tarawa is well away from the town, but like Wellington Airport if a plane runs off the end of the runway it falls into the sea. The other, on Christmas Island, is in the jungle. Christmas Island appears to have two ‘cities’, London and Paris, separated by a channel. Did close up on Paris and could not find any houses. There is another town – total population of Christmas Island about 5500.
Interesting fact from Wikipaedia:
“At Western discovery, Kiritimati was uninhabited. As on other Line Islands there might have been a small or temporary native population, most probably Polynesian traders and settlers, who would have found the island a useful replenishing station on the long voyages from the Society Islands to Hawaiʻi, perhaps as early as AD 400. This trade route was apparently used with some regularity by about AD 1000. From 1200 onwards Polynesian long-distance voyages became less frequent, and had there been human settlement on Kiritimati, it would have been abandoned in the early-mid second millennium AD. ” This appears similar to the depopulation of Greenland – same reson perhaps? Christmas Island was also abandoned in 1905! Severe drought.

DC Cowboy
Reply to  Dudley Horscroft
December 5, 2015 3:21 am

“early-mid second millennium AD”?

DC Cowboy
Reply to  Dudley Horscroft
December 5, 2015 3:23 am

“early-mid second millennium AD”
Is that the same as late-early second millennium AD?

Reply to  Dudley Horscroft
December 5, 2015 4:28 am

No, it is pre-late-early second millennium.

Reply to  Dudley Horscroft
December 5, 2015 4:48 am

“As on other Line Islands there might have been a small or temporary native population, most probably Polynesian traders and settlers, who would have found the island a useful replenishing station on the long voyages from the Society Islands to Hawaiʻi, perhaps as early as AD 400.”
Granted I am no mariner, but I am having a hard time understanding why someone travelling from the Society Islands to Hawaii would find it convenient to go a few thousand miles in the wrong direction while on the way there.
The Marshall Islands and Kiribati appear to be no closer to Hawaii than the Society Islands, and also appear to be (mostly) downwind and (mostly) down current.

December 4, 2015 11:51 pm

According to the WHO we need to “face the facts”.
Unless something is done about the problems faced by the people of Tuvalu, then soon their entire nation may sink beneath the waves.
This is because of rising OBESITY.
65% of males and 71% of females are overweight, according to WHO figures.
Are we entirely sure that they need more money?
More money for what? Cake?

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 12:00 am


Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 1:26 pm

Its genetic, and likely widespread because of a previous population restriction. Related to highnprevelance of T2 diabetes. A subject of active medical research.

Curious George
Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 1:35 pm

Have heart. Name three nations which don’t need money. And be grateful for a small size of Tuvalu population; imagine China asking as much money per person.

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 7, 2015 10:00 am

If they all moved to one side of the island, would it tip over?

Reply to  MarkW
December 15, 2015 2:36 pm

wow… u ppl… have you been to Tuvalu?
[have you? show us your travel pictures -mod]

Peter Miller
December 4, 2015 11:58 pm

Reparations, hand outs, gimme, gimme, more, more, more………
“Why the hell should I show you why, or what for?”
Such is the work ethic and morality of the Third World’s kleptocrats and ineptocrats.
It is comforting to know the only places they can find to justify their claims is in the highly manipulated computer model projections and land based temperature data. As for Mother Nature, it still refuses to co-operate by giving us a demonstration of supposed global warming. Not surprisingly, the Chinese, Indian and Russian leaders howl with laughter at their western counterparts for their stupidity and willingness to sacrifice their economies in a futile attempt to solve a non-problem.

December 5, 2015 12:00 am

Well, no other country has any evidence.
It’s hardly fair to demand tiny Tuvalu to become world leaders in the science.

Reply to  MCourtney
December 5, 2015 3:52 am

“World leaders in the science”?!?! Yeah, wha-huh?
They are being asked to show anything, something…..a flooded house, an empty net, a dead bird, a sea fish upland, ANYTHING. The clowns at the Cop21 only want a scrap, so they can crow and holler over it. They aren’t asking him out of spite, they are begging him for their sound bite.
Don’t be so daft. No one needs science when you have proof.

Boulder Skeptic
Reply to  gaelansclark
December 5, 2015 8:15 am

You may want to practice the art of recognizing sarcasm, which is clearly evident in MCourtney’s remark.

Don’t be so daft.

ease up, dude!

Reply to  gaelansclark
December 5, 2015 1:25 pm

B. S.
I read Gaelan’s comment as sarcastic as well.

December 5, 2015 12:05 am

Get 12000 folks from US to swap fully with their citizens. Call the bluff.

December 5, 2015 12:18 am

“Money for old rope”
Of course all these islands and small 3rd world countries are rubbing their hands at free money, who wouldn’t. Since they can blame everything on “climate change”, why not blame their own mistakes on it. After all Tuvalu’s land mismanagement can be covered up and free money to help out would be gratefully received.
Who needs evidence it hasn’t helped climate “scientists” as they just ignore it anyway.
Let the money floodgates open!

Reply to  confusedphoton
December 5, 2015 4:31 am

Um, hey…let’s not, instead.

December 5, 2015 12:35 am

It was downright foolish to extend full nationhood to all those hundreds of coral islands scattered all over the Pacific Ocean – as if they were ordinary countries with an ordinary geography, with sufficient resources of water and hortiocultural soil; and with room for expansion. They should have been declared special United Nations protectorates so that their population could have been monitored. Their problem is not sea level rise (coral islands go up with sea levels) their problem is overpopulation. But, yes, they certainly need help to remedy that problem. But let us tell them they are not climate refugees – ’cause they aren’t.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  AndyE
December 5, 2015 5:28 am

Maybe we should downgrade them to dwarf nations.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
December 5, 2015 1:30 pm

Not even nations. Nationtesimals, maybe. Pluto is not anymore a planet for the same reason.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
December 5, 2015 10:10 pm

It’s absurd even calling them nations – they are unable to develop a modern civilisation in a place like that. They simply haven’t got the resources. They will never manage without continued economic support.from outside.

george e. smith
Reply to  AndyE
December 6, 2015 12:40 pm

I think that is what originally was the case. Nauru for example, I believe used to be under some sort of New Zealand protectorate status.
NZ provides school teachers and medical services to places like Raratonga, and the Cook Islands.
Then busybody Bobby Kennedy, the US attorney General got on his anti ” colonial ” high horse, to force independence on these unsustainable nano-countries.
Along the way, part of New Guinea suddenly became part of Indonesia; with absolutely no ethnic population connection whatsoever.
Papuans are as akin to Indonesians, as Swedes are to Australian Aborigines.
So the UN has a self made mess that it helped create; so let it fix it from Brussels.

December 5, 2015 12:38 am

And NZ is starting to show some signs of good sense over sea level rise. A recent report by our Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment acknowledged that RCP8.5 was a “very high” emissions scenario (our legislation requires resource managers to take account of the “likely effects of climate change” so projection based on RCP8.5 now look shaky), and that any assessment done as an input into coastal management needs to give a best estimate of the uncertainty, and not add a little bit for safety at every turn.
Hopefully people will now start to get this into perspective. Despite all the rhetoric about the risks from sea level rise in NZ, in reality it is a slowly evolving change.
The volcanoes, earthquakes and Tsunamis are much greater risks.

