THIS PAGE HAS BEEN ACTIVATED AS THE NEW STATESMAN BLOG IS NOW CLOSED FOR COMMENTS
At 10am this morning, the New Statesman finally closed the Mark Lynas thread on their website after 1715 comments had been added over a period of five months. I don’t know whether this constitutes any kind of a record, but gratitude is certainly due to the editor of of the New Statesman for hosting the discussion so patiently and also for publishing articles from Dr David Whitehouse and Mark Lynas that have created so much interest.
This page is now live, and anyone who would like to continue the discussion here is welcome to do so. I have copied the most recent contributions at the New Statesman as the first comment for the sake of convenience. If you want to refer back to either of the original threads, then you can find them here:
Dr David Whitehouse’s article can be found here with all 1289 comments.
Mark Lynas’ attempted refutation can be found here with 1715 comments.
Welcome to Harmless Sky, and happy blogging.
(Click the ‘comments’ link below if the input box does not appear)
10,000 Responses to “Continuation of the New Statesman Whitehouse/Lynas blogs.”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
TonyN: See my note on #6850
All;
This may seem irrelevant to the thread, but it gives some statistical perspective to what follows below the wiggly line.
‘Tis weird how strange unexpected coincidences can occur like thus:
T’other day I received correspondence from “authorities”, advising that they had not received payment for annual renewal of registration of my pride vehicle, a developing camper van, which meant that I would commit an offence if I drove it and would criminally lack third party insurance, as of about a week ago. My other vehicle was immobilised because of work I was undertaking on it. No prob’s I thought, I’ll carefully, (illegally), drive over to the circus that is known as “VicRoads”, the State road authority, and I’ll show them my bank statement and stuff, and it will take no time at all to sort it out.
Wrong! That was last Friday, and it is still not sorted out, and I have some intercourse yet to come starting tomorrow, Monday, with “Australia Post”, the authority through which I have strong recollection, and some evidence that I actually made the payment. (in a multiple transaction, the receipt details of which I have lost)
However, the thing that really left me trembling was at the point when my journey towards the “VicRoads” circus was almost complete! I stopped as necessary at that moment in the left lane at a roundabout, which had directional arrows both left and straight ahead, but wanting to go straight ahead. When the roundabout cleared, I proceeded as desired, but this hoon on my right turned left across my front with a squeal of tyres and quite a lot of decibels. About all I could see in my taller vehicle, (Ford Transit), which is surprisingly quick for a 2.2 litre diesel, was part of his roof, below my nose. Phew!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robin, cc Max, et al;
Further to my 6847, wherein I mused about things mysterious on the RealClimate site, including for instance, an apparent bind they had with their (maybe recent) post numbering system, if they should want to edit out any inconvenient posts.
Well blow me! I was wanting to get on there early this morning to have some more fun, only to be greeted with a July 4 message something like: sorry we are updating our software momentarily.
Later it was all cleared, but things are now different in layout etc, and my previous two posts that had been accepted beforehand have now “evaporated“.
Furthermore Gavin confessed to a new problem with post numbering
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No prob’s, I had already composed a new post, which was surprisingly rapidly accepted and commented on by Gavin.
The only thing is that his comments are startling absolute crap, as appended on my: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/groundhog-day-2/#comment-129677
and I suspect that if I respond making any corrections, they will probably be deleted, leading other readers to think that I‘ve submitted to his nonsense.
I think I’ll let July 4 get out of the way, and meanwhile ponder how best to point out for example that Gavin contradicts NASA and others in principle concerning the terrestrial energy budget. (that is, in principle, not with the actual numbers)
My current thoughts are to work-up to it obliquely via a F/U enquiry to Kevin McKinney, who has gone silent on some points I asked him on the difference and on his understanding of EMR versus HEAT.
I have now put up Robin’s long comment from #6850 as a guest post here:
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=202
Well worth reading, particularly if one considers whether an adviser to Gordon Brown would feel able to give public voice to the ideas that Cass Sunstein has published.
Robin
..why do you think they seem more ready these days to have (by the standards of that site) a reasonable dialogue with sceptics? (6841)
Perhaps it’s because they are otherwise occupied organising their “functioning and reasonably realistic climate model” as mentioned at the top of the Groundhog Day thread.
If they’re using Stefan Rahmstorf’s methods, the ‘realistic’ bit might have to go.. :-)
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/7/5/climate-cuttings-27.html
Tonto
“..sitting on top of tons of coal”
Slightly OT, but you’ve reminded me of Aneurin Bevan’s famous remark at the end of the war: “This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organising genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time.”
Sadly, deep mines are difficult to re-open once closed (thank you, Mrs T) but at least the coal is still there…
Alex
Eco Britain.co.uk enthusiastically endorses ‘Green Britain’ day on 10th July. To celebrate this epoch making event Eco- Britain.co.uk will be introducing the revolutionary new renewable energy source’carbon lite’.
