This is a continuation of a remarkable thread that has now received 10,000 comments running to well over a million words. Unfortunately its size has become a problem and this is the reason for the move.
The history of the New Statesman thread goes back to December 2007 when Dr David Whitehouse wrote a very influential article for that publication posing the question Has Global Warming Stopped? Later, Mark Lynas, the magazine’s environment correspondent, wrote a furious reply, Has Global Warming Really Stopped?
By the time the New Statesman closed the blogs associated with these articles they had received just over 3000 comments, many from people who had become regular contributors to a wide-ranging discussion of the evidence for anthropogenic climate change, its implications for public policy and the economy. At that stage I provided a new home for the discussion at Harmless Sky.
Comments are now closed on the old thread. If you want to refer to comments there then it is easy to do so by left-clicking on the comment number, selecting ‘Copy Link Location’ and then setting up a link in the normal way.
Here’s to the next 10,000 comments.
Useful links:
Dr David Whitehouse’s article can be found here with 1289 comments.
Mark Lynas’ attempted refutation can be found here with 1715 comments.
The original Continuation of the New Statesman Whitehouse/Lynas blogs thread is here with 10,000 comments.
Peter
Hansen had the effrontery to fly to England to testify on behalf of 20 vandals trying to wreck a British power station. Our power supplies are teetering on a brink due to our govts absurd obsession with wind power and the last thing we need is for any to be closed down.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/14/ratcliffe-coal-james-hansen-evidence
Crazy Aunt? He has a track record-remember when he shut down the Air Conditioning in order to testify in front of Congress over 20 years ago?
tonyb.
“20 vandals” ???
Isn’t that for the jury to decide? What about “innocent until proven guilty”?
James Hansen has been asked for, and agreed to give, his scientific opinion on climate change from the witness box of a UK court. If English law allows expert opinion to be taken into account in these type of cases, why criticise James Hansen? There is no need for him to co-operate with the UK legal system. You should be grateful he is offering his time for free. You’ll be paying for everyone else involved via your taxes.
Your grievance isn’t with James Hansen, it’s with the UK Parliament who obviously have passed a law which doesn’t meet with your agreement.
Can I suggest you write to your MP about getting this changed?
PeterM you can’t demand that Tony first accepts your silly premise about CO2, as a way of not answering a question we all know you can’t answer. Why don’t you butch up and just accept you don’t know, and admit you are taken in hook line and sinker but the AGW mantra.
Everyone who looks at all the science about CO2 concentrations in the earth’s atmosphere over historical time can’t help but wonder about what we have been told about current concentrations and where they come from. Scientist cannot even agree on the total size of the total CO2 budget so how they can state that the so call increase as measured by Keeling is entirely down to the burning of hydrocarbon based fuels. As with the temperature records, the more you look the more you discover we don’t know, and the greater the uncertainty over the current numbers.
And all this goes on whilst areas of science that do offer some explanation as to what may be happening with our climate and weather get totally ignored. You need to wake up Peter as those of us in the Northern hemisphere are getting thoroughly feed up with the situation as it is, and as I have pointed out previously unless our leaders wakeup a revolution will ensue. It’s happened before and it will happen again.
By the way happy new year everyone.
Peter 3004
Sorry Peter you misunderstand-The Jury DID find the vandals guilty. This was after two hours of testimony and cross examination of Hansen, so obviously his ‘expert’ opinion didn’t convince anyone. Probably the first time in a court of Law that the ‘science’ has been cross examined and exposed for what it is.
Peter Geany in 3005 is right, you just can’t answer the basic questions can you, as they affront your basic core values.
I will accept that your silence on the matter indicates that you can’t find any rational reason for the IPCC to ignore a vast body of knowledge and effectively erase this long episode from their version of history.
The establishment have a way of doing this to disguise inconvenient truths (as you must know from your politics)
We currently have it with the Ex Labour Govt trying to rewrite history to disguise their incompetence over their running of the British economy.