Curious George
Reply to  HAS
December 5, 2015 1:44 pm

The greatest risks are pompous fools.

December 5, 2015 12:43 am

Tuvalu is still above water?

Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
December 5, 2015 2:22 am


george e. smith
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
December 6, 2015 12:42 pm

floating atolls always are.

December 5, 2015 12:44 am

Phishing is a national pastime in Tuvalu.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  dp
December 5, 2015 9:44 pm

Actually, Tuvalu is moderately important in the world of the internet. Each country was assigned a two letter code as its top level domain. The United States has .us, the United Kingdom has .uk. Tuvalu has .tv, which has been quite popular. They did the sensible thing and contracted the operation out to a big player (Verisign).

December 5, 2015 12:50 am

All of you who call yourselves skeptics might like to read an article in the December issue of Scientific American written by, in my estimation, the king of skeptics. His name is Michael Shermer and he is the publisher of Skeptic Magazine (www.skeptic.com). The name of the article is; “Consilience and Consensus: Or why climate skeptics are wrong”. It can be found on page 81. I don’t expect that the article will change anyone’s mind on this site, but it might show another way to think about things, that one might find interesting.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 5, 2015 6:29 pm

Interesting. I am wondering what the gender was.
Quiz time:
Do you know the origin of the term “bug” to refer to a problem with computer hardware or software?
( i know this may be an easy one)

george e. smith
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 6, 2015 1:02 pm

I don’t know the answer to that, but I am aware of a real life ‘bug’ story.
Years ago, at Tektronix; at their Cedar Hills Engineering plant, one of the engineers received a number of engineering samples of a Phillips very high gm dual triode vacuum tube (something similar to ECC81 or somesuch) similar to a super 12AT7.
While pretesting these samples in a Tektronix tube curve tracer, the engineer was surprised to find a strong blue glow from one of the samples, yet it clearly had no cracks or anything wrong with the envelope.
So he took a look at it under an assembly type binocular microscope, and was surprised to find the dessicated remains of an ordinary house fly inside the envelope.
So he sent it back to the Phillips lab people and said that this sample did not seem to function according to his expectations.
He got it back from Phillips with a terse note that said.
Well of course not; can’t you see that the driver is dead ??
The blue glow was of course the ionized gaseous emanations from the fly.

Reply to  george e. smith
December 6, 2015 5:02 pm

george e. smith tells of the Tektronix engineer who sent a “buggy” component back to Phillips quality control complaining “that this sample did not seem to function according to his expectations,” to get back a note reading:

Well of course not; can’t you see that the driver is dead ??

Okay, Mr. smith. That one’s a keeper.

“It is very simple,” Hawkeye explained. “You get a chair. You sit on it backwards with your arms clasped behind its back and your chin resting on the top. You gotta have a big cigar in your mouth. You sit there and look. Most of the guys will know what to do. If they don’t you growl, ‘Skin it and wring it, soldier.’ Sound mean when you say it. If you think there is a suspicion of venereal disease, you make a gesture with your thumb like Bill Klem calling a guy out at the plate. Then somebody hauls the guy off somewhere. I never found out what happens to them. Every now and then, just so they know you’re alert, you grunt, ‘Don’t wave it so close to my cigar, Mac!’ If you follow these simple rules, you can’t go wrong.”

— “Richard Hooker,” MASH: A Novel About Three Army Doctors (1968)

Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 3:07 am

At 12:50 AM on 5 December, we have bobthebear ardently recommending “an article in the December issue of Scientific American written by, in my estimation, the king of skeptics. His name is Michael Shermer and he is the publisher of Skeptic Magazine (www.skeptic.com).
But, of course, no link. Let’s rectify this ommission: “Consilience and Consensus: Or why climate skeptics are wrong” for all to see that the extent of this “king of sceptics” examination of climate skepticism has the depth, extent, concerted integrity, and intellectual value of a desktop coffee-cup slopover.
Not to get all ad hominem, but guess the principal source upon whom this “king of skeptics” preponderantly relies. You betcha!

“A 2013 study published in Environmental Research Letters by Australian researchers John Cook, Dana Nuccitelli and their colleagues examined 11,944 climate paper abstracts published from 1991 to 2011. Of those papers that stated a position on AGW, about 97 percent concluded that climate change is real and caused by humans.”

Now, those “of you who call yourselves skeptics” (uncrowned) who frequent WUWT are aware – as bobthebear may not be – of the methodological qualities of the endlessly-regurgitated “about 97 percent” toxic waste emitted by Cook et alia in pushing “consensus science” on the issue of allegedly anthropogenic global climate change, but would anybody else reading here care to assist this – er, discussant – to a better appreciation of how and why Mr. Shermer had been insufficiently skeptical (if, indeed, “skeptical” is a valid term of use) in sourcing the information upon which his opinion piece had been predicated?
As Mr. Monckton might put it: Ex nihilo, nihil fit.

Not many men can grasp the concept of the irremediable, or take in the fact that what happens in the world is only seldom modified by human volition. Most men even go beyond believing in volition; they actually hold that there is some mystical potency in mere faith. The resultant fallacies are innumerable, and only too painfully familiar. Uncle Julius has come down with cancer and the doctors have given him up; ergo, we must try chiropractic, or Christian Science, else we be accused (and in our own eyes, convicted) of abandoning him to his doom. From this nonsense flows a very common corrollary, to wit, that quack remedies must be somehow better than rational ones, since they at least promise to cure. The belief in such promises is the great curse of man. More than anything else, it impedes the progress of the race. Its chief beneficiaries are all enemies to mankind.

— H.L. Mencken, aggregated in Minority Report (1956)

Reply to  Tucci78
December 5, 2015 1:53 pm

Tucci78, thanks for your comment. As I said, I didn’t expect to change anyone’s mind. I thought it might be interesting to some of you. You never know when you might learn something of value. Remember that open minds are as hard to find as hens teeth.

Reply to  Tucci78
December 5, 2015 1:56 pm

Over on CE, there is a long anguished 2015 post by Planning Engineer. He used to be a full blown member of Shermer’s skeptics. Hosted meetings, knew Randi personally… But somehow that gang decided climate skepticism was in the same debunkable category as psychics, telepathy, and bent spoons. That whole group has scientifically inverted itself. Shermer in SciAm merely puts this perverse inversion on indelible public display.
Some of us true skeptics will have great fun with him in upcoming years. He is a big fat target, who did not study the climate science up close and personal as his creed requires. That makes him a cargo cult shaman.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Tucci78
December 5, 2015 9:50 pm

Obama raised the 97% to 99.5% last week. Climate Science is now purer than Ivory Soap, which is only 99.44% pure.

Reply to  Tucci78
December 6, 2015 9:16 am

When keeping an open mind, one must guard against keeping it so open that one’s brain falls out.

Reply to  Tucci78
December 6, 2015 10:54 am

So, then that might imply that the average climate scientist is about as virtuous as the Ivory Soap Girl herself, Marilyn Chambers?

Reply to  Tucci78
December 9, 2015 1:49 pm

Yep – skepticdotcom is a disinfo site.

Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 4:56 am

Shermer is a pompous ass. There, I said it.
The man thinks his own sensibilities are the last word in objective evaluation.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 1:45 pm

Have you read his magazine or his blogs? Please don’t be so quick to judge. Thank you for your comment.

Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 4:17 pm

In response to the assertion that “Shermer is a pompous ass,” we have bobthebear conciliating:

Have you read his magazine or his blogs? Please don’t be so quick to judge.

Is the opinion piece so ardently extolled not a representative sample of Mr. Schermer’s manner and conduct as “the king of skeptics,” particularly as he is showing in this essay his abysmal failure to demonstrate reasoning skepticism in any way whatsoever?
Is it not possible to take this biopsy as reflective of malignancy in the rest of the man’s body of work?

…science, unlike American politics, is not a democracy. It doesn’t matter how popular your theory is or how many people agree with you. If science were a democracy, then Galileo, Darwin, and Jim Watson would all have been voted off the island a long time ago. Science is truly an elitist enterprise. In science, the majority doesn’t get to decide; the best few do. It doesn’t matter how popular you are; it only matters if you are right.

— Satoshi Kanazawa (5 December 2010)

Michael Darby
Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 2:35 pm

(Note: “Michael Darby” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Buster Brown’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. All the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Michael Darby
Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 2:54 pm

(Note: “Michael Darby” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Buster Brown’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. All the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Michael Darby
Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 4:00 pm

(Note: “Michael Darby” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Buster Brown’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. All the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Michael Darby
Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 4:05 pm

(Note: “Michael Darby” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Buster Brown’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. All the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Michael Darby
Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 4:09 pm

(Note: “Michael Darby” is the latest fake screen name for ‘David Socrates’, ‘Brian G Valentine’, ‘Buster Brown’, ‘Joel D. Jackson’, ‘beckleybud’, ‘Edward Richardson’, ‘H Grouse’, and about twenty others. The same person is also an identity thief who has stolen legitimate commenters’ names. All the time and effort he spent on writing 300 comments under the fake “BusterBrown” name, many of them quite long, are wasted because I am deleting them wholesale. ~mod.)

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 6:16 pm

I have been reading SciAm since I was a young teen, when I found a stack of them from the 1950’s-’60’s in a closet. I was fascinated and drawn further into the world of scientific research, with articles on cosmology, particle physics, astronomy, and biology especially interesting. Back in those days, important things were being discovered and elucidated, and there were few sources of such technical information back then.
Of course, back then, and for many years after, it was a real scientific publication, with much of the magazine pages of text only. No color photographs, no pretty illustrations, not written at a sixth grade level.
Starting in the 1980’s I noticed it becoming more of a commercial publication, and the articles written or edited to be more colorful and more accessible to laypersons and casual readers.
So, yes, I have/had read nearly every article Shermer wrote for that periodical, until relatively recently.
I even used to visit his website regularly, and have seen him on various television programs over the years, including some recent ones.
I still have a subscription, but only because i have not gotten around to cancelling it. The magazine is now a rag. I am not sure if his given opinions on such matters as climate change/CAGW are even his, given that if he was a skeptic he would no longer be welcome on the staff…of that I am quite certain.
So I think my opinion is grounded in an assessment of his writing, yes.
He writes opinions, and some I agree with, and some I do not.
What I find little of in his writings and opinions is just what I said above…he writes as though his opinions carry the weight of facts, as if his reasoning and interpretations are somehow unassailable, watertight, and bulletproof.
(Although, I did read a recent piece of his in which he recounted a rather personal experience with some sort of occult overtones, in which some old radio or something turned itself on after twenty years in a closet or some such thing…a radio that was a memento of a relative who had recently died, and the occurrence was at some particularly unlikely moment in time. I do not recall the finer details, and recount this to demonstrate that yes, I do indeed read what he has written. I read a lot, from many sources. Always have.)

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 6:19 pm

PS, I finally had it with SciAm when they began to delete any and all skeptical comments as soon as they were posted. i found this shocking and completely unacceptable…they have a unity of opinion on their website because they permit no discussion at all, at least none that might draw any attention to their hive-minded devotion to liberal causes and CAGW in particular.

Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 5:18 am

Link, please.

george e. smith
Reply to  rogerknights
December 6, 2015 1:08 pm

To what ??

Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 8:54 am

I expect that many people who post here were formerly quite well aligned with the views of the Michael Shermer. I, for one, consider myself to be a well informed and scientifically literate skeptic.
But, I’m here because I’ve encountered a lot of bullcrap and a lot of very crappy voodoo/cargo-cult/pseudo science which masquerades as “climate science” and related environmental studies/sociology/psychology etc.
If pressed I have never attempted to refute or dispute the basic theory – burning fossil fuels is raising atmospheric GHCs which should, all else equal, produce some warming.
I’m not here because I need to reject the central hypothesis. I’m here because I find it reassuring to discover that there are still people who can make some basic enquiries, learn some basic facts and ask some awkward questions. In an age when most people appear to be screaming “faster faster” as the bus hurtles over a cliff.
This article may interest you:

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 8:56 am

Apologies – GHGs, not GHCs whatever they might be!!

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 9:43 am

GHC = Green House Cabal

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 2:02 pm

+10. See my comment just upthread. You went and got the link that I should have. PE is even more hurt by Shermer and his ilk than his post let on. We have done some joint guest posts on renewables over there, also. In real life, he is THE senior transmission system planning engineer for one of the country’s largest electric utilities.

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 5, 2015 6:26 pm

Count me in the same camp as I. Frog and R. Istvan.

Pat Frank
Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 12:55 pm

Here’s Michael Shermer’s AmSci column at his blog site, where interested folk can read it for free.
In that column, Mr. Shermer says that theories are accepted because of a “consilience of inductions,” which he also calls a “convergence of evidence.” So, human-caused global warming is proved because of (his words), “pollen, tree rings, ice cores, corals, glacial and polar ice-cap melt, sea-level rise, ecological shifts, carbon dioxide increases, the unprecedented rate of temperature increase — that all converge to a singular conclusion.
But notice what’s really going on here. There is a large number of possibilities that could cause this same set of observables (perhaps apart from carbon dioxide increases). The terrestrial climate is known to be highly variable. See also here.
Climate theory is far from adequate to choose among possible causalities, or even to delineate the range of possible causal agents.
Mr. Shermer has merely made an ad hoc decision to pick one favored cause from the set of possibilities. That, when climate science is incapable of determining whether his choice of cause — GHG emissions — is even capable of being causal. He has assigned causality, rather than deduced it from a falsifiable theory.
The whole column merely shows that Mr. Shermer does not know how to think as a scientist. In his defense, the AGW controversy itself has demonstrated that a large number of scientists, and — by my experience, all climate modelers — do not know how to think as scientists, either.
Given that Mr. Shermer is not a trained physical scientist, we can forgive him for following the false lead of people who are trained physical scientists. Apart from climate modelers, who give no evidence of being scientists.
Mr. Shermer is not really equipped to realize that the scientists among those he follows are leading through incompetence rather than acuity, and that the others he follows are not scientists at all. That latter diagnosis includes most of those involved in proxy climatology as well.

Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
Reply to  Pat Frank
December 6, 2015 6:15 am

Shermer really disappoints. To the best of my knowledge, he had first used “consilience of inductions” and “convergence of evidence” in a respectable and well-researched book he had co-authored with (real!) historian, Dr. Alex Grobman in 2002: Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened & Why Do They Say It?.
That book, however, pertained to an in-depth, well-documented examination of the “works” of self-appointed “revisionist scholars”, such as Ernst Zundel, David Irving and their disreputable ilk.
Yet Shermer has chosen (or perhaps been persuaded?!) to mindlessly re-purpose these two concepts in conjunction with relying on third-rate dreck produced by the likes of Cook et al.
Perhaps Shermer – who calls himself inter alia a “scientist”, but whose academic background is in psychology, would have been wise to enlist Grobman’s assistance prior to issuing his superficial declamations pertaining to “climate science”. Views to which, according to Wikipedia, he appears to have been “converted” circa June 2006. If Wikipedia is to be believed, this does not appear to be the first of such “conversions” for Shermer; nor was it his last!

Curious George
Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 2:53 pm

Bob dear, I no longer subscribe to Scientific American. They published a whole issue demolishing Bjorn Lomborg’s book, and only allowed one page for his reply. He refused, and argued on his website. Then the dear SciAm sued him for a copyright infringement.

Lewis P Buckingham
Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 6:02 pm

Just to be contrarian and open minded, all chicks have an egg tooth to bust out of the shell.
Not only is this the case but they also carry the genetic information to make an adaptable tooth.
This site is populated by scientists, it is not interested in internet chatter.
If you want a debate just publish.
I just did and I bet you this comment will make the cut.

Reply to  bobthebear
December 5, 2015 6:08 pm

Another way to think about things? I could not find ANY train of thought in the article, other than, “We must believe in the consensus, because, well, it’s a consensus, isn’t it?” Mr. Shermer’s assertion that skeptics must come up with an alternate theory that explains ALL the data, is simply laughable. It’s smarter to say you DON’T KNOW, when you’re working on a problem as big as the Earth, a non-linear chaotic system with many variables and processes, some still unknown or poorly understood.

December 5, 2015 12:50 am

I guess you just need to find a geologically stable coastline somewhere, outside the influence of posts-glacial rebound etc, and check to see what’s going on.
So that’s that.

Bill Illis
Reply to  mosomoso
December 5, 2015 3:52 am

Sydney is actually sinking at a faster rate than the tide gauge sea level rising. That would indicate sea level is actually falling.

Reply to  Bill Illis
December 5, 2015 4:02 am

Wouldn’t surprise. It’s certainly been a very sluggish rise since the late 1700s. Not much of a warming compared to the days when you could sail a boat into Ephesus or Ostia. Hope we’re not going into a chilly period. That LIA was a bit nasty, and you don’t get indefinite Holocene. Alas.

Reply to  mosomoso
December 5, 2015 4:59 am

I sincerely doubt Kiribati is experiencing post-glacial rebound. The center of the Pacific plate may be one of the most geologically stable portions of the earth’s crust.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 5:27 am

And I seriously doubt that sea levels are rising selectively. Never said or implied that Kiribati is influenced by post-glacial rebound. If sea levels in Stockholm or Juneau are “dropping” while they are “rising” elsewhere and pretty “stable” around much or the Australian coast, I’m thinking we need to look for conservation and engineering solutions to the vagaries of climate and geology. And we need to remember that there has been a dribble of actual sea level rise since the end of the 1700s, which is bound to have an effect. When you consider that it was possible to walk from Victoria to Tasmania less than nine thousand years ago, and that the Claudian invasion of Britain in 43AD came ashore where you would now need to walk miles from the coast…well, I guess it’s fair to say that there are going to be these ups and downs.
The Maldives were holding underwater cabinet meetings before tens of billions came in for airstrips, hotels and super-luxury resorts – which quite changed the subject! Let’s hope a few of those billions go towards sane conservation measures.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 6:57 pm

My point was that islands such as coral atolls built on the backs of long extinct volcanoes, and residing in the middle of the pacific plate, may in fact be the best place to determine what sea level is really doing.
I is apparent by looking at tide gage data from many places and over many years that, in the short term, the monthly and annual variability is far greater than any overall long term trend. So one must look at quite a few years to have any assurance that what is being seen is not variations in ocean currents, large scale wind patterns, etc.
As pointed out, land subsidence due to isostatic rebound, ground water draw down, and other factors such as overall tectonic movements or magma intrusions can mask the true trends.
And these are outside of all the possible ways that the ocean might actually be rising, from sedimentation, to changes in gravitational and possibly even magnetic anomalies of the Earth, to thermal expansion, draining of inland seas and groundwaters, glacial melt, etc.
And Tony Heller seems to have uncovered evidence that even the tide gage data itself is being adjusted and may be unreliable, as trends and levels being reported now differ significantly from what was reported a few decades ago.

Science or Fiction
December 5, 2015 1:01 am

United Nations has created a complete mess.
How on earth did they think they could be able to distinguish between climate change and bad weather events? Did they think every possible record has already been set and recorded at every location in the world – and that all new records or all new bad weather events would have to be caused by humanity? Everything is allowed by their theory: More rain and less rain, more wind and less wind, more drought and less drought, higher temperatures and lower temperatures, more ice and less ice and the sea level is rising anyhow.How naive can one possibly get? Who voted for these idiocrats?

Reply to  Science or Fiction
December 5, 2015 5:05 am

Who votes for fascists?
The same naïve fools who gullibly buy their propaganda.
And many of ones who did not appoint themselves are simply whoring themselves out for the fat stacks being larded around.

Reply to  Science or Fiction
December 5, 2015 6:39 am

The whole thing smacks of a fish suddenly becoming aware of the water in which it’s swimming. Oh golly gee, the climate CHANGES? Holy shite, why-why-why that could, like AFFECT us, no? What can we DO about it? No one wants to hear “nothing,” which is the truth, because their egos can’t admit they’re not the Masters of the Universe. Whole thing’s like an adolescent “having a problem” with the facts of life!

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Goldrider
December 5, 2015 10:01 pm

The CAGW crowd is not interested in solving problems. If they were they would be looking into cheaper ways to build sea walls. They want to seize power over the entire population of Earth, and tell them how to live. Their aim is purely political, their method is to panic everyone into giving them power.

Reply to  Goldrider
December 9, 2015 2:04 pm

Read the history of the UN environment program at appinsysdotcom; UNFCCC head Maurice Strong – “how can we get $60 billion/yr?”
It’s never been about AGW; CO2 was a convenient excuse.

December 5, 2015 1:06 am

Evidence? I don’t gotta to show you no stinkin evidence!

Reply to  Mark and two Cats
December 5, 2015 5:07 am

Was my first thought upon reading the headline, Mark.
Cat owners are very familiar with willful obstinacy, eh?

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 11:21 am

When I think of willful obstinacy, I think of obama.
My Cats display enlightened self-interest 🙂

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 6:59 pm

I stands corrected.

