Apocalypse Deferred

This discussion with Mark Steyn is the only time Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick, and Anthony Watts have appeared together on stage.  It occurred while on the Alaskan Mark Steyn Club Cruise in September.~cr

From Mark Steyn online.

Joining me for the discussion were three people at the forefront of pushing back against Michael E Mann and his fellow warm-mongers: Anthony Watts, proprietor of the world’s Number One climate website, WattsUpWithThat; and the dynamic duo that broke Mann’s hockey stick, Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick.

[Side-note: If you watch this on YouTube, the ever more insecure reducation-camp commissars at Google-YouTube-Global Thought Control Inc have put up a Planetary Public-Service Health Warning under the video. (Why is it only Elizabeth Warren who wants to break up the Facebook/Google uni-cartel?) Have a good giggle at it, and then reflect that at least their book-cooking is getting more inept: An hour after this video was posted, it had 55 likes, yet only 1 view. Hmm…]

50 thoughts on “Apocalypse Deferred

  1. Excellent talk! Needs to be force fed to schools kids all over the planet. Humor and reality in a smooth blend.

  2. you know…just put a stake in the heart of this thing and be done with it

    The only countries that have increased their emissions…are the countries the UN says we have to pay to help them mitigate it
    ..pay them to increase their emissions

    If that doesn’t scream $c@m loud and clear to everyone….they are brain dead


    • “They are brain dead”. Well yes, that is exactly correct. Never taught to think, just accept what is said to them by their peers.

  3. The Teenage Super Sleuths have used much of this material in their High School Science Fair Project. They have tried to put all this material into an easy to understand presentation. I would encourage everyone that knows a kid looking for a science fair project to use the highlighted Cruise Video and the following one as a basis.

  4. It’s funny how YT plasters its boilerplate “global warming” Wikipedia blurb on anything remotely related to global warming, especially if the content flatly refutes the blurb.

    It’s even funnier how little the public seems to care about this issue.

    • I never see that warning on my smartphone with the browser set to “mobile”mode (instead of “desktop”).

    • The makers of the YT videos should put a little side-balloon with an arrow pointing to where the google “warning” might be and say something like “You Tube may attach a “warning message” to the bottom of this video. Watch this video for the science. See the YT message (arrow) for the propaganda.”

  5. What???? It wasn’t squelched by the gods of the interwebs???? They must have been out at a cheap bar, crying in their beer, or something.

    The proper response to Mann and his fellow travelers is ‘Yeah, yeah, yeah, we’ve heard all of that already. What else have you got besides repeats??? And would you please stop holding our your hand for more cash? You get grants money, Tootsie. That will have to do.”

  6. Recently watched a documentary highly critical of the number of deaths during the building of Hover Dam and how changes implemented brought about OSHA.

    The “official” number of fatalities involved in building Hoover Dam is 96. These were men who died at the dam site (classified as “industrial fatalities”) from such causes as drowning, blasting, falling rocks or slides, falls from the canyon walls, being struck by heavy equipment, truck accidents, etc.Mar 12, 2015

    Wind energy kills a mere 100 people or so per trillion kWhrs, the majority from falls during maintenance activities (Toldedo Blade). However, what will that number be when we have over a Billion Wind Turbines just in the US? What are the numbers for roof solar?

  7. With regards to view counts, the count update is delayed no matter what the content. Meanwhile the comment count is immediate. I see this often on the computer gamming youtubers videos that I watch (the only content I watch on YouTube, mostly).

  8. Around 1:10:10 the discussion comes around to wind/solar.

    The only thing that will put an end to the CAGW madness is when people realize the futility of wind/solar. The only alternative to fossil fuels that stands a chance of working is nuclear.

    Anyone who thinks something like a carbon tax will have any effect on the global temperature is living in cloud cuckoo land. People need to understand what’s ultimately being demanded of them.

  9. I’m waiting for Chicken Little to get a grant to paste acorns back on the oak trees to prevent the sky from falling.

  10. The like/view ratio happens because the like number updates continuously, but the view number doesn’t. Yo have to refresh to see the views increase.