This substance-formerly known as ‘coal’-has undergone a special hi tech process whereby a hole is drilled through the centre of each carbon lite unit, thereby reducing its size -and calorific content by 20%!!
The right product for a fuel hungry but caring green world. A product which Eco-Britain.co.uk has in abundance.
It will be sold in eco-tonnes, each of which are some 20% less than the old fashioned, smelly, and inconvenient metric tonne.
I will need you Alex to go and sell ‘carbon lite’ which has been endorsed by all the leading climate scientists;
‘Carbon lite? Have you gone mad?’ James Hansen
‘I wish I’d thought of that,’ Albert Gore
‘You’ll never get away with this madness,’ Michael Mann.
Carbon lite is scientifically proven to be cheaper, more practical and more efficient than any other form of renewable energy-and it’;s available now!
Are you up for the the job Alex? All you need to bring is a Black and Decker drill.
Tonyb
TonyB, that’s truly inspiring, but also sounds a little too much like hard work. I suggest an alternative – the new Greenwash Filtering Technology(TM), which also promises a near-perpetual supply of carbon-lite and is simple enough to be operated by the PR departments of most large corporations. Elements of this include rebranding with the colour green somewhere in the company logo, enthusiastic overuse of the words “eco” and “sustainable”, and of course the sponsorship of vaguely green-themed national events which are planned to occur spontaneously in local communities throughout the empire.
May I also suggest the nifty Carbon Capture Tomorrow(TM) technology, which offsets prohibitively expensive and unfeasible carbon capture and storage permanently a short distance ahead in time, allowing for continuous guilt-free energy generation. This technology is modelled on the behaviour of climatic tipping points, which are also permanently set to occur tomorrow, or maybe the day after, but which never actually arrive.
Robin, Max, et al, further my 6852;
RC has reverted their software to the previous level, although two of my posts remain disappeared.
Coincidentally, I found my missing documentation from Australia Post, so that too has worked-out fairly well.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As a reaction to the first of Gavin’s three evidently false assertions to me:
I posted this to his buddy Kevin McKinney, and it is currently accepted and comment free:
Kevin McKinney, further to my 972:
If you are still struggling in understanding the terrestrial energy budget fundamentals, here is an image from NOAA which is perhaps the neatest/easiest of all three versions so far linked.
It gives, verbatim, compared with; {IPCC/Trenberth equivalent WORDING}, [clarification]
a) Latent Heat Flux, {Evapo-transpiration}……….. ~45%
b) Net Emission of [ALL] Infrared Radiation from surface, {Not given}…….. ~41%
c) [Of which total] Absorption by H2O, CO2, [{?} Trenberth equiv. is confusing]…. 29%
d) Sensible Heat Flux, {Thermals}…… ~14%
BTW, this budget also adds up: a) + b) + d) to 100%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The fundamental solution as to why the sun appears to have uniform brightness presented despite that it is a sphere, is that its surface emits EMR equally in ALL directions, hemispherically. (I don’t know why Rod B 981 and Patrick 978 wanted to aggravate on this simplicity).
From this it follows that the Earth’s surface also does this, but at long wavelengths.
It also follows that any fundamental small package of air emits in all directions, spherically. Furthermore, that adjacent packages, AOTBE, are radiating equally at each other.
Consider the sideways radiation of these packages, AOTBE. Obviously, they do not keep getting hotter, despite all that EMR flying around. WHY?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The answer to the analogous puzzle of what is the net of two opposing EMF’s of 12 volts and 9 volts, is 3 volts. Does this help?
James P, in your exchange with Robin in your 6854:
[Robin] ..why do you think they seem more ready these days [at RC] to have (by the standards of that site) a reasonable dialogue with sceptics? (6841)
[You James] Perhaps it’s because they are otherwise occupied organising their “functioning and reasonably realistic climate model” as mentioned at the top of the Groundhog Day thread.
I would love to make enquiries of Gavin as to the functionality and reasonableness of the current and past models, but suspect that it would be like waving a red flag at a bull, and I might get seriously excommunicated, thus terminating the fun I’m having in a more prolonged gentle tease.
Why don’t you try for a moment of kamikaze glory over there?
Please, or delegate to Brute or Robin or someone!
Don’t forget to type-in the two distorted “ReCaptcha” words or weird symbol/number combinations down below for preview and when they change, again for posting.
Don’t worry if they are unreadable, I’ve guessed a few times and it has been OK, and presumably it would offer another try if too far out
The common html tags for text enhancement are available if you want.
TonyB
Carbon Lite (TM) is brilliant!
Suggest a PR initiative to point out to potential environmentally conscious customers that the Carbon Lite (TM) conversion operation is powered exclusively with green wind or solar power, with the internally generated residual bore hole product used to fire the backup generation facility when there is no wind, respectively no sun, keeping the entire process in balance and symbiosis with nature.