December 5, 2015 1:14 am

I don’t understand the prime ministers bitch of having to supply “evidence” when it’s already been done for him or doesn’t he agree with it?
“New Zealand coastal geomorphologist Paul Kench, of the University of Auckland’s School of Environment, and colleagues in Australia and Fiji, who have been studying how reef islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans respond to rising sea levels… Their analysis, which now extends to more than 600 coral reef islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, indicates that about 80 percent of the islands have remained stable or increased in size (roughly 40 percent in each category)… Tuvalu’s main atoll, Funafuti—33 islands distributed around the rim of a large lagoon—has gained 75 acres (32 hectares) of land during the past 115 years.”
Then to compound those facts, you have the United Nations summary in responce to their very own latest report SR5, in the section dedicated to the Pacific Islands.
Is he’s island really threatened by global warming or is it simply over population that is depleting finite natural resources?
“In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low… Over periods of a century or more, evidence suggests slight decreases in the frequency of tropical cyclones making landfall in the North Atlantic and the South Pacific”

Reply to  Leigh
December 5, 2015 5:11 am

Many of these islands are too close to the Equator to ever have any chance of being hit by a tropical cyclone, or any other sort of cyclone.
There is not enough Coriolis force at those low latitudes.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 9:16 am

What Coriolis ‘force’ would that be then?

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 1:42 pm

Yes, everyone familiar with the subject should also be aware that Coriolis is not a true force, but instead is a manifestation of inertia on a spherical surface.
But the point remains…cyclones do not/can not form or persist at the Equator, and are quite rare at any latitude lower than about 10 degrees. The ones that do manage to spin up below 10 degrees are almost always very weak.
You can see maybe one that has managed hurricane status at the 10 degree margin since WWIIcomment image

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 2:03 pm

Rotating spherical surface, that is.
I only meant to point out that there are places and Islands which have little to nothing to fear from cyclone activity.
Kiribati is one such place, laying largely within about 10 degrees of the Equator, and mostly within about 5.
So they can cross this off the list of concerns.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 7:01 pm

BTW, click to embiggen.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Leigh
December 5, 2015 10:03 pm

I think Willis Eschenbach has explained that on this website several times.

Hari Seldon
December 5, 2015 1:44 am

…and I think he’s a witch…

Reply to  Hari Seldon
December 5, 2015 4:20 am

Has anyone weighed him against a duck to check ?

December 5, 2015 2:37 am

“Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sosene Sopoaga has criticized demands for evidence that his country is suffering harm caused by anthropogenic climate change.”
I would like to point out that Tuvalu has been “harmed” but it is lexicons from Ireland that did it. Ireland should pay the damages!
And please don’t ask me for evidence, as modern “science” does not do evidence any more.

Neil Jordan
Reply to  markstoval
December 5, 2015 10:30 am

I don’t usually report people to the Grammar Police, but your comment
“. . .but it is lexicons from Ireland that did it. . .”
tempts me. Before I submit the report, does this comment mean:
1. Someone shipped too many dictionaries to the island, causing it to sink beneath the waves?
2. A rogue auto spellcheck has been unleashed?
3. Leprechauns have been co-opted by Greenpeace? Why not, they are both green.

Reply to  Neil Jordan
December 5, 2015 11:25 am

It was probably mostly number 2, but I think that number 3 may also have been involved.
On the other hand, it may well be that I typed “Leprechauns” and they changed the word to “lexicons”. They have always messed with me and my family. Darn them!

Reply to  Neil Jordan
December 5, 2015 2:37 pm

I took it for a speech to text error and moved on, although I was briefly tempted to comment.

December 5, 2015 2:44 am

Of course Tuvalu PM Enele Sosene Sopoaga is critical of the demand for evidence of claims….they were promised a windfall for going along with the farce from the get go…..this raising of the bar was not a part of the original promise..not fair!

December 5, 2015 3:03 am

Be fair, he has put a lot of work into decided what color he wants his Lear jet to be. And all that is holding it up now is the money.

December 5, 2015 3:09 am

Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sosene Sopoaga has criticised demands for evidence that his country is suffering harm caused by anthropogenic climate change.
He is scared of Tuvalu missing out on western money if he admits the truth … that there is no scientific evidence that Tuvalua is suffering from a changing climate, no matter what is changing the climate.
He is dancing the ‘climate hustle’!

Stephen Skinner
December 5, 2015 3:30 am

Tuvalu is considered ‘Ground Zero’ for Global Warming and global sea level rise. My question would be why is this sea level ‘rise’ so localised. Tuvalu has experienced an 8cm sea level ‘rise’ but why only here if this is a global issue. It is already part of our knowledge that water extraction will make the land subside, and this can be in metres and not cm. Places that have seen land subsidence because of man made changes to the local hydrology are Florida, the Nile Delta, the Mississippi Delta and any land not made out of rock where water extraction takes place on a large scale. The argument is being forced towards a single idea that the AGW and in this case sea level rise is the only story in town. There is now no such thing as land subsidence (either natural or human induced).

Reply to  Stephen Skinner
December 5, 2015 5:17 am

Land subsidence in the delta regions such as the Mississippi is mainly due to a combination of soil compaction and oxidative decomposition, as a result of channelizing the flow of the rivers which had previously built up and nourished the land.
Just sayin’.

Stephen Skinner
Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 7:04 am

Menicholas December 5, 2015 at 5:17 am
Land subsidence … is mainly due to a combination of soil compaction and oxidative decomposition, as a result of channelizing the flow of the rivers …Just sayin’.
Well yes. And not caused indirectly by the burning of coal and oil.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 5:13 pm

I agree.

December 5, 2015 3:30 am

***surely Dr Koko Warner will verify!
3 Dec: news.com.au: Victoria Craw: Population of Tuvalu, Kiribati and Nauru already migrating due to effects of climate change
A survey of nearly 7000 people in more than 850 households in Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu, found nearly everyone there had been affecting by the rising sea levels, floods and drought due to climate change.
While nearly one quarter of people in Kiribati had already moved due to climate change, another 70 per cent said would look to migrate if the impact on their homes and country got any worse. Eight per cent of those in Tuvalu had already moved while 70 per cent said they would also consider moving, as did 35 per cent of those in Nauru.
***United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS) expert Dr Koko Warner, who carried out the study, said while people often move from outer islands in towards the capital, this not a “durable solution” long term…
Tuvalu’s Prime Minister Enele Sosene Sopoaga said at the opening of the conference he believed no leader carried such a weight on their shoulders…

Stephen Skinner
Reply to  pat
December 5, 2015 4:30 am

pat December 5, 2015 at 3:30 am
***surely Dr Koko Warner will verify!
“…..While nearly one quarter of people in Kiribati had already moved due to climate change,”
This is leading the witness. Whether it is encroachment of sea water or shortages of drinking water or lack of work and opportunities or all of these and other motivations, to just assert it is due to climate change doesn’t make it so. How has it been established that their reasons for leaving are due to climate change unless they have been told this is the reason?
The fact that no other reasons are given for the islanders predicament forces me to be sceptical of the claim that this is my fault and I must compensate these people for causing this. This is not the way to get assistance or even understanding.

December 5, 2015 4:07 am

I have to agree with the President. There is no robust evidence for human induced climate change anywhere. Why should he be forced to provide any?
Just make a computer model, just like the real scientists.
The sad thing is, many people will agree with the above.
Truly, we live in astonishing times.