I first got interested in the erasing of history some years ago when I was startled to come across the White slave trade.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_slavery
This is Wikis useless reference to it.
1 million Europeans were taken as Slaves and yet we don’t hear about it because thats not politically correct. I’m not trying to draw any sort of moral position here, just pointing out that erasing history does happen.
In our discussion it happened with the ‘erasure’ of Co2 records, and to back that up history was rewritten by the absurd Hockey stick and the equally absurd Met office trying to claim there was little variation in the climate until mans input in recent times.
The truth will out at some point Peter, you can very easily discover it for yourself by reading about the Sea surface temperatures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_surface_temperature
Our SST science is based on a very tiny number of readings taken in an extremely haphazard manner by less than dedicated observers using uncalibrated equipment over a minute fraction of the earths oceans. To make these into a useable data base grids were constructed and data invented (there is no other word to describe it) that was inserted into the grids.
Do you think this is the slightest bit credible or scientific? Are you happy that so called scientific organisations behave in this manner?
Tonyb
TonyB,
Talking of CO2 levels, and the controversial reliance on ice-cores for pre Mauna Loa stuff, did you see this over at WUWT?
CO2: Ice Cores vs. Plant Stomata
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/26/co2-ice-cores-vs-plant-stomata/#more-30247
It seems to me that plant stomata can probably be more reliably calibrated/assumed than ice-cores. They give higher pre industrial numbers. Also, interestingly, according to satellite observations modern CO2 levels are lower at high latitudes, (where the ice-cores are), than at Mauna Loa.
It also discusses the work of Beck etc.
TonyB,
Presumably you don’t mean that the 20 defendants were all members of an Eastern Germanic tribe?
So, I take it to mean that these so-called “Vandals” were engaging in ‘senseless or mindless acts of destruction’ ?
Probably they were planning to put up banners, paint a few slogans on the towers, and stop delivery trains etc. So the term ‘destruction’ seems slightly excessive. Neither was in ‘mindless’. You may not be able to understand it, but that’s not saying much.
The object of the exercise wasn’t so much as closing down a power station but to raise awareness of the AGW problem. I think I can safely say they’ve achieved that.
Brute,
Reur 2997/p20
Well, yes, everyone with half a brain or more, that actually studies his misinformation would agree with you.
However, it is the bulk of policy makers and media that are in control, and we are unable to conduct brain scans on them to prove the point.
Peter 3008 said (somewhat childlessly)
“Neither was in ‘mindless’. You may not be able to understand it, but that’s not saying much.
The object of the exercise wasn’t so much as closing down a power station but to raise awareness of the AGW problem. I think I can safely say they’ve achieved that.”
I’m well aware of who and what vandals are/were thank you Peter. This bunch are part of a concerted campaign to close down our conventional power supplies. At the end of the coldest December in 100 years I don’t find that at all amusing. So perhaps ‘criminal’ would be a better word? Mindless still applies to both the vandals AND James Hansen though.
BobFj
Yes I saw that thread. Its high time the Co2 records got an independent audit which might illustrate how little we know of the Co2 cycle and demonstrate the way in which thesubject it appears to have been hijacked.
tonyb
TonyB,
“Childlessly” ? Its not long since Brute was giving me a ticking off for having too many!
An independent audit eh? Even if this were done, do you really think that there is even the slightest possibility of any real impropriety being uncovered? I’m guessing that you don’t really.
Of course, that could mean one of two things. The first possibility is that the conspiracy among the world’s scientists, and politicians, could be so wide ranging and widespread that any enquiry would just be a cover up.
But you don’t think that there is a conspiracy do you? So, this means that the position of mainstream science must be correct after all.
Re the trial of the Ratcliffe-on-Soar activists, here is what the Guardian said about James Hansen’s involvement (my emphasis):
The verdict? Still guilty as charged.
On a different topic, anyone see this video of Professor Mike Lockwood on C4 News earlier this month (Dec 19th?) (H/t Bishop Hill.) Transcript below:
Peter
I’m not the conspiracy theorist around here-you’ll have to look elsewhere for that. Incompetence and complaceny are usually more reliable guides.
Impropriety? Ive never really thought of it like that. Its clear the correct figures were not used. It was generally accepted as late as 1956 that up to 400 was a perfectly normal level. Someone had a theory to prove-Callendar- and someone else-Keeling- was too young and inexperienced to disagree with Callendar.
What have you got to worry about with an independent audit? You’re certain the figures are wrong so surely must welcome the chance to see your beliefs confirnmed.
Can I put you down as the first signatory in my online petion to reexamine the figures? You’ve got nothing to lose if the figures are as wildly out as you believe,
Mind you whether it would prove anything I dont know as the effects of Co2 increasingly seem to be highly exaggerated-a gas that can cause areas of warming and cooling at the same time probably isnt the driver you believe it to be.
tonyb .
TonyB,
You might want to read this:
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/beck_data.html
I see, you continuously tout the theory of evolution in comparison to global warming theory but haven’t studied the topic.
As a strident proponent of evolution, which race of people would you consider to be most “evolved”?
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
By Charles Darwin
Brute,
There are many scientific topics which I haven’t studied directly. I guess most scientists would know a lot about their own field but have perhaps no more than a reasonable general knowledge outside of that. It doesn’t mean we reject it though.
Its easy to judge Darwin harshly using the standards of our time. Certainly he would have used terms like “savage” in ways we wouldn’t now. But, most, if not all people of European origin did then. When he started working on ideas which led to “Origin of the Species”, slavery was still institutionalised in the USA. The justification for that came largely from the Bible – not science.
At the time there was some debate in scientific circles about whether Africans, Asians and Europeans were all the same species. Darwin insisted they were, that they blended together and had common origins.
Darwin’s theory of Evolution tells us how things came to be as they are , it isn’t a justification for genocide. It is often said Hitler used Darwinian theories in justification, but Mein Kampf contains nothing about Darwinism. The Nazis early propaganda called on Martin Luther who was notoriously anti Semitic. He’d written a book call The Jews and Their Lies, and would have been quite at home in the Nazi Party.
The attack on Darwin isn’t so much about concern over what we might now categorise as a lack of political correctness. He’s attacked, largely by fundamentalist Christians, in an attempt to discredit his scientific theories. Darwin may not have been perfect but the fundamentalist Christians of the same era were just so much worse.
TonyB,
You write “1 million Europeans were taken as Slaves” in your reference to “White Slavery”.
Do you have some justification for this figure?
Incidentally, I’m not trying to trivialise any form of slavery – white or otherwise. It’s a big problem worldwide.
Incidentally, the history of Australia can be said to include a large measure of “white slavery”. Some years ago, Paul Keating, Australian PM at the time, was accused of failing to show “proper respect” to Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II during her state visit. In other words he stood up straight and didn’t bow and scrape. In response, Terry Dicks, a Tory member of the British Parliament said, “It’s a country of ex-cons, so we should not be surprised by the rudeness of their PM.”
Dicks’ remark was highly offensive, ignorant and false. Most of Australia’s “convicts” were shipped into servitude for such “crimes” as stealing a yard of cotton, cutting firewood on an aristocrat’s estate or poaching rabbits to feed a starving family.
Australians are thought to be anti-POM. That’s not true. As a cricket follower you’ll know what I mean when I say Aussies generally like people like Andrew Flintoff – its the MCC cravated blazer types who kop the flak. Folk memories of what happened a few generations ago aren’t quite extinct.
Peter 3012
Ferdinand is a personal friend_ I met up with him last year when we went to see Professor Stewart talk at Southampton. (Professor Stewart is an arch warmist and I reported on this here last year)
Whilst Ferdinand agrees the source of co2 in recent decades he does not believe it has any great effect-so he is not really an appropriate person to quote. We have had many denbates over the years and he participated on the one that resulted from my article last year.
Tonyb
Peter
Your 3015. If you had bothered to read my own articles on climate that I reference, you would find them not only interesting but highly informative :)
I wrote on white slavery in terms of a changing climate, an extract is here (pictures can be accessed from the links)
“Looking at the town sheltering under St Michael’s church -situated right on the beach under the cliffs beyond the pier-serves as a reminder of the funds raised by churchgoers throughout England to recover white slaves seized from their homes in villages all around the South West-including Teignmouth- by Barbary corsairs from around 1620.
Giles Miltons book ‘White Gold’ provides an intriguing account of the North African white slave trade during this period. It includes a description of an attack on a Cornish fishing village by a fleet of Islamic corsairs. The warriors, wielding scimitars, stream into the cobbled streets and force their way into cottages, taverns and churches to seize the villagers and carry them off to the Moroccan port of Salé to be sold as slaves.
This abiding folk memory was so deeply ingrained that even my mother’s generation (born 1920) still feared the white slavers that were a byword for terrible cruelty.
Figure 3 ‘The Bitter draught of slavery’ by Ernest Normand shows a slave trader offering his captive to a Mid East potentate). http://www.bridgemanartondemand.com/art/101737/The_Bitter_Draught_of_Slavery_1885
Centre of the white slave trade was North Africa, particularly Morocco and present day Algeria. It is reckoned that some 1.5 million white slaves were taken from towns, villages and vessels throughout Europe. To the left of the port in the first panoramic photo is Bitton House-formerly the home of Admiral Lord Pellew- who in a stroke of delicious irony avenged the capture of his own ancestor who had been seized 100 years earlier from a Cornish village and kept as a slave by the Barbary pirates for decades.
Admiral Pellew comprehensively destroyed the pirates in Algiers in August 1816 and liberated up to 20,000 Christian slaves taken from all over Europe, from Iceland in the North, to Spain in the south, with many of Pellew’s countrymen amongst them. It was a close run thing with the outcome of the battle in the balance until superior cannon eventually destroyed Algiers-to this day reproductions of the cannon used can be seen in the grounds of Bitton House.
1816 was known as the year without a summer-the third coldest in the entire 350 year CET record- and was thought to have been caused by a combination of low solar activity and the eruption of Mt Tambora
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
Interesting as he is, this is not Pellew’s story either. Two hundred yards away from Bitton House lay the home of Thomas Luny-one of Britain’s greatest marine artists who took a commission from Pellew to paint a depiction of the Algiers battle in 1820
Figure 4: Bombardment of Algiers by Thomas Luny
http://www.bridgemaninteriors.com/art/80303/Bombardment_of_Algiers_August_1816_1820
****
Peter, by the way if you get Hornblower on your tv, the Admiral in it is the very same Pellew I reference above. Pellew in effect destroyed the white slave trade and as part of the Royal Navy then enforced the crackdown on other forms of slavery.
Of course in many ways ‘serfs’ were slaves so up until recent times slavery -covert and overt- was a big problem and remains so-same players as they were in the earliest days.
tonyb
Peter,
I’m chuckling………So you’ve altered Darwin’s theory to conform to your modern, politically correct sensibilities. (I wonder if Darwin would approve).
Darwin’s theory no longer applies to Homo Sapiens according to Peter Martin………You should write a paper. Another great theory relegated to the dustbin of history by Peter Martin, the Australian Anthropologist/genius.
Do you have any other pearls of wisdom to regale us with regarding Hansen’s theory? Perhaps that the North American continent is exempt from the effects of CO2/temperature relationship?
Perhaps you should study these theories more deeply as opposed to blindly following their tenets. Just because some egghead “scientist”, descended from Mt. Olympus, armed with a pocketful of taxpayer money and promises of more taxpayer funded largesse tells you what you want to hear ……doesn’t make it so.
If we mingle the theory of evolution with global warming theory wouldn’t the result simply be the “evolution” of the species?