  11. It is refreshing to see we have very capable defenders of common sense. Thank you all Gentlemen and yes, please keep on speaking out.

  12. 11/27/19 @11:44 over 17000 views. To be on stage with Mark Steyn for an hour and a half has to be a lifetime highlight. Good for you Anthony. When this fight is finally over Anthony, Mark, Ross, Steve and a few others should have their faces carved on a mountain somewhere.

  13. If Mann is peddling untruths(lies) can he not be held to account for bending the minds of the the young people? The whole dissemination of climate human caused change for our earth has been made a political sling shot. Facts surely must supersede lies?

  14. I learned a new expression …
    “noble cause corruption”
    I previously only blamed “next year funding dependency”

    Most excellent video !

  15. The imminent catastrophe goes on
    Not showing many signs of happening.
    The ice at the North Pole that should be gone
    By now, is awkwardly still lingering,
    And though sometimes the weather is extreme
    It seems no more so than when we were young
    Who soon will hear no more of this grim theme
    Reiterated in the special tongue
    Of manufactured fright. Sea Level Rise
    Will be here soon and could do such-and-such,
    Say tenured pundits with unblinking eyes.
    The sea supports the sceptics, but they, too,
    Lapse into oratory when they predict
    The sure collapse of the alarmist view
    Like a house of cards, for they could not have picked
    A metaphor less suited to their wish.
    A house of cards subsides with just a sigh
    And all the cards are still there. Feverish
    Talk of apocalypse might, by and by,
    Die down, but the deep anguish will persist.
    His death, and not the Earth’s, is the true fear
    That motivates the doomsday fantasist:
    There can be no world if he is not here.

    Clive James, March 2016.

    RIP, mate.

  16. Yes, thank you all for doing this!

    If the subject of racketeering could be thoroughly explored and the financial ramifications clearly identified and if the senior officials within the scientific society as well as politicians and key people within the U.N. and complicit media corporations, who are behind the deception were openly named, would we continue to be barraged with the alarmist propaganda?

  17. I came across an interesting paper, prompted to do some browsing by the brief discussion yesterday on the influence of the AMO between Chris Hanley and WXcycles . I compared , as so many here have certainly done, the AMO amplitude graph from realclimate that Chris linked to, with HADSST3 and its Northern Hemisphere adjunct. The correlation is very clear, between the position of amplitudes in both time series, with the difference that the SST appears to have an underlying upward slope of about 0.5(C) per 60 years (the AMO period between maxima or minima since 1850) since about 1940.
    The paper I refer to is :
    Reduced interdecadal variability of Atlantic MeridionalOverturning Circulation under global warming
    a joint Sino-American paper in PNAS.
    Using models and CMIP5 , RCP2.6 to 8.5 they find that with increase in RCP the amplitude of AMO falls , quite dramatically, and the period falls also from 60 years to 40 , then , at the worst forcing ,RCP8.5, to 20 years .
    That sounds dramatic, unless ,if high AMO amplitude is correlated to high sea surface temperature, a low amplitude in the future, under even the worst imaginable CO2 forcing, will mean effectively a stabilising of sea surface temperatures due to AMO thereby alleviating the secondary, gradual ,underlying temperature rise due other causes.
    Could this mean that apocalypse is not only deferred , but will never actually happen.
    (Of course it is models. But even so, quite reassuring, until Nick points out that I have totally misunderstood the paper).

  18. After the last Q&A question, I was almost certain Ross McKitrick was going to reference the 1983 Ulcer solution, of Australians Barry J. Marshall and J. Robin Warren, that was the laughing stock of ALL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE – THE CONSENSUS – of the time. These two scientists proved all of medical science wrong, while they were correct. Moral – thank God, science is not a consensus, else we would not have cures for ulcers, the light bulb, telephones, automobiles, computers, and so on, ad infinitum (seems like)…

  19. The bottom line here is that, based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we have been experiencing is very small and is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. The AGW conjecture may seem to be plausible at first but upon closer examination the AGW conjecture is based on only partial science and is full of holes. For example, the AGW conjecture depends upon the existence of a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases in the Earth’s atmosphere with LWIR absorption bands. Such a radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere or anywhere else in the solar system for that mater. The radiant greenhouse effect is science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is nothing but science fiction as well.