December 5, 2015 4:14 am

Greenpeace and the Small Island States: Interview with Tuvalu Climate Negotiator Ian Fry
“Q. How did you, an Australian native, become Tuvalu’s lead climate negotiator?
A. I’ve been on the job for 11 years. I was working for Earth Negotiations Bulletin and Greenpeace before that. I met the prime minister of Tuvalu at a meeting and provided him with a briefing on climate change. He then invited me to come onto their delegation at [the 1997 climate negotiations in Kyoto, Japan]. It evolved from there. I now work full time for the Tuvalu government as an international environment advisor.
Q. How did Tuvalu decide to push for a target of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and atmospheric greenhouse gas levels to below 350 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide equivalent?
A. Within the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), we had commissioned work by scientists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, and we’ve done our own research on vulnerabilities based on work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It was clear that a global temperature rise above 2 degrees would be disastrous for Tuvalu. We were even saying well below 1.5 degrees. At 1.5 there are probabilities of sea-level rise that could be quite disastrous for Tuvalu. Well below 1.5 degrees relatively equates to 350 ppm.”
Move on then to the Potsdam Institute and an Aussie called Bill Hare, http://www.climateanalytics.org/
“CLIMATE ANALYTICS GmbH is a non-profit organization established in Potsdam and hosted at Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) A major project carried out by CLIMATE ANALYTICS is the PREVENT-Project “Assessing and preventing dangerous climate change”. PREVENT’s aim is to provide policy and analytical support for delegations of developing countries, in particular the Least Developed Country Group (LDCs) and Small Island States (SIDS), in the ‘post-2012’ negotiations.”
Hare was a Lead Author for the IPCC’s Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change component of its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) and a Topic Leader on long term issues and Article of the UNFCCC in the Synthesis Report of the IPCC AR4. He has been a Visiting Scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research since 2002 whilst continuing to advise Greenpeace International on all aspects of climate change.
In fact until at least August 2008, and for all his time at Potsdam since 2002, he was Director of Climate Policy for Greenpeace. As shown at this link, he held this position at the time of AR4, of which he was a lead author and summary writer.
27 August 2008
“Too much time is being wasted arguing about procedural details and restating historical positions and not enough real substance is being put on the table,”said Bill Hare, Director of Climate Policy at Greenpeace International. “This is the third round of talks since the two-year process was launched in Bali last year, and by now the deal that will be agreed at the end of 2009 should be taking shape.”
http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb28/9june.htm: Both Hare and Fry in photos at the 28th Sessions of the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies and Sessions of the AWGs 2-13 June 2008, Bonn, Germany. They have both been on the case a long time and were “witnesses” at the Aus. senate committee in 2000, “The Heat is On: Australia’s Greenhouse Future”
Another activist aquires a low lying island:
“Speech for the Climate Vulnerable Forum” – Mark Lynas, (Former) Climate Adviser to the Maldives
“We are here today because we know what climate change means. For us, this is not a scientific abstraction. Here in the Maldives, the very integrity of the nation is being eroded, by a triple-whammy: rising ocean levels which swamp the islands, higher sea surface temperatures which kill the coral, and ocean acidification which dissolves the carbonate rocks the reefs are built from.”
Lynas was adviser to scuba diving former President Nasheed, who is now in jail in the Maldives for terrorism offences. http://maldivesindependent.com/feature-comment/the-petro-dictatorship-119332
The Maldives is currently the Group Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, but they are a bit out of favour with Lynas, because the the new government is searching for oil around the Maldives. He was planning a deal to turn the Maldives 100% solar panels.

Reply to  dennisambler
December 6, 2015 5:06 am

The Maldives really is a basket case and for the full monty on the current politics, check here:
The charges against the deposed Nasheed were clearly trumped up, but he was on the scam for climate money anyway. The prosecution was handled, bizarrely, by Human Rights lawyer Cheri Blair, whose husband has something of a track record with dictators.

Mark from the Midwest
December 5, 2015 4:18 am

Coral atolls grow as sea level rises, unless you have a bunch of pesky humans trampling on them. The key here is those pesky humans. One USN Amphibious Ready Group could have all 12,000 of them moved out in about 9 hours. We could relocate them to someplace like Hong Kong, where 12,000 extra people would barely be noticed. Or we could move them to San Francisco, where there are an enormous number of people who blame all the ills in their life on somebody or something else. Again, they would fit right in.

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
December 5, 2015 5:25 am

Maybe Europe could use a few thousand in their suicidal mix of invitees…diversity, yo?

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 1:45 pm

I’m not gonna suggest we take Tuvaluans here and put Iraqis there. That would be cruel. First, people from the warmth of Tuvalu would freeze here, and second, you would not know which way Mecca is in the middle of Pacific. Lets take the refugees here and leave Tuvaluans in their warm paradise.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 5:16 pm

Yeah, but…what about diversity?
And I am not so sure how much of a paradise it is these days. Parts of it are heavily polluted and short on resources…too many people, and no room.
But, the whole place is a few miles long and a couple hundred yards wide…that is nothing like my idea of paradise.
Being born and living one’s whole life in a place with no room and almost nothing to do and almost zero opportunity?
No thankee.

December 5, 2015 4:29 am

We must stop all fossil fuel powered transport to Tuvalu. It’s for the children.

December 5, 2015 4:31 am

If you wonder how off the climate activists are ..
“Tuvalu PM Criticises Demands for Climate Evidence”
If that isn’t more evidence that the hypothesis of man made global warming is a swindle, nothing is!
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, got nothing to do with too few inhabitants. High level stupidity and obviously a desperate plea for money, of course, in a dishonest fashion.
But then again, nothing about the man made global scam is honest ..

December 5, 2015 4:34 am

The rate things are going we in the whole of Europe will be queuing to get on a boat to New Zealand, not because of any climate change but because the rest of the world is intent on coming to dear ol Blighty and Europe. HELP.

December 5, 2015 4:34 am

Tuvalu is, according to evidence, growing. The PM of Tuvalu is, according to evidence, lying. The PM is the perfect example of the new normal as established in our post modern world: The alarmism of the claim is more important than the evidence of the claim.

December 5, 2015 4:48 am

A rather amateurish shakedown artist. What’s needed is a shakedown working group.

Reply to  trebla
December 5, 2015 5:29 am

Well, he is only the top dog in a small pack.
Boss over 12,000 is not even the equivalent, constituency-wise, of a good sized HOA president here in some parts of Florida.
Strange how such a person somehow gains such world stature. His island is no closer to sea level than entire vast cities in other parts of the world.

December 5, 2015 4:55 am

Regardless of any theories of sea-level change, Tuvalu does not seem to be sinking into or rising from the ocean: any change is masked by the much larger variation during the course of a year[1]. Even Kiribati is barely a foot per century[2]. This sounds like some sort of real-estate scam, based on scaring beachfront landowners to sell cheap to international developers who will build marinas, hotels, airstrips, golf-courses and luxury resorts.comment image
[2]comment image?w=640&h=227

Reply to  suffolkboy
December 5, 2015 5:27 pm

There are reasons to be wary of building one’s home and one’s life on beachfront property, or anyplace with a few feet of sea level, but ocean rise ain’t one of them…not in the space of a person’s lifespan or the useful life of most buildings.
Coastal storm frequency and severity in places such as the Gulf coast of the US, or the Eastern coastline from Florida to New England, mean that long before the ocean inundates anyone’s home, any given property will be wrecked at least once and possibly many times by flooding and/or wind.

December 5, 2015 5:02 am

On Tuesday the NY Times had a big front-page story on how the Marshall Isl;ands were suffering from SLR. No SLR figures though, IIRC.