Wouldn’t harnessing fire and the use of fossil fuels be the direct result of progression of the species? …………A completely natural advancement of the human condition as Darwin theorized?
The use of fossil fuels and industrialization to advance the species would affirm the theories of the Secular Humanist’s bible (Origin of the Species)……would it not?
If other species are eliminated in the process of advancing humankind this would also vindicate Darwin (survival of the fittest).
So, meddling with the “natural order” of things (stifling human advancement by way of regulating industry) would seem heretical to your Darwinist religious beliefs………
NOW IT’S SNOWING — IN PHOENIX?
http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/2010/12/30/20101230phoenix-area-residents-report-snow-falling-valley.html
Groan….. I found this over at WUWT, (Tips and notes)
We sceptics all know that there are many problems with Peer Review and Journal bias, e.g. as partly revealed in Climategate. This following discussion is about medicine, and is shocking, including examples of serious harm to many patients etc. However, there are clear parallels with climate science, such as in this brief extract. (the scope of the concerns in medicine is appalling)
http://breast-cancer-research.com/content/12/S4/S13
Brute,
Darwin’s theories haven’t been overturned but they certainly has been modified since his day. For instance he wasn’t aware of Mendelian genetics or the nature of DNA. They have now been added to the overall picture to explain why Darwinian Evolution works.
Does Darwinian Evolutionary theory apply to humans? It certainly has in the past. But it may well have stopped, or slowed down in many places, due to modern living conditions. To give an example: For thousands of years human groups lived on the edge of survival. Child mortality in Europe would have been high, but slightly higher for children who had darker skin, and whose genes died with them, and slightly lower for those with lighter skin, and whose genes were passed to the next generation. Over time the European race evolved to have a lighter skin.
Of course living conditions are so much better now, child mortality in Europe is very low and that sort of pressure does not apply any more.
The term “survival of the fittest” doesn’t mean the very fittest but slightly fitter than average. The prefered term is natural selection. Darwin wasn’t saying that Europeans were higher on the evolutionary scale than other races, just that they had evolved with fair skins and hair to suit the local climatic conditions. The same is true for all races. No race is more evolved than another, but because local conditions are different so too is the outcome of local evolution.
There are those who try to apply Darwin’s ideas to whole societies. Capitalism started in Europe, closely followed by the USA, and those of European descent were largely in control of it. So does this mean that there is something special about Europeans? Probably not. It just so happened that the conditions in Europe were right in the 18th and 19th century for it to all happen.
In Europe, thousands of years ago, the fair skinned children didn’t consider they were superior to the darker skinned, or the other way around in Africa. It just happened that they survived slightly better. Whatever might be the justification for the idea of European superiority, it isn’t Darwinian. However those who do have certain political agendas have naturally wished to misapply Darwin’s ideas for their own benefit. The so called “Social Darwinians”
Its not difficult to separate the one from the other. It seems to me that you’ve been influenced by those who don’t like the idea of Darwin’s theories per se, and are using misapplications of the theory to try to discredit the theory itself.
Groan some more….. I also found this over at WUWT, (Tips and notes)
Again it is mostly about medicine, but some interesting parallels with climate science including debunking of paradigms etc:
The Truth Wears Off: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=1
Extract from Page 3 of 5:
Extract from page 5:
And:
Jonah Lehrer asks “Is there something wrong with the scientific method?”
Well you could argue if there was nothing wrong then it would be perfect. I don’t think anyone is saying that. But is there anything better? That’s the real question.
TonyB,
Yes I did notice that Ferdinand Engelbeen described himself as a sceptic. All scientists are BTW! He was certainly sceptical about 19th century CO2 measurements.
He seems an intelligent guy. His argument on CO2 was well thought out and reasoned. I thought you might be more prepared to listen to him rather than the Royal Society or any other mainstream science organisation, even though there is no disagreement between them.
I couldn’t see any link to articles where he was in disagreement. Do you have any?
peter
am on holiday so just saying hello through my kindle.
probably for first and last time as difficult to use
tonyb