Top international award for UNSW Sydney climate scientist–Warning, breathe through your mouth.

From Eurekalert

Public Release: 13-Jul-2017

The prestigious Tinker-Muse Prize for Science and Policy in Antarctica for 2017 has been awarded to (University of New South Wales (UNSW Sydney) scientist Professor Matthew England in recognition of his outstanding research, leadership and advocacy for Antarctic science.

The US $100,000 prize, awarded by the Tinker Foundation and administered by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, is presented annually to an individual whose work has enhanced the understanding and/or preservation of Antarctica.

Scientia Professor England, of the UNSW Climate Change Research Centre, was honoured for his “sustained and seminal contribution to Antarctic science through profound insights into the influence of the Southern Ocean on the continent and its role in the global climate system”.

He was also recognised for his significant leadership roles in international programs such as the Climate and Ocean – Variability, Predictability, and Change (CLIVAR) project and the Climate and Cryosphere (CliC) project of the World Climate Research Program, where he has demonstrated a strong commitment to collegiality, capacity building and the global impact of Antarctic science. “Importantly, Professor England has consistently shown a rare ability to translate global issues to local impacts, and in an engaging and accessible way to the general public,” the prize citation reads.

…..blah blah blah…We’ve discussed Professor England in the past.  And since no publicity is bad publicity, here are some of those articles.  He appears in dozens on WUWT.  I’ve limited the list to those with his name in the title.~ctm

A review of Professor Matthew England’s ‘say anything’ past failed claims

Seven years ago, we were told the opposite of what the new Matthew England paper says: slower (not faster) trade winds caused ‘the pause’

Climate modeler Matthew England still ignoring reality – claims IPCC models will eventually win



90 thoughts on “Top international award for UNSW Sydney climate scientist–Warning, breathe through your mouth.

      • This was a pilot program, for a new series of Yes Minister – a very successful BBC comedy series from the ’90s. However, the new series was canned, after seeing that they could parody global warming and political correctness so easily. There is no room within the BBC for making a mockery of liberal ideals.

    • “a strong commitment to collegiality”

      Right, keep the alarmism up to full steam and keep the money rolling in. Everyone needs to pull together to ensure the gravy trains keeps rolling. This is a Prize for Science and Policy , not for science.
      UNSW Climate Change Research Centre, even the name of the place shows that they are not doing objective research on climate. “Climate Change” is a political issue and is usually understood as being synonymous with anthropogenic “Climate Change”.
      Politics masquerading as science.

      • I hate it when someone uses a word I have never seen before, a classic tactic to confuse the proles.
        The specific meaning of ‘collegiality’ is the role if bishops in governing the Roman Catholic Church in conjunction with the Pope.

  1. by 2017 my faith in science has been smashed.
    I also got blocked from Climate Ect for one post pointing out that sensitivity study estimates are driven by anomaly analysis and close to being cargo cult science.
    Ect is turning into somewhat of a luke warmer echo chamber

    • Why do you assume that it is Jim D who is being protected?
      He spouts amazing amounts of total crap and refuses to be corrected by evidence. I would Imagine Judith is trying to stop him taking over C.Etc. and polluting every thread with his crap.
      I have argued against him several times without anything getting blocked, but it’s pretty much a waste of time, which is probably his aim.

    • I also got blocked from Climate Ect for one post pointing out that sensitivity study estimates are driven by anomaly analysis and close to being cargo cult science.

      That’s surprising. Can you link to the thread and your comment?

      • The thread was the Nick Lewis sensitivity thread, in the last three or four threads there.

      • funnily, I am blocked on Twitter by WUWT and can post here, and was followed by Judith and cant post on Ect
        Funny old world

      • I was blocked by WUWT on twitter for tweeting at WUWT and NASA pictures of persistent contrails. Widely accepted as fact in relation to the possible effect on climate\weather given the impact clouds have, consistent contrails are essentually man made cloud cover.
        Dont know if it was Anthony, but I never tweeted at WUWT before that, and I was blocked straight away.
        It was rather silly.

      • Correction, missing important comma *Widely accepted as fact””,”” in relation to the possible effect on climate\weather given the impact clouds have, consistent contrails are essentually man made cloud cover.

      • I can only assume that whomever blocked me misinterpreted it as a “chemtrails” tweet 😀 yet my twitter has nothing related to chemtrails on it.

    • All I did was point out that they are using a residue of changes known and unknown to estimate sensitivity of one tiny factor in the system they model, which essentially has undefined boundaries due to lack of understanding of the influence of solar sea floor and space.
      I pointed out that sensitivity studies have come down in line with anomaly estimates, which smacks of the anomaly estimations dictating sensitivity of a doubling of CO2, in an undefined system.
      I suggested it bordered on cargo cult science.
      I cannot comment there since, refuses login.
      Shameful. I dared question the sensitivity study with valid questions and this is how they reacted, like SKS,.

    • Curry is known to keep insults away. She accepts dissent and even comments with no added value, but insults and spamming get you blocked. Which is good.