Reply to  rogerknights
December 5, 2015 5:32 am

They (climate liars in general) keep repeating lies which have been long since debunked, as if they are uncontested facts.
Truly, they operate on the principle that a lie, repeated often enough, will morph into the truth.

Reply to  Menicholas
December 5, 2015 6:42 am

Morphing into “belief” in enough people is unfortunately the same thing, functionally.
Sad but true.

December 5, 2015 5:02 am

Stephen Skinner – I doubt the study cos look who did it….the UN…and you can’t trust their word on ***anything!
5 Dec: 3news New Zealand: 1.5degC goal dealt blow in Paris
By Elise Scott
A push by vulnerable nations to limit global warming to 1.5degC has been dealt a blow with key scientific research blocked at major climate talks in Paris.
Tensions between developing nations escalated on Thursday (local time) when Saudi Arabia played a key role in blocking the conclusions of a two-year review into the adequacy of the agreed two-degree goal…
The block means crucial research won’t be submitted to the United Nations climate change summit and can’t be used as evidence to back the call for 1.5degC.
Pascal Girot, a member of the Costa Rica delegation, says the review is a critical link between science and policy and believes the negotiating process has politicised the science.
“Now we don’t have the scientific arguments to push forward an ambitious agreement,” he told AAP in Paris.
“It doesn’t bode well for substantiating the need for more investment in adaptation or even worse, for loss and damage.
“Because some will ask ‘where’s the evidence?’ and now the science has been blocked out of the negotiations.”…
***The United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change also highlights the review’s importance on its website, saying the 1.5 degree goal would be discussed in Paris “based on the outcome of the review”…
5 Dec: Bangkok Post: AFP: Climate pact ready, now comes the hard part
Despite being riddled with conflicting proposals on most key points, the draft drawn up over four years of tough talks is the skeleton of what has been described as the most complex and consequential global accord ever attempted…
“In the words of Nelson Mandela, it always seems impossible until it is done,” South African negotiator Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko said after the 48-page draft accord was adopted to loud applause at the event known as COP21…
More than 50 personalities committed to combating climate change, from actor Sean Penn to US billionaire Michael Bloomberg and Chinese internet tycoon Jack Ma, gathered to inspire the UN conference at Le Bourget on the northern outskirts of Paris.
“Perhaps this is the most exciting time in human history,” Penn told a special event at the conference.
“Those illusions of having too many difficult choices have always created chaos. Now we live in a time where there are no choices. We have certainty. The days of dreams have given way to the days of doing.”….
Any deal emerging from Paris is likely to fall far short of what is needed to cap global warming at 2.0 degrees Celsius or below.
The key, analysts say, will be agreement on a review every five years at which nations’ commitments may be strengthened, a so-called ratcheting-up mechanism.
There is still no agreement on fundamental issues: how fast and how far to slash greenhouse gas emissions; who shoulders most of the burden and, critically, who should pay…

Bruce Cobb
December 5, 2015 5:04 am

Let us examine the robust “logic” of the Tuvalu PM:
“I think there’s a moral challenge to people of the world,” he said.
Appeal to shame. Irrational.
“Are we going to allow this to happen to some of our fellow nations?
Appeal to shame. Irrational.
“If we can reach the planets and … the Moon, and we cannot save our own kinds, this is a shameful world.”
Starts off as False Analogy, but then reverts back to Appeal to Shame. Both confused and irrational.
What, no crocodile tears? I’m disappointed. Maybe later on, as emotions really get ramped up.
More popcorn.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 5, 2015 6:34 pm

The governor of Washington State is using similar logical fallacies in an attempt to create a gigantic carbon tax. He says the recent drought and record wildfires are directly caused by greenhouse gases, without presenting any evidence. Then of course, he’s flying to Paris. Hypocrite.

December 5, 2015 5:10 am

Reuters says its now 42-page draft text:
5 Dec: Reuters: U.N. climate talks approve draft text, many disputes remain
(Reporting by Alister Doyle, Bate Felix, Barbara Lewis; Editing by Toby Chopra)
The senior government officials signed off on the draft text, running to 42 pages, minutes before a midday (1100 GMT) deadline after working through the night.
The idea is that the text lays out options, ranging from a long-term goal for slowing climate change to rising climate finance for developing nations, that can be resolved by ministers next week at talks lasting until Friday.
Many nations said the draft, the result of four years of work since the process was launched in Durban in 2011, left too many issues unresolved.
“We had hoped that our work would be further advanced,” said Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko of South Africa, who speaks on behalf of more than 130 developing nations.
“We call on our partners to listen to our concerns as we work together to find solutions.”…

Tom Judd
December 5, 2015 5:10 am

Maybe Obama could fly in and do a fundraiser.

Reply to  Tom Judd
December 5, 2015 12:48 pm

And hopefully stay there and never come back

Reply to  Tom Judd
December 5, 2015 1:36 pm

Tom Judd suggests:

Maybe Obama could fly in and do a fundraiser.

Might could. What are the golf courses on Tuvalu like?

…politicians pass laws for Gun-Free School Zones. They issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them. And in so doing, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are their safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.

— Wayne LaPierre, 21 December 2012

December 5, 2015 6:42 am

I am completely taken by how the climeo-politico actions of Tuvalu and Maldives resemble those of the “European Duchy of Grand Fenwick” in Leonard Wibberley’s 1955 novel, The Mouse That Roared. Please do follow that link and skim the ‘Plot’ section! It is uncanny!! If there is a playbook for such things, we have found it.
Tiny country hatches plot to declare war on superpowers to be defeated and achieve international ‘victim’ status: CHECK.
Country stages ‘hostile’ invasion of United States intending to surrender, but through a series of insane slapstick antics finds itself in possession of a prototype Global Doomsday Bomb (AGW sea rise) and captures it for itself: CHECK
With the ‘weapon’ securely locked in its vault, the Duchy proceeds to use this threat to extort money and power from developed nations: CHECK
The so-called Doomsday Bomb is discovered to be a ‘dud’: CHECK
The Duchy decides to keep this fact to itself, to further the cause of, cough cough, world peace: CHECK
Reality is stranger than fiction.

Reply to  HocusLocus
December 5, 2015 7:09 pm

Since CAGW and doomsday bombs are both works of fiction, the jury may still be out on that one.
But, I tend to agree.
Guess I will have to stop saying “You cannot write this crap! I dare you to try.”

December 5, 2015 7:00 am

Shall we also compensate them for the potential of the Super Volcano erupting again?

December 5, 2015 7:30 am

The Guardian was saying farewell to Tuvalu fourteen years ago. Another failed prediction. http://www.theguardian.com/comment/story/0%2C3604%2C582445%2C00.html

Ralph Kramden
December 5, 2015 8:51 am

Who is asking for climate change evidence? I thought all the people at the COP21 were true believers. They wouldn’t ask for evidence.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Ralph Kramden
December 5, 2015 11:09 am

The individual countries applying for climate extortion money aid have to show they are “victims” of climate change. You know, like people who went through Sandy were “victims” of “climate change”. I mean sheesh, how hard can that be? It’s not like their threshold of “proof” is very high. It’s like he thought they’d just hand them the dough, no questions asked. Sheesh.

December 5, 2015 9:27 am

Evidence, we don’t need no stinking evidence.

