Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Camille Parmesan is a US / UK based scientist who has accepted President Macron’s challenge to President Trump, Macron’s offer of funding for US climate scientists who move to France. Camille thinks climate “deniers” live in a world of fiction – but she does not present any real evidence to back her claims.
Camille Parmesan: ‘Trump’s extremism on climate change has brought people together’
Interview by John Vidal
Sun 31 Dec ‘17 18.00 AEDT
The climate scientist on leaving the US to work in France – with funding from President Macron – and why she believes Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris agreement will backfire on him.
Camille Parmesan, a biologist at the universities of Texas and Plymouth, is one of the world’s most influential climate change scientists, having shown how butterflies and other species are affected by it across all continents. She is one of 18 US scientists moving to France to take up President Macron’s invitation of refuge after Donald Trump’s decision to cut science funding and withdraw the US from the 2015 Paris agreement.
What has made you leave the US?
The impact of Trump on climate science has been far greater than what the public believe it has. He has not only slashed funding, but he’s gone on the attack in any way he can with his powers as the president. University researchers are buffered from this, but scientists working at government agencies have really felt the blow. They have been muffled and not allowed to speak freely with the press, they have had their reports altered to remove “climate change” from the text, and are being told to leave climate change out of future reports and funding proposals. This degrades the entire climate science community. Scientists are fighting back, but Congress needs to exercise its constitutional powers and keep the executive branch in check. This is not a partisan issue – this is about the future of America.
Are you angry?
None of us expected Trump to win. It was a real shock. It was horrifying to have him as a candidate. He was so extreme. Frankly, I am not just angry at the far right, extreme Republican groups but also with [some] liberals who bought the Russian propaganda and who are not taking responsibility. And with people who didn’t vote. Good lord. You need to vote! It was a bit like Brexit. Many young people did not vote. I understand they did not want a mainstream candidate but they got Trump and Brexit.
…
When do you expect the major impacts to take place?
Things will shift to the extremely negative in the next 50 years. Climate scientists are doing decadal projects and it starts really shifting about 2070-2090. That is in my children’s lifetimes. They will have to deal with it. That’s what makes me angry. Policymakers are mostly in their 50s and they will be dead by then. The worst impacts will hit their grandchildren. That’s what annoys me about young people not voting. They will be the most severely impacted.
…
What about the deniers?
People like believing in fiction in the face of reality. We’ve had many climate disasters and they haven’t woken up the minority who are still living in a fictional universe. People want to believe this lie and I don’t know how to get through to them. But hurricanes like Harvey and Katrina have woken up middle-of-the-road people. It’s not that they were denying climate change, but it was unimportant to them. These people are beginning to understand it is impacting whole countries and regions.
…
Camille, if you want to “get through to deniers”, you could try offering some real evidence to back your claims.
Hurricane Katrina and Harvey are not evidence of imminent climate catastrophe. Powerful hurricanes occurred before the industrial age, and they will continue to occur regardless of what we do about CO2 emissions. If anything, long term there has been a decline in strong hurricanes making landfall on the continental USA.
The incontestable stream of climate disasters Camille predicts will not strike until 2070 – 2090, by which time most of us will be dead. Her climate claims are not falsifiable on any reasonable timescale.
Camille’s 2070 – 2090 timescale seems a bit of an advance on most climate disaster predictions. Is it just me, or does the settled science date of this “imminent” climate disaster always seem to be galloping off further into the distant future?
Update (EW): Hilited “this is not a partisan issue” (h/t BallBounces)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It’s funny that none of these people make predictions that can be falsified in their lifetimes – or before they retire.
I’d love to have a job with zero actual responsibility or accountability.
Have faith in mortal gods, conflated logical domains, and emanations from the twilight fringe (a.k.a. penumbra). The end of the world is nigh.
nn
December 31, 2017 at 4:17 pm
Have faith in mortal gods, conflated logical domains, and emanations from the twilight fringe (a.k.a. penumbra). The end of the world is
nighNye.There, FIFY. 🙂
But what we have is all the predictions made over the last 30 years of which none have come true.
From the full article.My bold.
Oh really? You really don’t realise that 30y or perverting science, gatekeeping the published literature, crying wolf, and politicising something you still try to pretend is not politicised has not been noticed?
You can fool some of the people, some of the time ; but you can’t fool all the people all the time.
Running away is the new “fighting back”. If you won’t debate, then it is not fighting back. Science does not grant “permanent dibs” on playing offense all the time. If you want to call it science, defending your work and the analysis of it, is also required.
Russ – she also gives the impression that there are no ‘scientists’ who think the CAGW narrative is hyped beyond any rational limit, given the lack of evidence.
Russ,
“Science does not grant “permanent dibs” on playing offense all the time.”
Au contraire, it does in the realm of Evolution (the grand origins story kind, not mere “natural selection”, which is little more than an acknowledgement that nature can do what humans have for millennia). And I suspect that’s a major reason why the climate change clan thought they could slip this one past us . .
It’s called a Parthian Shot (alas, not a parting shot); to shoot at the enemy while retreating. Maybe a Parmesian shot in this case.
It’s almost impossible to be more shocked by the irresponsibility of climate alarmists, but this lady has a good stab at it. Her sanctimonious sentimentalism is about as far removed from science as one can get. Go by plane to Australia for vacation? Your grandchildren will suffer. Fly to a climate conference in Bali? Your grandchildren will NOT suffer. And Parmesan is “one of the world’s most influential climate change scientists,”? A world saving star, up there on the podium along with Hansen, Mann and Trenberth? Her colleagues must cringe, reading such stuff.
Camille Parmesan is (Snip) SHE WASN’T IN THE USA FOR THE LAST 7 YEARS?? / UK based scientist who has accepted President Macron’s challenge to President Trump, Macron’s offer of funding for US climate scientists who move to France. Camille thinks climate “deniers” live in a world of fiction – but she does not present any real evidence to back her claims.
Why go to France?
I came to the UK for family reasons seven years ago. But I was not happy with my department at the University of Texas. Research funding has gone down so much in the US. I had a big collaborative grant and I wanted to continue it, but it looked like funding was not there. Then Brexit happened, Trump got elected and President Macron made his offer [to fund climate research]. It was perfect timing. His initiative brings me to France, which allows me to apply for EU money. FOR THE EU MONEY HONEY!!!
That, of course, means the funding started to drop under Obama. Yah- sure.
I wonder if she could be counted as the first “climate refugee” 😉
Readers may not remember, but Camille Parmesan is the biologist Jim Steele exposed as pruning some data and misrepresenting other data to make it seem that Edith’s checkerspot butterflies had changed their range because of the climate horrors of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.
She claimed to be in personal anguish over the indifference among Americans to the clear climate change signal she had observed; so much so that she was leaving the US for the UK. Now she’s going to France. To her credit, Camille Parmesan improves the scientific integrity of every society she leaves behind.
Amazon stock is going to be at $5976.00 a share in 2075. I modeled it.
A Big Mac will cost at least $25.
The cheesy Parmesan follows the money! What a Surprise!
50 years ago a Big Mac cost 50 cents; now they cost $5 and could easily cost $25 in 2075–all WITHOUT Climate Change!
(Shouldn’t I get some HUGE FRANCE GRANT for that unprecedented prediction? I mean, where’s the ironing here?)
Actually, now that I think about it, most things are about ten times what they cost about fifty years ago in the late sixties.
By the way: Parmesan goes prety well on Mac(a)ron(i) 😉 😉
Except for such things as TVs and appliances.
They are actually cheaper for equivalent products.
Brilliant move!
RockyRoad – December 31, 2017 at 8:21 pm
HA, 60 years ago the (resident) tuition cost for me to attend Glenville State College was $100/year ($50/semester), …… now the (resident) tuition cost is $5,592/year.
In the late 60’s my tuition at the University of Maryland College Park was less than $500 for 15 credit hours. Books were usually less than $100 total. Your factor of 10 is not far off.
Here are links to essays about Parmesan bad science:
1. Fabricating Climate Doom: Parmesan’s Butterfly Effect
http://landscapesandcycles.net/climate-doom–parmesan-s-butterfly-effect.html
2. Fabricating Climate Doom: Hijacking Conservation Success in the UK to Build Consensus!
http://landscapesandcycles.net/hijacking-conservation-success-in-the-uk.html
3. A request for retraction of Parmesans paper due to half turrets
http://landscapesandcycles.net/American_Meterological_Society_half-truth.html
The essays on Parmesan were so damning, Hotwwhopper’s Slandering Sou (aka Miriam OBrien) repeatedly tried to misdirect the issue regards Parmesan’s bad science, and suggest my criticisms were not about horrendous science but a personal grudge or professional envy ROTFLMAO.
Slandering Sou got Parmesan’s husband and co-author, Dr. Singer, to post on her site about our my essays, only to have Dr. Singer validate everything I said and reveal just how ignorant and denigrating Slandering Sou is. Read
Hotwhopper’s Miriam O’Brien – Hoist by Her Own Petard!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/20/hotwhoppers-miriam-obrien-hoisted-by-her-own-petard/
How about inviting her to be one of the panel members with Nye and whoever else would be willing to take on a panel of well prepared, fact based, heavy hitters? This debate needs to be aired. The knowledge gaps need to be filled as soon as possible in 2018.
Logic and reasoning is the way of the future.
Thanks for those links Jim. I was suprised not to see that in the article since I was sure this butterfly nonsense had been rebutted. Maybe Anthony will add those links in an update.
I wonder if she actually knows what Karl Popper’ writings are all about?
Cheers
Roger
http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com
It seems she is in possession of very little in the way of historical perspective or factual information.
Consider her work, and combine that with what we know to be true regarding the historical temperature patterns, not to mention the paleo data.
She has somehow made a causal link between fake temperature adjustments of a few degrees, and the fate of some insects that have been spread all over the earth for tens of millions of years, and have survived every cataclysm and upheaval that the world has experienced.
We are supposed to believe that global milding is going to be some unsurvivable challenge for butterflies?
And that this is important work?
This is a person who has devoted her entire life and career to fr@ud and trivia.
With any luck she won’t let the screen door hit her on the ass.
Agreed!
Except, as with so many puffed up pompous climate alarmists; Parmesan’s ego ballooned head will prevent any door from hitting first her posterior.
Aye!
Especially for an alleged biologist that ignores the maturing of her tiny butterfly plot.
Adjoining new growth areas are flush with the same butterflies, she allegedly studied; but her chosen plot of older growth plants, no longer provide butterflies food.
A Duh! moment if she’d simply opened her eyes to see expanses of butterfly filled fields.
But, then she’d have to admit, CO2 and temperature do not meant death to butterflies.
What a choice?
Actual butterfly science and the ruination of her personal confirmation bias?
Or the ruination of alleged butterfly science coupled with her moments of infamy?
‘Exactement’!
Hopefully, France and French science will survive; somehow.
No you wouldn’t. Imagine looking back on a lifetime of activity so irresponsible and meaningless that in your last moments you realize you pissed your entire professional life away for nothing and will be forgotten, except perhaps as a footnote to a footnote in an obscure appendix to “Lysenko Redux: Academic and Scientific Misbehaviour During The Great Global Warming Fraud of 1980 to 2020; Schmutzig u. Dreckig Verlag, Berlin, 2045; 350 pages.”
Yes, that would be quite an epitaph. And possibly a mild one, at that. What will her grandchildren think? But for a bit of Mac & Cheese, integrity and truth goes by the board. French dough and American topping.
They used to make predictions that were in their lifetime, but every single one of them failed to materialize, so they have now pushed their prophesies of doom out to a point in time that can never fall back on them.
How people who have been so wrong about so much for so long have even one single shred of credibility with anyone on Earth is beyond me.
The incredible inanity of this charade is simply astounding.
I am worried about my great great grand children.
I’m way ahead of the curve.
A few years ago, a climate change sceptic asked Britain’s Royal Society how many years of zero warming would it take for the Royal Society to concede that global warming was not happening. “50 years” was the answer.
After all, the science is settled.
It’s rather clever, actually. Since the current climate regime seems to follow a 60-year(±) cycle, it’s almost certain that absent a descent into another Little Ice Age, you’ll never see a 50-year stretch of no warming. All they have to do is wait for the upswing and go “Aha!!”
The best part is that it is always about the Children. Suffer the poor children. We don’t do this for ourselves we only care about the children.
If they were really worried about the children they would be writing about the $20 Trillion in Federal Debt while facing another $70 Trillion in unfunded Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid liabilities. Because that is what is going to Chap the Children’s arses.
I don’t find a prediction by Parmesan in her interview in the Observer. Did she make one somewhere else?
So, she is willing to let her children bear the shame?
Meh, I’ve forgotten her name already…
+100
Except, Jim Steele’s excellent butterfly science review indelibly wrote Parmesan’s name right along with Rachel Carson’s, in my memory.
Shameful moments for science.
First, Ms. Parmesan did NOT leave the US because of Macron’s offer. She left to go to the UK long before that offer was made. If she goes to France now, because of the offer, she will be leaving the UK, not the USA.
Secondly, thanks for the reminder of Jim Steele inspired slam dunking of Camille’s butterfly research in the Sierra’s, which if I recall correctly, showed her work and conclusions to be sloppy and wrong.The butterflies she claimed were being forced to extinction due to “global warming” were in fact doing just fine, just following some longer term cyclical patterns that Ms. Parmesan didn’t understand and apparently, didn’t really care to understand.
I’ll editorialize further in saying Ms. Parmesan will never understand complex biological behavior while she looks at the questions tendentiously, and works backwards from foregone conclusions. But in the CAGW alarmist’s world, it’s a great way to get funded. But then came Trump, and now some of that funding is being threatened, which is the real reason so many CAGW alarmists are upset with him. They want their government teat to continue lactating indefinitely.
First,?
I’ve not a clue what you are imperatively responding to, Mickey.
Other than that, I agree with most of your comment.
I care not what/where Parmesan claims she is emigrating from. As, Parmesan apparently has convinced France to hand over one million $ or is that ₣, or perhaps € in return for Parmesan immigrating, or claiming to immigrate to France?
For all we know, France is giving her the money and immigrant citizen status, while Parmesan conducts her anti-science in England. Those poor butterflies…
France’s loss, on multiple fronts.
Science’s loss, as that lady now has the cash to attain greater infamy.
America and England’s gain. Though England certainly has surfeit of remaining climate alarmism inertia.
Perhaps we’ll hear that Lewserandowsky, Cook and other’s of their ilk will somehow emigrate from the USA in order to grasp some of that free French cash trough.
Meanwhile, Trump and his Administration should be encouraging a long list of bad science alarmists to emigrate to France, before England’s alarmists grab all of the offered cash.
Consider it part of Trump’s naughty list.
Oh, sorry, AtheoK, I was responding to the headline over the article, “One of President Macron’s Climate Defectors.” Camille Parmisan is NOT one of those, and I was jarred by the carelessness of the quasi-explicit implication that she was such a person. I guess I should have unthreaded that comment from my response to you about Jim Steele’s deconstruction of her work. Sorry.
One last follow-up on my thoughts about Ms. Parmesan. She reacted to Jim Steele’s requests for her methods and data (so that he could replicate her experiments) by flatly refusing and even trying to dissuade him. This is exactly the same reaction Phil Jones, at East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit had to Steve McIntyre. In one of the more (in)famous Climategate e-mails, Jones told McIntyre that he would not share his data, because Steve “just wanted to find something wrong with it,” before then engaging with other members of the hockey team to conspire that he should never have it, even to the point of breaking the UK’s Freedom of Information laws as they pertain to “public servants” (scare quotes used advisedly).
Now, I know some are averse to ever mentioning the word conspiracy, as if we risk becoming the target of a Stephen Lewandowsky smear. Hey, we already are his target. He’s part of the same team, the same conspiracy. Can you imagine that Lew will ever consider even the possibility, let alone formally study the question of how two leading lights of the CAGW team came to the identical conclusion that refusing to cooperate with replication of their work was the best way to advance “science?” Can you ever imagine that he’d study whether or not his definition of “the community” had advanced to the point where it was a corrupt conspiracy of groupthinking cult members? No, of course he can’t.
And here we can turn to another famous Climategate rumination, Steven Schneider’s Faustian challenge, which is, do you want to be honest (i.e. objective, scientific) or do you want to be “effective” (i.e. lie, propagandize, spin, exaggerate). I think i have the measure of Camille Parmesan, Phil Jones, CRU, Mann, Lewandowsky, et. al. on that question.
Mickey, Phil Jones’ comment was to Warwick Hughes, not to Steve McIntyre. Warwick had noticed anomalous warmth in Siberia, and thought it because of faulty measurements.
He asked Phil Jones for his list of stations and methods. Phil’s reply was, “We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” One of consensus climatology’s greatest of their great moments in the integrity of science. 🙂
Steve McIntyre did write about that episode, here.
Pat Frank, thanks, I stand corrected. I recall that McIntyre was stonewalled by the CRU and Mann at several points, and I incorrectly recalled that the Jones Climategate e-mail had been directed to him. It’s instructive that McIntyre, Hughes and Steele have all been stonewalled by researchers too scared to be audited, who do not want to be accountable to their public funders.
Didn’t comrade Hansen say in 1988 that NYC would be under water in 30 years?
That’s like, well, now.
Happy 2018 to everyone!
Does anyone know if there exists a compilation of all the AGW predictions that have proved false? If one doesn’t yet exist, perhaps it’s time to start one?
There was the warmlist, but it has been discontinued due to heavy maintenance involved.
One still can look at the beautiful collection here:
“A complete list of things caused by global warming”
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
http://climatechangepredictions.org/
Good point,
I wrote about it in my blog.
https://thedemiseofchristchurch.com/2016/05/06/un-headquarters-and-usd1-2-billion-upgrade-and-rising/
The UN obviously does not give sea level much thought!
Cheers
Roger
Hansen’s prediction(s) were more immediate, until Hansen, and others protecting their fake franchise, extended that prediction.
Hansen’s predictions have been busted at every flood and fiery doom deadline.
A biologist, studying flutterbys, not a climate scientist, being persecuted by the evil President Trump, lamenting about the ignorance of the unwashed masses:))… Got to love the spin.
Not just any biologist…” one of the world’s most influential climate change scientists”
Never heard of her
Jim Steele has written about her work, here and in his book.
I was afraid to look her up; she’s a beauty queen compared to Naomi Oreskes.
She’s the one that Jim Steele has written about several times. She was one of the first to claim an observation that a species had its habitat changed due to global changey-change-change. As I recall, the butterfly species had expanded its range, not reduced and much of the effect was due to habitat changes due to humans – not warming. She got a Science paper and now everyone quotes her paper as “evidence” of GW induced species migration. All from memory, so you will have to look up the Jim Steele posts for the details.
Thanks guys….I do remember Jim writing about that….I just didn’t remember it was her, shows you where my priorities are! LOL
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/14/fabricating-climate-doom-part-1-parmesans-butterfly-effect/
R. Shearer,
Trivially true. 1/2-point above one is an improvement, but still not saying much.
Latitude,
I share your luck.
I also have never heard of her.
“…Frankly, I am not just angry at the far right, extreme Republican groups but also with [some] liberals who bought the Russian propaganda and who are not taking responsibility…”
Which liberals and what Russian propaganda?
Talk about a “denier” who is “believing in fiction in the face of reality” and “still living in a fictional universe.”
“People like believing in fiction in the face of reality. We’ve had many climate disasters and they haven’t woken up the minority who are still living in a fictional universe. People want to believe this lie …”
As stated by others … just listen to what they (this butterfly lady type) are accusing of doing … that is what they (dem-progressive-lib) are actually up to.
What a dimwit. Good riddance.
That joke about raising the IQ of both continents comes to mind.
I’d guess that her French colleagues might have views on her being their on the franc that they might have had and that French sarcasm might be turned up a notch or two.
I wonder how she’ll stand up to that.- or safe spaces part of the deal?
Bruce,
Completelyagree, but I’d call her a nitwit. Same thing.
Bruce & Joel: I think “bugwit” fits best.
Before the disaster occurring in time span of 2070 – 2090 will Earth warm up a little?
In terms of lefties predicting doom- which is common and often and for varying reasons [silly reasons- like, over population, to name favorite one for last thousands of years or so], the 2070 to 2090 choice is more distant into the future than is normal.
As a biologist, has the process of photosynthesis ever been considered? Rain, hail or shine, it is fundamental to all carbon-based life forms.
Camille Parmesan
Here’s her bio:
https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/staff/camille-parmesan
OMG, cheese is talking ….
Grating, isn’t it?
“Mike McMillan December 31, 2017 at 5:09 pm
Grating, isn’t it?”
GROOOAAAANNN. 🙂 Made me laugh
No use asking ‘OK who cut the cheese’ because we all know the answer?
Good Wisconsin cheese curds “sweak” when you bite them.
Wisconsin went for Trump in 16 tho’.
So parmesan is Fake Cheese.
Parmesan was used as currency once.
Parmesan as currency went out of style due to the difficulty making change.
“What has made you leave the US?”…I needed a job
Yup. Tough duty. 2-3 year vacation in Paris. Wonder what she will do after that.
Hopefully by then we will be out of the EU and she will need a job visa to get back into the UK. But I am sure Texas will welcome her back with open arms (and wallets).
Maybe she was just cheesed off?
“…But hurricanes like Harvey and Katrina have woken up middle-of-the-road people…”
Oh, now they “woke.”
Katrina was 12 years ago.
Katrina was 12 years ago and the thermometer needle has barely fluttered since then. Interesting.
Hurricanes apparently were a very rare event.
…practically non-existent in Paris.
In Hartford, Hereford, and Hampshire, hurricanes hardly ever happen.
She talks about hurricanes, so maybe she should look up the damage caused by her namesake hurricane (Camille – August,1969). That was during a period of global cooling.
I hope they woke up if they were in the middle-of-the-road when Harvey and Katrina hit.
The butterfly world (whatever the scientific scientific name may be) of Michael Mann. The synonym of fraud!
Butterflys bring up a memory of the past. Melbourne in Oz was laid out in about 1830 by a very wise planner for the future, with three ring roads out to about fifty miles. The first was about 10 miles from the CBD as the crow flies.
By about 1970 we needed that road and most of it was built, then we got a lefty female premier whom took notice of the greenies they out forward this fantasy that an endangered butterfly was on the route of the final stage of the ring road. This stupid premier canceled the ring road and sold of the land to developers.This had been held as government land since 1830.
Result her ruinous bottom line got a cash injection and now in 2018 we have traffic chaos.
It was discovered not long after her decision that the butterflies were thriving over thousands of miles.
Trust a green or a warmest NO
I would like to understand how “butterflies and other species are affected (effected?)” by a tenth of a degree per decade. It seems that would be quite difficult to detect, let alone make changes to their prime directive – live long enough to propagate the species.
I would also like to hear about how they coped with climate change in the past, and how today’s climate change is different in effecting them versus past climate change.
Maybe she would like to give us a quick executive summary of her findings, since this is “The world’s most viewed site on global warming and climate change”. Seems like it would be a great place for her to voice her findings and analysis of those findings.
And lastly I am wondering if anyone thinks about what level of “butterfly / climate variation” study is appropriate for funding, based on the world of possible funding choices? Do we have a surplus of this type of study, or is it underfunded?
You can do whatever research you like about how prophesies will affect things (and it’s perfectly acceptable and valid to do so), but it proves nothing about the cause of climate change and, therefore, means Parmesan is NOT a climate scientist!
She is not a climate scientist. She just had to “kiss the ring” to get the funding. And at that point she is forced to defend the faith of face the Inquisition. Guess we really haven’t learned much from the mistakes of our past.
Jim Steele had a piece about here work on WUWT a few years back. He clearly refuter her hypothesis by showing other factors that were at work on the butterfly populations she wrote about.
We are all better off with her in France being paid with French taxes.
We’re not ALL better off – I live in and pay taxes in France. Someone has to do it.
SteveT
Yowch!
…”People want to believe this lie and I don’t know how to get through to them…”
You could start by making climate predictions that actually come true. Its been 30 years we’ve been hearing you people make dire climate predictions, when are we going to see one come true? Or a prediction that isn’t better explained by natural variation?
Is there a definable, explainable process by which brainless dogma gets dogmatized and is then propagated to seek out and infect additional weak and susceptible minds? And it appears that this lady wasn’t even a journalism major? Go figure.
Yes. It’s called Progressive Socialism.
funny bloke this Macarony, we know CAGW is a nonsense, don’t we Vladimir?