      • Well, at least to some extent. She does not have all the time in the world to moderate. So it will be a quick decision.

    • Mark-Helsinki, I have no idea what Judith Curry, ECT, or others mentioned are doing, but I object to lumping Real Scientists in with the Political Science/Unethical Opportunist crowd. Professor Emeritus Don Easterbrook, who often appears on, is an excellent example of a Real Scientist, as are many others.

      • I don’t think Judith blocked me, I really doubt it. I’d say it was whomever was mod.
        If you say something off here, Anthony or the mods will say it, and snip your post and warn you, that’s fair (unless its an out and out troll moron comment in which case you are clearly not there to discuss things)
        I insulted no one, called no names, never mentioned certain keywords that might get you filtered.
        My comment was awaiting moderation, for some reason, and then it disappeared and I could no longer log in.

      • Judith has said that she sometimes snips lengthy back-and-forth exchanges that are on tangents because they discourage persons interested in the main topic from reading further.

    • By being on the edge of moderation and serving a huge amount of unsupported claims and opinions he is effectively performing Technique #3 – ‘TOPIC DILUTION:
      “Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. … ‘ By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.”

      • I have definitely seen the sheer volume of drivel. And tried to reduce it by requesting him to back up his claims with referenses.
        June 28, 2017 at 5:56 pm
        Here are a few comments that may shed some light on his perspective:
        “Yes, maybe not enough conflict in my regular life. Some people do online gaming. I do this. It’s an alternative universe you guys have here.”
        “As I mentioned to Don, the analogy is online gaming. I prefer to do this. It’s like a shoot-em-up with the skeptical arguments.”
        Judith has a comment regards Jim D and moderation here:
        June 30, 2017 at 1:31 pm
        There is a golden opportunity to comment on her moderation.

      • No. “The award process is administered independently by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR). All inquiries should be directed to SCAR.”

      • The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) is an inter-disciplinary committee of the International Council for Science (ICSU). The International Council for Science (ICSU) is a non-governmental organisation with a global membership of national scientific bodies (122 Members, representing 142 countries) and International Scientific Unions (31 Members). The main ICSU Secretariat (17 staff in 2016) is based in Paris.
        Swamp, indeed.

  2. … he has demonstrated a strong commitment to collegiality….
    From interview on ABC:
    MATT ENGLAND: Oh absolutely. There are people actually out there trying to say that the IPCC has overstated or overestimated climate change. This report shows very clearly that the projections have occurred.
    And so anybody out there lying that the IPCC projections are overstatements or that the observations haven’t kept pace with the projections is completely offline with this. The analysis is very clear that the IPCC projections are coming true.
    (My bold)
    Quite a commitment.

    • @ Santa Baby. Hey! My wife had a lesser western goldfinch for a pet and he was actually quick. When I opened the front door (~7m from his cage) he would fly to the farthest corned and keep quite. When my wife open the front door he would jump to the front of the cage and sing beautiful songs.
      Smart bird. So careful who you call a bird brain.
      Suggest you use a different statement: Thick as a Brick, Lights are on but no one is home, Drinks cool aid at every supposed crisis, One can short of a six pack, Sharp as a marble, Warmunist, or some such term that does not belittle smart birds.

  3. I could see this guy winning a Darwin Award, but one with $100k attached to it? Yikes.

  4. Given that Antarctica is already frozen solid at something like -40 (F or C, take your pick), I’d say it’s already pretty well preserved without any need for help from Prof. England.

  5. Importantly, Professor England has consistently shown a rare ability to translate global issues to local impacts, and in an engaging and accessible way to the general public …

    Such an ability is also shown by Al Gore. Of course Al Gore has a court decision that finds that An Inconvenient Truth is a work of political indoctrination.
    Activists should not also be able to call themselves scientists. Scientists compare poorly with engineers. Engineers have to take an ethics exam, scientists don’t. It shows in the miserable state of science these days. yet another link

    We need a better understanding of the factors driving publication and productivity-related behaviors. This is key not only to appreciating the exceptional pressures wrought upon researchers by a strict publish-or-perish imposition, but to improving science itself. This would not only benefit those working in the field, but is crucial if public trust in science is to be maintained.

    The pressures of the publish or perish situation are well known and are the focus of much literature. Nobody disagrees that most published research findings are bogus. Nobody has yet focused on activist driven science but they’re nibbling around the edges. link Certainly there’s plenty of evidence that activist groups will attempt to shut down science that threatens their chosen stance. link Activist driven research is certainly no better than any other research and there is plenty of reason to think it is worse. Worse than bad is, of course, really bad.

    • blockquote> Engineers have to take an ethics exam, scientists don’t.
      Not so fast there, Bob. Try being a geologist in Canada. (although I think there are 2 provinces left that don’t have legislation requiring licensing for geo’s).
      Not that I’ve noticed passing the ethics exam having much effect on anyone’s behaviour…..
      If my experience of watching other practitioners in my field leads to any conclusions, it is that teaching epistemology would be more useful than teaching ethics. People should be able to make clear distinctions in their own minds between what they know, what they believe, what they would like to conclude from their data, and what their data actually shows them
      Of course, in climate science, data is (are) an optional extra. You have to work to get some, as opposed to models that are ready to hand.