Dave in Canmore
December 5, 2015 9:34 am

Why should I provide you the evidence when your aim is to find something wrong with it? No wait….
h/t Phil Jones

Gunga Din
December 5, 2015 9:56 am

China is building islands. Why doesn’t he ask them to dump some of that sand on Tuvalu?

Reply to  Gunga Din
December 5, 2015 1:32 pm

Sand will not stand in one place, waves will take it and make a river of it. You need planning to control the flow. Even a wave braker could be detrimental as it can increase net loss of sand somewhere.
But if you are careful, the next question is – what does it cost? Is it feasible?

Gunga Din
Reply to  Hugs
December 5, 2015 7:26 pm

I forgot the sarc tag.
But since CAGW is built on sand, sand should work fine. /sarc
Besides, when talking about CAGW, since when has cost and feasibility been a consideration?

December 5, 2015 10:25 am
Reply to  feliksch
December 5, 2015 5:23 pm

Reading that report I was *appalled* by the way the alarmists have put a whole people in fear.

December 5, 2015 10:45 am

I have had the opportunity to meet Climate negotiators from Kiribati and Tuvalu at an Island hotel while they were in transit. After several hours of “negotiation” they both admitted it is a scam to get them more money. They did not know or care if the climate was making any difference but they did know there might be money in it so they were balls to the wall all for that!!
Resistance usually collapsed at about 8 beers.

December 5, 2015 11:21 am

I’ll gladly buy beachfront Tuvalu acreage at “it’s-going-to disappear-into-the-ocean prices.”

Reply to  1sky1
December 5, 2015 1:25 pm

There are thousands of people who’d be interested in investing beach front there. I’m sure building material, like stone, sand and cement could be brought by barge, where timber could be simply pulled by a tugboat. Energy can be produced with coal and water can be desalinated and recycled.
The only hindrance is the distance, but it also guarantees tourists with money.
Tuvalu does not need mitigation, it need investments.

December 5, 2015 12:41 pm

Tuvalu is a Commonwealth member.
When the UK joined the European Union, it was required that they discontinue all trade preferences they had with these nations. This makes absolutely no sense.
These nations would benefit greatly from their status as equal and sovereign states, trading and exchanging with one another. Trade is far more beneficial to these small nations than aid in every conceivable aspect of the question.
Why isn’t Great Britain trading with these small countries? Why is it locked into trade with Europe only? Why has it abandoned these natural trading partners and made them into beggars looking for foreign aid where ever it can? Get out of the EU and start trading with these countries that share language and common law. Get out of the EU and make trade with these diverse countries, improving the lives of the people legitimately.
Trade not aid.

The Commonwealth
The Commonwealth is a voluntary association of 53 independent and equal sovereign states. It is home to 2.2 billion citizens, of which over 60% are under the age of 30. The Commonwealth includes some of the world’s largest, smallest, richest and poorest countries, spanning five regions. Thirty-one of its members are small states, many of them island nations.
– See more at: http://thecommonwealth.org/about-us#sthash.xbxSg92D.dpuf

December 5, 2015 12:43 pm

Hope they don’t ask for evidence for off shore money laundering .
Or perfectly legal off shore tax havens

December 5, 2015 12:53 pm

In a free world, tiny and small countries can exist without being invaded or needing foreign aid.
The way this can come about is by freely trading with these small nations. To be a Commonwealth nation, there must be representative/elected governments, a constitution, and majority rule (as opposed to rule by a foreign colonial caste).
Foreign aid only attracts a corrupt class looking for easy money. And these are more than willing to shut down development and inflict cruel Green Colonialism.
Trade and investment requires stability, infrastructure (including reliable inexpensive power), property rights, rule of law and safe and secure shipping. Why has Britain abandoned these trade partners?

December 5, 2015 4:37 pm

These guys are bitter because they’ve been waiting for this scam to pay off since 2003 or earlier. Now, it’s so close they can smell the reparations.

December 5, 2015 9:58 pm

This is what happens when the whiff of easy money is bandied about by the fine wine diners gathered in Paris to save the world even though it can’t stop volcanoes going off anywhere, and doesn’t need to explain whyvthere is no discrrnsble warming for 18 years despite so much naughty naughty sirborne fertiliser.

Call A Spade
December 5, 2015 11:06 pm

Send them hessian bags when the crisis arrives they can fill them when required.

David Cage
December 6, 2015 1:32 am

Only a total con merchant would suggest that demands for compensation should not be first verified that the damage had been done. Can he point to a single insurance company that does not have anyone checking that the demands for compensation were not fraudulent?

Ed Zuiderwijk
December 6, 2015 7:43 am

Perhaps the president can explain the millions of dollars spent on improving and extending airports on his islands which are being upgraded to facilitate tourists brought in with those evil airplanes.

December 6, 2015 9:56 am

Apparently, the mod (or spam filter?) found my “letter” not very funny or perhaps even inappropriate and in poor taste. My apologies.
(Sorry, nothing found in the Spam folder. Please re-post if you like. -mod)

December 6, 2015 11:36 pm

Thanks for the interesting article, Eric. I’m not surprised that the good folk of Tuvalu are trying to get money out of the deal. They have very, very few ways to bring money into the Islands, and needs must when the Devil drives … doesn’t excuse it, but I can understand it.
For those interested in further information, you might enjoy:

Floating Islands 2010-01-27
Much has been written of late regarding the impending projected demise of the world’s coral atoll islands due to CO2-caused sea level rise. Micronesia is suing the Czech Government over CO2 emissions that they claim are damaging their coral atolls via sea level rise. Tuvalu and the Maldives are also repeating…
The Irony, It Burns … 2010-06-03
Anthony commented yesterday on the question of atolls and sea level rise here, and I had previously written on the subject in my post “Floating Islands“. However, Anthony referenced a paper which was incorrectly linked by New Scientist. So I thought I’d provide some more information on the actual study, entitled “The dynamic response of reef…
So Many People … So Little Rain 2012-03-10
Well, I started a post on Kiribati, but when it was half written I found Andi Cockroft had beaten me to it with his post. His analysis was fine, but I had a different take on the events. President Tong of Kiribati says the good folk of the atolls are…

My best to everyone, and well done, Eric.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 7, 2015 8:24 pm

Coral Reefs and Sinking Islands
WHOI coastal geomorphologist Andrew Ashton and MIT-WHOI graduate student Michael Toomey
American geologist. Working several decades after Darwin, Reginald Daly was aware that sea level drops during ice ages, when water is transferred from the oceans to ice sheets on land, and then rises to present levels between glaciations. To him, sea level cycles were the key to understanding coral formations, not island subsidence. He suggested that exposure to increased wave energy during sea level drops would erode an island away. Then, during sea level rises, the coral would re-grow on submerged island platforms. Daly’s idea fell into the background after drilling experiments in the 1950s proved that volcanic islands do indeed sink. But maybe, the WHOI-MIT group hypothesized, sea level oscillations could explain the curious differences between ocean island systems.

December 7, 2015 9:51 am

It’s criminal that the insurance company would demand proof that my car has been totaled before they pay me.

December 15, 2015 2:44 pm

the sea is eating Tuvalu Islands that’s because of climate change……….. prove it yourself and stop hating for what you’ve haven’t seen it for yourself.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights