Al Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Freeze’

Josh has something to say, or rather, draw, about the recent kerfuffle over Al Gore and Michael Mann’s beliefs as covered here on WUWT and in the Washington Times:

Al Gore under fire for claiming icy storm is ‘exactly what we should expect from climate crisis’

Former vice president links freezing weather along eastern seaboard to global warming

Former Vice President Al Gore is taking heat for his claim that the icy nor’easter blanketing the eastern seaboard with snow and freezing temperatures is “exactly what we should expect from the climate crisis.”

The debate over global warming’s impact on Winter Storm Grayson was already raging when Mr. Gore jumped in with a tweet positing that the storm was consistent with human-caused climate change, and citing an article by Penn State climate scientist Michael E. Mann.

“It’s bitter cold in parts of the US, but climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann explains that’s exactly what we should expect from the climate crisis,” said Mr. Gore in a Thursday tweet.

Josh has it covered:

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
indefatigablefrog

Yeah, apparently we are now the fools, for not realizing that global warming causes, antarctic mass gain, record antarctic sea ice extent, net gain of coastal land globally, a rate of sea level rise which is not discernibly different to that seen in the 1930’s, an increase in polar bear numbers, extreme cold winters in the US with extreme heavy snowfall etc etc
We should never have expected anything else, because even though the opposite of all of these things was long predicted by climate scientists, the various novel post-hoc explanations have now all been revealed.
And it is skeptics who can now be treated as fools for failing to adapt to the attempts to fit the data to the hypothesis.
Silly us, really.

Latitude

antarctic mass gain….which totally invalidates the computer games

Leo Morgan

No, the first prediction was for mass gain.
When they didn’t see that in the measurements, they changed the predictions to decreasing ice. Then Zwally et al explained how it really does exist in the measurements, and they’ve changed the prediction back to increasing mass.
EVERY possibility has been predicted and is ‘just as they expected’.

RICHARD FEYNMAN ON THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD (1964)

at 0:39/9:58: ”If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.”

At 4:01/9:58: “You can always prove any definite theory wrong.”

At 6:09/9:58: “By having a vague theory, it’s possible to get either result.”

THAT IS THE ALARMISTS’ KEY STRATEGY – “By having a vague theory, it’s possible to get either result.”

It is clear that these “Climate Change” alarmists are not scientists – they are probably students of the humanities.

“The theoretical broadening which comes from having many humanities subjects on the campus is offset by the general dopiness of the people who study these things.”
Letter to Robert Bacher (6 April 1950)
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

Richard P. Feynman: Theory, Prediction, Observation

at 16:02/57:52. On Causality: “EFFECTS CANNOT PRECEDE THEIR CAUSES”.

Excerpts from the post below:

“CO2 LAGS TEMPERATURE BY ~9 MONTHS in the modern data record.

THE CLAIM THAT ”CO2 IS THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF GLOBAL TEMPERATURE” ESSENTIALLY CLAIMS THAT “THE FUTURE IS CAUSING THE PAST” – an untenable hypothesis (within this space-time continuum).”

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/24/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-297/comment-page-1/#comment-2701359

[excerpted]

It is increasingly evident that global warming alarmism is a false crisis, promoted for political and financial gain. It is the greatest fraud, in dollar terms, in history.

The “Great Conundrum” for climate science that most scientists are still afraid to discuss, is that I proved in 2008** that CO2 LAGS TEMPERATURE BY ~9 MONTHS in the modern data record. Humlum et al re-affirmed and expanded this hypo in 2013**. Ocean temperatures (e.g. Nino34 area) lead atmospheric temperatures, which lead atmospheric CO2 trends – that is the mechanism, so the claim that ”CO2 is the primary driver of global temperature” essentially claims that “the future is causing the past” – an untenable hypothesis (within this space-time continuum).

For the past 30+ years, the popular notion that “increasing atm. CO2 is causing dangerous global warming” has clearly been proven false, based on the evidence. Tens of trillions of dollars have been misappropriated due to this scam, and energy systems have been greatly compromised.

Allan in Calgary

**References:

1. MacRae, 2008
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/CO2vsTMacRae.pdf

2. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1979/mean:12/derivative/plot/uah5/from:1979/scale:0.22/offset:0.14

3. Humlum et al, January 2013
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658
Highlights of Humlum:
– Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature.
– Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5–10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature.
– Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature.
– Changes in ocean temperatures explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980.
– Changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions.

“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.”
– attributed to Albert Einstein

Jeff Alberts

”If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.”

Can’t agree with that one as a blanket statement. There have been countless invalid experiments. I think he should have said “if it disagrees with observation, it’s wrong.”

Tom Gelsthorpe

“Global warming causes whatever I say it causes, and anyone who claims different is a heretic who belongs in the clink.” Albert Bore

NME666

if F 1 race cars could only travel as fast as those goal posts………………..

Ricdre

Those goal post are moving so fast that they are getting harder to detect because the red-shift has slid the light coming from them down into the radio spectrum.

MarkW

They are moving so fast, they arrived before they left.

Ricdre

Like that young lady named Bright?

NW sage

Bright from the Isle of Wight?

Philip of Taos

Good thing it’s Globul Warming if it was Globul Cooling we would reall be screwed.

Brian McCandliss

Philip of Taos what’s the difference, the result would be the same: i.e. they’d say every incident proved the claim, and demand wasteful measures to change it.

Brian McCandliss

“Warming.” Mr. Gore, you keep saying this word. I think it does not mean what you think it means.

Perry

Engage brain before opening mouth, is advice that Igor has never taken to heart. the DM has his number.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5248817/How-alligators-survive-North-Carolinas-arctic-blast.html

Interesting.

Richard Thornton

If we put solar windmills on top of their snouts can we stop global warming?

Brian McCandliss

No, because solar wind doesn’t exist in AGW… at least they ignore the relevance of it.

Since no one can predict the climate, the story lines are all post-mortem repairs to stay relevant. When a natural science model predicts everything, it cannot be invalidated, and as such, is not a true model. When warming becomes the temperature is doing anything , then it requires to use language in a way that words no longer have meaning. This makes it hard to communicate, presuming we want to communicate efficiently with intelligent people..

Notanist

“…When a natural science model predicts everything, it cannot be invalidated, and as such, is not a true model….”

And thus the tipping points become “tripping points”, where such models always fall flat as useful tools for predicting the future.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing

It may be more accurate to call them “climate alarm tripping points”. Each one, when reached, causes the catastrophism to stumble. Each wobble creates a moment of alarm followed by a lurch in a new direction, heading for the next tripping point.

Given how unpredictable climate change can be, apparently, the consistent failure to reach any predicted point of catastrophe is itself worthy of examination. What else about climate is so consistent, save the failure of such catastrophic predictions?

Somewhere in there is a consistent, working formula. All we have to do is find it, invert it and presto: get the truth.

MikeyParks

Well stated. We’re up against a “self-sealing” argument; the type of logic invented by fools to repel the truth.

Brian McCandliss

Miley Parks aka proving a negative against compulsive liars… which is why science has something called “The Null Hypothesis;” but scientists WAIVED that requirement when they responders to AGW-panicmongers who didn’t meet that burden, which would be like a judge talking to a cop about evidence against a suspect arrested without probable cause; i.e. both scientist and judge would be derelict in their duty, since both are required to throw the whole case out until the burden IS met.
Unfortunately, most scientists don’t take their duty as seriously as most judges, since there’s less accountability.

Brian McCandliss

“Donald Kasper January 9, 2018 at 2:09 am
Since no one can predict the climate, the story lines are all post-mortem repairs to stay relevant.”

As a professional panic-monger. But I blame the true scientists just as much for ENTERTAINING them without a proven hypothesis; it takes two to make an argument. and scientists have a DUTY to remain silent when the burden of the Null hypothesis has not been met.

In the north of England we are having our usual winter weather: rain, mist, frost, sleet, sunshine, wind etc…it’s just one terrible event after another and all a sign of the dreaded Climate Crisis.

jipebe29

So, according to Al Gore and Michael Mann, cold = hot. The great thermodynamicist Clausius will come out of his grave and pull their ears for scientific heresy.

Bloke down the pub

Al looks like he takes his holidays in Skegness. Oh so bracing.

Hey – leave Skeggy out of this!!!!

john

Surely we must be approaching the end times for this farce? We have gone completely round the clock with the human-caused climatic catastrophe now. From new ice age in the 70’s to runaway Venusian-like warming over the next half century and back again to new ice age again at this time. We have people writing papers about how carbon dioxide is going to trigger mini ice ages – post hoc of course because of unpredicted NH cryogenic winters.

No one from the carbon dioxide religion ever predicts anything even remotely correctly and all is post hoc hideously tortured ‘explanations’. There cannot be anyone who would stand up and attempt to defend a hypothesis which claims every conceivable climatic outcome to be the result of a single tiny anthropogenic component as science – can there? There has never been any shaman in history who would have expected people to swallow Unfalsifiability at that kind of level. In a perverse kind of way the only scientific thing about the whole circus is the way the climate alarm community have managed to define in such a rigorous manner the absolute standard for unfalsifiability. The ‘anthropogenic climate change’ hypothesis is forever set at an unfalsifiability value of 1 and all other unfalsifiable hypotheses range between zero and < 1.

There cannot be any honest person free of vested interest who actually falls for this lunacy – can there? Or is it really the case that the new paradigm is becoming, climate science gets a pass from the normal scientific strictures because Pascal's Wager?

Bruce Ploetz

cephus0, if the point of the CAGW propaganda had anything to do with truth or science it would have ended decades ago. It is not and has never been about anything but global governance and wealth redistribution.

Bob Tisdale came up with a great way to explain it a couple of days ago.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/01/06/dad-why-are-you-a-global-warming-denier-a-short-story-thats-right-for-the-times/

Arguing with global warming true believers is like wrestling with a pig – you both end up covered in mud and the pig enjoys the tussle.

The true believers are talking about feelings and self-loathing, the skeptics are talking about boring old data and graphs that nobody understands anyway. Like any true believer, confrontation with provable facts only drives the believer into his illusions that much harder.

https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html

To a true believer, using facts only proves you are an unbeliever. Everything you say after “the temperatures in the 1800s were colder than today for natural reasons” is like the “wah wah wah” sound you hear in the Peanuts cartoons when the adults are talking.

If and when temperatures really go down, they will suddenly “discover” that CO2 really does act like a blanket and is cooling the planet. Catastrophe! If it stays the same, that means it will go up in a hundred years! Catastrophe! If it goes up a little they will scream about record highs! Catastrophe! They need a plausible catastrophe to justify their agenda and any port will do in a storm.

Toneb

“Arguing with global warming true believers is like wrestling with a pig – you both end up covered in mud and the pig enjoys the tussle.”

Actually I prefer this ….

Never argue with an idiot, as they will drag you down to their level and beat you by experience

Latitude

Never argue with an idiot that believes some theory that has never made one correct prediction

ClimateOtter

toneb~ So we should ignore you, yes?

jim

As well as self loathing, its also about loathing anyone or anything that appears to be ‘happier’, more contented than yourself. Living a certain way to gain ever lasting salvation for your soul, has always been the power control knob for religions. AGW is no different, its just Gaia as the god-head.

Toneb

“toneb~ So we should ignore you, yes?”

You could try being knowledgeable of the science, not the kind found here that is.
But of course people are here for the reason that they don’t.
That is my definition of an “idiot”.

Patvann

I feel your pain, and stand on my chair pumping my fist. THAT’S the proper rant for this cannard!

Javier

that’s exactly what we should expect from the climate crisis,” said Mr. Gore

Except that it is a lie. If it was what we should expect, it would have been said so beforehand.

This is what was expected:

2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, predicts that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”
The Independent. March 20, 2000

2001 IPCC TAR (AR3) predicts that milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms IPCC TAR WG2

They have changed the predictions after the failure of the original ones. The mark of a false hypothesis.

Toneb

“predicts that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

You missed the bit where he said “winter snowfall in England will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

Yes, an idiot who shot his mouth off to be evermore mythologised by “contrarians”.
England is not the Globe and one mouthy idiot does not make IPCC consensus.
And can you point out where he said it would happen in the next 16 years?

“They have changed the predictions after the failure of the original ones. The mark of a false hypothesis.”

No they did not “fail” as we haven’t gone long enough for them to have “failed”.

So…. would you expect a weather organisation, who having made a forecast 5 days out to continue with that forecast up to T+0 even though new data shows it to be incorrect.
Why should climate scientists have to be correct from the get-go?
Oh! of course, that’s so you can use that logical fallacy to denigrate everything concerning AGW science.

“2001 IPCC TAR (AR3) predicts that milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms IPCC TAR WG2”

And so they will given enough time.
So you expect 16 years to be enough time?
Really?

In short the Serengeti strategy is at work here, along with an ability to realise that the consequences of AGW lie for the most part decades into the future.

Latitude

“Why should climate scientists have to be correct”…about anything at any time ever…..so far they haven’t been

If there was one word of truth in any of it…..they would all be making the same predictions….instead of all over the place and hoping one sticks

Javier

Yes, an idiot who shot his mouth off

No. A perfect example of career escalation through climate alarmism.

David Viner.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-viner-fienvsci-14a76630/
1991-2007. Senior Research Scientist and Climate Change MSc Director. Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia
2007-2008. Principal Specialist – Climate Change. Natural England (Government Agency).
2008-2011. Global Director – Climate Change, Environment and Sustainability. British Council.
2011-Now. Global Practice Leader and International Climate Resilience Strategist. World Leading Infrastructure Consultancy. Mott MacDonald

He has been lavishly rewarded for his idiocy.

you expect a weather organisation, who having made a forecast 5 days out to continue with that forecast up to T+0 even though new data shows it to be incorrect.

I expect after being shown incorrect not to turn around and say their hypothesis predicts the opposite.

So you expect 16 years to be enough time?

I expect things to move in the expected direction as per the hypothesis, yes. The second coming of Jesus was predicted 2000 years ago. Nobody has shown them wrong, but predictions that don’t happen within a reasonable time frame are useless. If AGW is to affect the world in 200 years what is the point in worrying now? We should be better prepared to face the problem in 100 years. And a lot of things change in 100 years. The problem might not be such.

Norman MacLeod

So . . . when was the last time parts of the Sahara Desert received up to 15″ of snow capping the sand dunes?

Mike Bryant

*snicker*

Michael Jankowski

***And so they will given enough time.
So you expect 16 years to be enough time?
Really?***

It is for the “signs of climate change are all around us” crowd that wants to link every weather event to global warming/climate change…just as they are doing with snowstorms now.

AGW is not Science

Sorry, but your argument is missing some context; when we were experiencing winters with very little snow, the aforementioned “prediction” about the “children not knowing what snow was” was made; when we later started having winters with LOTS of snow, then the latest “gospel” became “heavier snowfall is “consistent with” global warming,” which shows you that their BS does nothing more than change with the direction of the wind. The true mark of a false hypothesis – one that tells you the catastrophe supposedly caused by their pet hobgoblin is whatever is happening outside your window at the moment…

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing

Tonyb

“England is not the Globe ”

In climate science, a single tree can be the entire globe. Try to keep up. It is all about how you treat the numbers. Starting with “42”, one can, using computers, especially large ones, reverse engineer that single pair of digits to produce not only a complete explanation of life, the universe and everything, but even the colour of rainbows on Proxima B.

Never underestimate the power of creative logic and inductive mathematics.

Gerald Machnee

RE Toneb
**England is not the Globe and one mouthy idiot does not make IPCC consensus.**
Wrong again!
According to The Mann, the Bristlecone Pine was the entire globe and one “**********” made the IPCC consensus.

Toneb

“I expect things to move in the expected direction as per the hypothesis, yes”

Except that the expected direction is not a monotomic trend. As you bang on about, there is NV affecting the long-term trend (but increasingly in the background). And it’s expected that there will be a greater “stirring” of NH PJS as that happens.

“but predictions that don’t happen within a reasonable time frame are useless”

Sorry but I put it to you that 17 years is an obviously unreasonable amout of time to expect that “prediction” to happen within.
And most of the so-called “failed” predictions are also well down the line. By that I mean several decades.

“Guilty as charged!”

Hardly, as he said “our children”. Didn’t say when.
Anytime in their lifetime would fit.
And as I said, one idiot mouthing off whilst not realising it would be twisted forever more to promote doubt in AGW science in “Contrarian” mythology.

Do you want to see the NH temp anomaly chart?
I have posted it several times on these “it’s snowing here (in the US, in the Sahara) so AGW is wrong threads.
Cold/warm air moves around. And snow is not just a measure of cold but more importantly WV content.
Also a warm Arctic is the corrollary of the cold air moving south. A feature of AGW.
Sorry and all that,

Javier January 9, 2018 at 3:03 am
This is what was expected:

2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, predicts that within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

Speaking of England he also said that heavy snow will return occasionally but when it does we will be unprepared. “We’re really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time.”

Such as happened in December perhaps?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/09/snow-bomb-set-cause-chaos-commuters/

Jones

Oh please, when will this madness of crowds end?

Peta of Newark

Very simple Jonesy – when they/we start eating properly AND no longer inflict life long brain damage on our children, by removing them off their mother’s breast before at least 24 months old, ideally 30 months.

There is a glimmer…. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-42608071

But meanwhile look at the madness of turning Palm Oil saturated fat into diesel and gawd knows whatever.
Total lunacy, that stuff could be curing diabetes and by taking liquid vegetable oils out of our diets, be reducing the incidence of cancer.

Certainly burn corn, do not eat it as the tsunami of glucose doing so releases into human bloodstreams rots minds, bodies and brains in equal and complete measure. Hence the madness to which you allude.

Also, DO NOT expect the growing of said corn, over vast expanses of ground to NOT affect the local and ultimately global weather…

Scott

It was really inconvenient that the cold snap happened over most of the US over the holidays, the narrative amongst family and friends could not be controlled and if my family is any guide it was quite negative against the global warmers. Al Gore lost a few years of “progress” in a couple weeks.

commieBob

The true believers will use Gore’s propaganda to soothe their cognitive dissonance.

When people form and cling to false beliefs despite overwhelming evidence, the phenomenon is labeled “motivated reasoning”. In other words, “rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe” link

CAGW is a castle in the sky built on a moldering foundation of motivated reasoning.

NME666

organized religion is a testament to that!!!

paqyfelyc

Those CAGW believers succeeded in having me missing the intolerant catholic church of old time, complete with Spanish inquisition. Sure they were ruthless, but less so than their contemporary men, while CAGW believers are MORE so.

JJM

Organized religion isn’t demanding trillions of your tax dollars to prevent Armageddon.

MarkW

Can you point to this massive amounts of data that you believe disproves all organized religions?

Confirmation bias. One feels oneself doing it and its compelling.
By the way, how do you manage those neat blocks for the quotes?

Bruce Ploetz

David, HTML tags make the magic happen. All the rules are here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/test/
The quoted text blocks use the “blockquote” tag.

commieBob

MarkW January 9, 2018 at 9:58 am

Can you point to this massive amounts of data that you believe disproves all organized religions?

Are organized religions a testament to motivated reasoning? No more so than any other organization of humans. 🙂

The Orthodox don’t seem to trust any kind of human reasoning.

… Orthodoxy is not intimidated by man’s intellectual accomplishments. She does not bow to them and change the Christian Faith to make it consistent with the results of human thought and science. link

Tom Gelsthorpe

“Everything is happening just the way I said it would. None of my predictions have ever been wrong. I am infallible. Anyone who doubts me is a heretic.” Albert Bore

Greg Woods

We could do with a remake of that Batman movie with Al replacing Arnold as Mr. Freeze…

Latitude

13,000 tourists are TRAPPED in Swiss ski resort after heavy snowfall blocks all roads and the train line

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5250315/13-000-tourists-TRAPPED-Swiss-ski-resort.html

paqyfelyc

gosh, 13000 climate refugees. Where is Bob Geldoff when you need him?

paqyfelyc

Meaning, “climate scientist” ™ now have a new model of climate :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_refrigerator
the more you heat it, the colder it gets.
Ain’t it “Cool”?

David A Smith

I am suddenly reminded of a Monty Python sketch. It is right for our times.
https://youtu.be/UwY98217hFE?t=651

kokoda the Deplorable

After watching Dennis Moore, I can understand why Britain is being taken over by Muslims.

David A Smith

PS the good part is after 10:30

Lloyd

Hewlett Packard Backed Report Includes Planned Penal Colonies for Climate Skeptics
by Eric Worrall
Guest essay by Eric Worrall h/t Willie Soon & Quadrant Online – the following are excerpts from a climate report which the Hewlett Packard website describes as a collaboration between HP Labs and Forum for the Future. 2028: Jean-Claude Bertillon, leader of the No Climate Change Party in Canada, is convicted of denying the existence […]

I got that email but can’t find the article can anyone tell me does that mean it was falsified?

LT

Is there anything that cannot be blamed on AGW..

TA

No, nothing.

Auto

Not even religious mania?
Hmmmm. Oh dear.
It IS worse than I thought.

Auto

CJ Fritz

Historically, everybody that has ever predicted the end of the world (by any mechanism) has been wrong.

All life on Earth has the ability to adapt to climate, if this were not the case, none of us would be here alive presently. 2 degrees C over a century is almost insignificant, if that were enough to cause mass extinction, we would all be dead already.

Things that make you go- Hmmmmm…

It is not just Al Gore making idiotic claims, it must have been a bad news day in the UK today. BBC 2:00pm radio news had an item about turtles in Australia. Apparently due to warming of the oceans 2/3 of them hatch as females and only 1/3 as males (lucky males) because gender is determined by temperature (only the BBC could get two left wing favourites, gender and climate change in one news item). The solution is hilarious, erect tents on the beaches where they lay their eggs to keep them in the shade! No doubt some of the turtles will claim their tent by going to the beach at dawn and leaving a towel underneath it. The news team appear to have sobered up by the 3:00pm news because there was an item about the worst snowfall in the Alps for ten years stranding 10,000 tourists and no mention of gender fluid turtles.
In yet more lunacy to persuade the world that climate change IS happening, climate “scientists” have come out with a new excuse as to why sea levels are not rising, it is because the weight of the water is causing the ocean floors to sink.
You really couldn’t make this c**p up!

“You really couldn’t make this c**p up!”

The BBC could and making c**p up has become their signature trade mark. They are completely free to broadcast and print whatever garbage and lies they choose and are immune from any and all criticism. They are EU/state funded with compulsory tax payer cash to the tune of £145.50 per annum per household. There are no comments allowed on any BBC production and they do not answer letter, emails or any other form of communication. They are a law entirely unto themselves and it shows in the completely sublime and untroubled way in which they promulgate their pseudoscientific deceptions. To watch the BBC on any kind of ‘science’ even remotely connected with climate or the environment is a totally jaw-dropping experience for people with any kind of scientific background. They tell direct lies in full antiphase with all of the available evidence. Once legendary for impartial high quality reporting – now widely known as a pure propaganda arm of the Globalist establishment and a national embarrassment.

cepheus0 Totally agree with you, I have to pay the licence fee or get fined or go to prison! To get some value from my £145.50, I listen to Radio 2, which has some degree of neutrality (apart from the News), compared with their TV programmes, especially Question Time. The way they treated David Bellamy (a true scientist, who publicly questioned the evidence for AGW) was as disgusting as their reverence of David Attenborough, who has prostituted himself, so that they continue to fund his programmes. In addition to your excellent description of the BBC you can also add hypocrisy for the difference in pay between their male and female employees who do exactly the same jobs.

Curious George

“Climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann explains ..” reminds me of an old East German joke: The minister of economy comrade Mittag sits at the stairs in front of the Central Committee building and weeps. The Secretary General comrade Honecker asks him:
– Why are you weeping?
– Because I don’t understand how our economy works.
– Come with me, I’ll explain it to you.
– Please don’t. I have been explaining it for years.

toorightmate

The old East German joke is Angela Merkel.

Andy Pattullo

“exactly what we should expect from the climate crisis”: $$$$$$$$$$$
Exactly what we should expect from the promoters of the climate crisis: utter rubbish disguised as science.

Arbeegee

So to recap Climate Change:
Hot: to be expected.
Cold: to be expected.
Temps within normal parameters: to be expected.

It’s hard to laugh at that any more.

It really is time to hold Al Gore and his money “scientists,” and media, legally and financially accountable for the damage they have caused to the weakminded who are easily effected by hysterical fears and mania and how they have caused pain and suffering in them and family members. Even having a hysterical, brainwashed family member in one’s family disrupts a families happiness and should be grounds for lawsuits. People sue for false advertising and the injury it causes. This is no different.

Bryan A

At the very least, they could be forced to place warning signs on their articles.

WARNING: Reading this article could drive up your blood pressure.

WARNING: The contents of this article are based on supposition

WARNING: The following article contains a plethora of Weasel Words

WARNING: Perusing the following article has caused headaches in Lab Rants

kenji

All I can say to the Global Warmists, like Al Gore and Mann … keep it up. Keep making crazier and crazier statements about Global Warming “causing” … everything. Everything that NORMALLY occurs on a 100year or more timetable. Every Flood – Global Warming, Every drought – Global Warming, Every Hurricane – Global Warming, Every Hurricane hiatus – Global Warming.

The MORE these Red Diaper Doper Baby EXTREME Climate Pearl Clutcher’s keep assigning EVERYTHING to Global Warming/Climate “change” … the more CRAZY they sound. And hiding behind “science” is no longer working. Basic common sense and the “common man’s” perception of the environment is more and more in conflict with their supposed “science” (of FAILed computer simulations).

And why is it that I cannot even read a story about the last two days of drenching rains in CA … without the story being framed in a discussion of “climate change” ? The public is rapidly seeing the ruse of this whole nonsense. I hope Gore et.al. keep “doubling-down” on their STUPIDITY.

Beautifully funny cartoon – Josh is a genuis.

CCB

As Dr Roy points out in:
‘Sydney Heat and “Bomb” Snowstorm: Pimped Out for Climate Change
January 7th, 2018 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
It’s been an eventful weather week in some portions of the globe. In fact, it is always an eventful weather week – somewhere.

But what really drives the narrative is when weather extremes — which always have, and always will, occur — happen to hit major metropolitan areas. Many people are already aware of the relentless guffawing resulting from Al Gore’s tweet that Michael Mann says the Northeast’s current cold wave is just what global warming predicts. (As I recall, Mann is a mathematician, not a meteorologist. Correction: Mann is a geologist/geophysicist, which is equally uninformed on atmospheric dynamics.)…’

Sara

I am strongly in favor of finding a planet for them to migrate to. We can send them all there, all of them, willy-nilly, where they can figure out how to survive without modern electronics, running water, gas for heat and cooking, and air conditioning. They need their own space. Cults only work when they can be isolated.

Meantime, I’ll get myself a slice of cheesecake, some nice hot tea, and make up my grocery list for Thursday’s trip to the store for grapes imported from Chile, carrots from Florida, cucumbers and zukes with cherry tomatoes for a nice chunky salad, and some extra crispy fried chicken with mashed potatoes and gravy.

TA

“I am strongly in favor of finding a planet for them to migrate to. We can send them all there, all of them,”

They already live on another planet, in their minds, but it would be nice to physically removed them elsewhere so we don’t have to listen to their ravings.

kenji

Google is actively trying to discover a way to make mankind LIVE FOREVER … extending our lifespans by SCIENCE !!! Can you imagine ? The very FIRST thing would be to impose STRICT government restrictions on reproduction … and/or … blast all the undesirables into space … or … find another, uh “Final Solution”

Bryan A

North Korea would be a great place to send them. Little Electricity, No Gas, and Little Kim to keep them warm

Joel Snider

I’m okay with just blasting them into space and let them find a planet on their own.

Brian McCandliss

Sara: “they can figure out how to survive without modern electronics, running water, gas for heat and cooking, and air conditioning. ”
Send them to Amish country. They wouldn’t last a day.

TA

From the article: “The debate over global warming’s impact on Winter Storm Grayson”

Isn’t that pathetic!

As Roy Spencer says about giving names to thunderstorms: “Just stop it!”

Old44

Near record heat in Sydney, Global Warming.
Simultaneously.
Near record cold in North America.

The one thing you can say about CO2, it’s versatile.

Brian McCandliss

Old 44: once one leaves the path of science, then everything becomes self-fulfilling prophecy.
And one leaves the path of science, when they cease to begin by proving the alternative hypothesis– and AGW has not proved theirs.
So it’s only natural, that everything proves AGW, according to proponents. It’s just a question of how long one is willing to listen to compulsive liars; when scientifically speaking, they should not be paid ANY attention until their alternative hypothesis is proved.

Casey

It just show how much this climate science is a religion.

Child prays for granny… granny still dies = god loved granny so much he wanted her back.
Child prays for granny… granny gets better = god loved granny so much he made her better.

When it doesn’t matter what happens they STILL claim it’s caused by their “deity”… you know it’s all a load of shite.

Brian McCandliss

Casey: No, “Climate Science” is an OXYMORON, since it does not prove an alternative vs. null hypothesis. And so since it’s not science, then anything goes.

Svend Ferdinandsen

It is all in the words. AGW was transformed to GW (in the meantime it was also called CAGW to make it more alarming) because it was impossible to find the link, then when GW seemed to take too long it was transformed to Climate Change.
And any weather is now Climate Change and the worse the more.
I just don’t understand how CO2 could still be the enemy, because CO2 only gives some mild warming, but freak weather often includes cold in massive amounts. Where could that cold come from? Not from the oceans that has hide the wamth, and the poles are warming faster than any part of the Earth.