  20. I was interested to hear Ross McKitrick (about 44 mins in) say that some of the professional societies he belonged to had it written in their constitutions that they would never issue position statements in order to preserve the intellectual freedom of their members.

    Most scientific societies don’t do this. I guess they don’t feel a need to preserve the intellectual freedom of their particular members. The leadership wants to presume to speak for them all.

    • Tom
      You have to wonder what motivates people to volunteer for an unpaid, largely thankless job as an officer in a professional society. It may be a desire to fatten their CV, it may be ego, but it also just might be a zealot looking for power to advance their ideology.

      Taking a public position on controversial topics is really a political activity, not a scientific or engineering activity. The only position that a professional society should take is, “We take no official position whatsoever, letting the facts speak for themselves.”

    • I have a browser app that can download any video located on a page. I have to use this with Youtube because Youtube doesn’t like my combination of Windows XP and its script blockers and Youtube videos won’t play on this machine. But I think downloading is better. It gives you more control of the playback and you don’t have to put up with Youtube virtue signalling.

      I guess one of these days I’m going to have to bite the bullet and upgrade my XP to Windows 7. 🙂

  21. Look immediately below the video where you would expect comments.

    “Global Warming
    Global warming is the long-term rise in the average temperature of the Earth’s climate system. Is is a major aspect of climate change, and has been demonstrated by direct temperature measurements and by measurements of various effects of the warming.”

    • Wow. That got stuck in the wrong place. It was supposed to answer Bob Tisdale, the third commenter.

  22. Very interesting! I was making notes for comment but the list became too long. A few comments, however:

    1. Totally agree with Anthony’s comment about “child abuse” and it should have more discussion in the marketplace of ideas.
    2. Ross’s description of the levels of discussion was interesting and included Academia (areas such as statistics and economics which bring reality to the climate debate), Science (where the physics/chemistry/biology warfare occurs) and the “crazy” political level (where the intense partisanship occurs). Ross was correct that the Academia/Science discussions do not get to the political level because that level is more interested in using the debate as a cash cow to further socio-economic ideologies rather than a scientific discussion. And, most people only look at the political aspects as they are not interested in delving into the scientific underpinnings of models, datasets and how they are built, managed and interpreted. My interest started in the science of AGW; but, I’m becoming more interested in the political level and getting people to investigate more on their own and to bring tools to them (such as WUWT) to help them understand the science and how it should influence the political solutions that are being offered.
    3. Glad that the importance of statistics and economics was mentioned.

    Really good discussion!

  23. Does anyone remember this oldie (as part of the video discusses energy)-


    “So tonight, I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: by 2035, 80% of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all – and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen.”

  24. The comments on scientists being afraid to speak up and comparisons to life under Communism reminded me of an old joke about workers in the Soviet Union:

    They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work.

    The modern climate research version of this would be:

    They pretend to care about science and we pretend to give it to them.

  25. I took a cruise up Glacier Bay about five years ago. A Park Ranger boarded to tell us how the glaciers had shrunk since the first Europeans sailed up to the Bay’s mouth, only to find it blocked by ice.

    She said “a healthy glacier” would not be shrinking like this—-thereby committing the Pathetic Fallacy.

    I should have responded that “Nature abhors idiocy”, but that wouldn’t have registered.

    I pointed out that western Canada would all be under ice if those Pacific NW glaciers hadn’t got ill, and that all of Alaska would be under trillions of tons of ice.

    She ignored my comment.

    Dumb as a bag of pine bark nuggests.

  26. Among other much more important things, today I’m thankful that climate alarmism is indeed a pile of hokum and it’s just a matter of time until that’s obvious to everyone, even the slow and even the disingenuous. Peace and blessings to all…

Comments are closed.