?zoom=2
Its quite obvious .
She believes that when a flutterby flaps its wings on the other side of the ocean that the effects can be felt many miles away .
So her findings are that less fluterbys =less wind
Therefore she has come up with a logarithm that shows that less wind =more heat
Pretty simple
I agree, she does look Pretty, shame she’s so simple….& a bit cheesey
Chaotic processes rule her mind but result in coherently venal action.
Having a very cruisy New Year’s Day in Oz, chilling out and listening to our old vinyl collection. Found one of my favourite albums by the Dutch group Focus from the 70’s, double album “Focus 3” which has this extract from Virgil’s Aeneid on the inside cover:-
“Forthwith Rumour runs through Libya’s great cities-
Rumour of all evils the most swift.
Speed lends her strength and she wins vigour as she goes;
small at first through fear, soon she mounts up to heaven,
and walks the ground with head hidden in the clouds.”
The CAGW Rumour has spread way beyond ancient Carthage and now infests much of the world with the likes of Camille Parmesan having their heads “hidden in the clouds” of nonscience.
As evidenced by his epic The Nature of Things, Virgil’s intellectual inspirer Lucretius had a far greater grasp of scientific reality than the likes of intellectual pygmies such as Professor Parmesan not to mention 2000+ years of intellectual inspiration to science and true scientists as a legacy.
And Professor Parmesan? Well the toy boy president put out the call and she came running….
Komade Kuma’
Ah, Focus. Brings back memories.
https://youtu.be/aAgvTsVcQgQ
https://southfront.org/emmanuel-macron-rothschilds-choice-for-president-of-france/
“funny bloke this Macarony” – Goes quite well with Parmesan though. 8-D
Oh boy that was a cheesy one. An Italian might even say it was a’ pasta joke.
Isn’t this just a typical example of a climate alarmist being subsidised to put out propaganda though? Exactly the kind of thing the alarmists try to blame the oil companies for, in terms of (allegedly) paying ‘Deniers’ to put out propaganda. Pot, kettle, black.
Intentional malignant projection is a traditional leftist political tactic.
“People like believing in fiction in the face of reality. We’ve had many climate disasters and they haven’t woken up the minority who are still living in a fictional universe.”
Like the completely fictional, failed computer simulations, alarmists call reality? Pure Projection much?
“People want to believe this lie and I don’t know how to get through to them.”
We know the feeling. Maybe start by doffing the virtual reality head set, log off you game of Sim cLIEmate and go out side? Collect some actual empirical observations?
Anyone else craving macaroni and cheese?
I’d prefer hot dog in cheese (:-))
That’s bad, on sooo many levels. Of course, I could just have a dirty mind, too.
Sliced tomato (grilled) on top is obligatoire for me, and Parmesan will be lost on it, needs a stronger flavour cheese.
Jim Steele effectively critiques Dr. Parmeson’s (and other’s) science, in Landscapes and Cycles.
President Macron’s getting Parmeson is very much like the guy who stole my old car. Gotta figure they both got just about what they deserve.
Plus many. Only difference is your car probanly still ran.
Camille Parmesan, was evidently a big cheese biologist at the universities of Texas and Plymouth, until the brighter future for biological research loomed under President Macron. As “one of the world’s most influential climate change scientists”, Camille obviously knows that it is best to make predictions about the future that will become evident only after 2070 – 2090. There is clear field here in France under President Macron for a start to 50 – 70 years of reasearch and extreme predictions about the future predicamemnts that will face butterflies and other species, affected by ‘Climate Change/Global Warming’ across all continents, not just Europe.. It sounds a great job free from responsibility or accountability until 2070 – 2090.
Macron and Cheese
I get it now. Obama was running a quid pro quo scheme with grantees and now that same scheme is operating in France on a smaller scale. The grantees are paid to be vocal tools for the policy objective and science loses.
Eric,
“Is it just me, or does the settled science date of this “imminent” climate disaster always seem to be galloping off further into the distant future?”
Well, it seems to me to be in virtual superposition . . both galloping further ahead, and rushing back at us in hurricanes and cold spells and whatnot, simultaneously ; )
Yup ! Quantum disasters! They are 100% real until you look for them.