Brian McCandliss

Svend Ferdinandsen “I just don’t understand how CO2 could still be the enemy”

Because it’s infesting their brains, which are clearly starved for oxygen.
Hello, they are PROFESSIONAL PANIC-MONGERS! NOT scientists!
And even those who REFUTE them are not scientists, because true scientists refuse to ENGAGE anyone who has not first proved their alternative hypothesis. And AGW-proponents have not.

Steve

It is a mistake to think Gore and Mann and Bill Nye are famous and making money because of what they know or believe. They are simply feeding a public hunger for making a bad guy out of big oil. There is a large segment of the population who want to believe we have a reason to shut down oil companies, and Gore and Co just feed that need. Supply and demand, they are meeting the demand.

A couple years ago I got into a blog exchange with Greg Laden, thought I was having a discussion with someone who could explain to me what I wasn’t seeing as far as global warming being a such a desperate problem.

I pointed out the rate of rise of global temperatures hasn’t been that bad lately, its almost flat in fact. Greg said the last 10 years have been the hottest on record, so global warming is the worst its ever been. I gave Greg the following hypothetical scenario, 10 years in a row with an average global temperature drop of 0.1 F, but all years still above the historical average for global temperature, just declining each year.

Greg said that would still be global warming since each year was still above the average, despite the decrease each year.

So Greg is not in business because he has any understanding of science, he is in business because his act feeds a need by a large group of people to hate big oil, just like Al Gore and Mann.

Patvann

I see them hating “big oil” as simply one of many convenient Hates. Their end-hate is for America, her influence, her power, her money, and Her Constitution….Thus one of our most important commodities must be attacked, and in this time that’s called: Oil Independence.

Ou “betterz” hate that “independance” kinda stuff….

Rhoda R

Patvann, you pretty much have a handle on it, but also include expanding their control over the population as well.

Brian McCandliss

Patvann– that’s just what they want you to think, i.e. ANYTHING but that they have failed to establish their alternative vs. null hypothesis.
When you do that, you have abandoned the scientific method; and as Mark Twain said, “idiots argue by dragging you down to their level and beating you with experience…” i.e. that’s where they have the home-field advantage.
So do NOT engage with them on a non-scientific basis, by responding to them as if they HAVE established their alternative hypothesis.

Brian McCandliss

Steve: “It is a mistake to think Gore and Mann and Bill Nye are famous and making money because of what they know or believe. ”

Of course, because there are countless others who are NOT rich and famous, who know and believe MORE than they do. And Gore, Mann and Nye KNOW it, since that’s “the sea of competition” they are up against for a REAL job.
Rather, they are shameless OPPORTUNISTS who go where the money is, claiming whatever gives them the most bang for the buck; and obviously there’s a lot more “bang” in claiming “The sky is falling!” than saying “all is well.”

Ron McCarley

Maybe reverse the argument into global warming being consistent with global cooling?

Brian McCandliss

You mean prove one negative with another. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Do not argue ANYTHING when there’s an unproved hypothesis, other than to show HOW it’s unproved; otherwise you’re just as guilty of bad science by indulging them.

Brian McCandliss

I blame ALL scientists for encouraging AGW’ers, by engaging them as scientists when they haven’t proven their Alternative Hypothesis; when they do this, responding with ANYTHING other than saying they didn’t refute the Null Hypothesis, they abandon the scientific method entirely, and engage in “proving a negative.”
The reason we HAVE the scientific method, is to establish credence in established theory over NON-established theory– ie. presumed false until proven true.
So the entire scientific community is to blame, for ENABLING non-scientific claims to be debated as scientific ones; when their only response should be to show how it has fallen short of being valid theory.
Otherwise, they’re dignifying it with a response. when they should exercise their right to remain silent– i.e. just like when talking to police, since anything you say WILL be twisted and used against you.

Fantastic! Thank you for sharing this clever cartoon…inconvenient indeed

“Snow will become a thing of the past”… and the future.
They always leave that last part out.
Until they don’t
Those warmistas.

Amber

The real question is why does anyone care what AL Gore has to say . A demonstrated mega BS artist
who has no scientific background or credentials with business interests designed to benefit from a self promoted scam . He produced a movie that British courts found to contain numerous inaccuracies
and his failed predictive powers are legendary .