      • The point of an ethics course is that if you slip up, the judge can say that you should have known better and throw the book at you.
        I suppose that folks with degrees in earth science can call themselves geologists. What they can’t do is call themselves Geological Engineers.
        For sure the truth gets stretched beyond its elastic limit every time a prospector tries to raise money from investors. 🙂

  6. Another nobody has told the King he is naked story. These self gratifications will continue until they either run out of money or respect from the people. Sometimes you wonder how long either can last.

  7. Wasnt this the “climate scientist” who was stranded in the Antarctic due to the non existent ice????

    • OZ is actually a great place. Lived there once and wish I could go back for a year or so.

      • It is indeed. I moved here 60 years ago; it has been a great life. I was even at UNSW for 16 years, but perhaps I shouldn’t admit that under the circumstances.

      • 6th generation m’self, but a WEST Australian (one of ‘the capitalists’) .. my grandmother said to me one day ‘you’d think after all my life I’d be used to the place.. oh well, to late to go back now’.
        it’s an odd place – so much potential. so very much.

  8. Matthew England was in good company with Santer, Meehl, Mann et al who recently published this paper in Nature geoscience:
    and because the truth had finally caught up with their endless decades of modelled BS, thought it prudent to end their abstract with:
    “We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.”
    But then, so they could remain in their Kosy Konsensual Klub, finished the paper with a bum-covering:
    “Although scientific discussion about the causes of short-term differences between modelled and observed warming rates is likely to continue, this discussion does not cast doubt on the reality of long-term anthropogenic warming.”
    IOW, the models that have been so wrong in the past will be right in the future.
    I love how “science” can get two obviously opposing statements peer reviewed in the same paper.

    • Disappointingly, most ‘establishment’ climate papers over the past 2 decades would appear to be created from the media release backward.
      Acknowledgements should be bestowed for media frenzy effects, rather than incisive science.

  9. The models are based on the political established UNFCCC. The problem is that climate science has been politicized.

  10. 100,000 as a award and yet its AGW sceptics we are told that have a ‘big money ‘ !
    Still fame and fortune has long followed those that produced the ‘right results ‘ for climate doom , let us hope that history reflects how these ‘right results ‘ where often lies built on BS and those concered live long enough to see this acknowledge.

  11. The statements made by climate scientists have become so off the wall and ridiculous that I expected to read that one actually did warn people to breathe through their mouths.

    • Yes, refrain from this in the future, it is not welcome here. Not only a bad joke, this is a discussing crime usually perpetrated on women and children.

    • Dr Stangelove, Wikipedia describes your chosen character as follows:
      Frederick Charles “Freddy” Krueger is a character of the A Nightmare on Elm Street film series. He first appeared in Wes Craven’s A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) as a burnt serial killer who uses a glove armed with razors to kill his victims in their dreams, causing their deaths in the real world as well. In the dream world, he is a powerful force and almost completely incapable of being injured. However, whenever Freddy is pulled into the real world, he has normal human vulnerabilities.
      Sounds like you’ve been dreaming and dressing up too much at SkS.

      • > dressing up too much at SkS.
        Now there’s an insult the mods might let pass. Given that the starting point (SkS) is well beyond the line, you can’t go there and then cross the line by going further. 🙂

  12. The “Tinker” Foundation, why would we think he shouldn’t be honored by the Tinkers? The entire body of data is a result of tinkering. Of course, there’s always the possibility that in Australian, the “h” is silent and has been dropped from ‘Thinker’. They do seem to think differently than others. Climateering science is rotting out elsewhere in the world and they are thriving and multiplying in Oz, a sort of marsupial divide? Although they may have quietly departed from South Australia for their safety.

  13. Here is a letter sent to and published in the Australian (a newspaper) on Monday July 17, 2017:
    “Life in a cold climate.
    Mornings have been bitterly cold lately. Intrigued by her silence, I checked on my wife on Saturday to see if she was alright. I found her sitting in her office, her head covered to the eyebrows by the hood of a thick jumper. I immediately felt ashamed, sad and angry.
    With the price of electricity going through the roof, little essentials that were making our lives comfortable in our old age have been turned off, starting with the heater.
    What’s happening? Instead of providing us with cheap and reliable energy, governments are presiding over the sale of our gas to nations that provide their people with cheap and reliable electricity.
    We now turn off all lights, my wife spends her evenings reading under a heavy blanket and I watch the Tour de France in the dark, rugged up in an old sleeping bag. As I ponder on our predicament, I recall that in the 1970’s when I migrated here, all I could hear was that I had arrived in the lucky country. But we don’t say that anymore. Bitterness has replaced happiness, shame has replaced pride, sadness has replaced joy. My wife is cold. I am cold.”
    Jean-Pierre Zajac, Uhima Beach, NSW.

Comments are closed.