To avoid a dusting problem and emphasize the clean, green goodness of Carbon Lite (TM), the end product could be spray painted with a (clean burning) (Kelly) green paint and packaged in biodegradable bags of the same color with the picture of a smiling bright yellow sun and the phrase: “Carbon Lite (TM): as clean and green as Nature itself”.
I also believe that the brilliant branding / marketing suggestions of Alex Cull should be considered seriously in order to ensure a successful launch of this exciting new product.
Max
Why don’t you try for a moment of kamikaze glory over there?
I have tried twice, but my comment (which would have been #1012) seems to disappear once submitted. Is that normal, or do they know I’m a troublemaker already? :-)
any fundamental small package of air emits in all directions, spherically (6858)
Didn’t Niels Bohr say the same thing 100 years ago, thereby refuting the greenhouse properties of CO2? I think he got a Nobel Prize for it!
(The absorption of specific wavelengths of light causes the electrons in an atom/molecule to move to a higher energy state, so it is unable to absorb additional radiation of that wavelength without first re-radiating it, in all directions.)
Bob_FJ, JamesP, Robin
To your question: Are the moderators at RC more ready these days to have a reasonable dialogue with skeptics?
It truly appears so, although they still use the same tactics as before (censorship of “difficult” posts and comments by the moderators to “correct” those that have expressed another opinion than their own).
Is this a sign that they are becoming aware that there is a growing ground wave of skeptics who question the premise that AGW is a serious threat (and must be dealt with)?
Is this a glimmer of “glasnost” after a period of “Stalinist control”?
Who knows?
In addition, I have noticed that the “AGW-groupie trolls”, who used to chime in with personal insults aimed at all skeptics have become less prevalent on the site.
So, at least for now, it makes blogging there a bit more rewarding than it used to be.
Max
Anyone who recalls my first post on this thread (the NS here – see 22 December 2007 at 19:55) will understand why I was amused by Steve McIntyre’s item yesterday. I liked especially Andrew’s comment “This would be the Y2.1K problem“.
Y2.1k problem
LOL! So it looks like their 3degC rise is about right then – just that it’s all going to happen on Dec 31st 2099…
AGW-groupie trolls
At least one of them is still trying to argue Mann’s case for the hockey-stick on Richard Black’s blog. I’d more or less given up, but he’s so irritable that I’m tempted to try again.
Everyone
In tune with the green ideals of Eco-britain. co.uk my govt (some of them elected) have issued our first edict.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/public_sector/article6639289.ece
I am currently working on the logo for a carbon card (not for use by me and my supporters obviously) whereby our citizens movements will be monitored and they will be obliged to register before travelling abroad. I have already got this past the environmental comittee of the House of Commons.
I sincerely believe that my citizens will be very pleased at my attempts to curb their non green movements and I will be urging my good friend Obama to follow suit.
To demonstrate my solidarity with my citizens I will be inviting them to buy their winter supplies of ‘carbon lite’ (painted green as suggested by Max) at a 5% summer discount.
TonyB (Climate emperor-Eco-Britain.co.uk)
TonyB
“Carbon lite (TM) day or night, is always right!”
Interesting piece on the December Copenhagen conference in the Times this morning. Here are two extracts:
Yes, I think that sums it up. That phrase “If carbon is a problem” betrays, I suggest, the author’s own scepticism.
Robin:
Perhaps we need a Copenhagen treaty to bring matters to a head.
A combination of the trade wars that would inevitably follow and the enormous cost of bribing the developing countries to sign up, all at a time of global economis recession and turmoil, would surely force a fundamental re-think, eventually, of what all this is about.
On the other hand, the consequences of reaching a rational re-assessment of the supposed threat by this route would be appalling in human as well as economic terms.
James #6861 So now you see; it’s got “more stuff”. Jasper
Hi Max, Bob et al
I was asked to write a review about a book by Peter Taylor called ‘Chill’ which concerns the possibility of global cooling and the lack of evidence to support AGW.
Peter has impeccable ‘green’ credentials so it is refreshing to read a book that looks so objectively at the science from that viewpoint and finds it wanting.
There were a number of papers he cites that I hadn’t come across before (lots on solar activity and the oceans and that the effect of co2 is exaggerated by a factor of three) and in effect it brings together in one place all the papers and more we have talked about here for a year.
It also looks at what makes a warmist tick and is the first book I have come across that manages to identify their motivations and often blind belief.
http://www.clairviewbooks.com/pages/viewbook.php?isbn_in=9781905570195
I think you will thoroughly enjoy this very meaty book, so might I suggest it could be part of your summer reading?
Tonyb
Robin
The Times article you posted (6869) is interesting indeed. The writer (Carl Mortished) refers to the Opium Wars of the 19th century, which was a different time from today.
Having lived in Hong Kong and spent considerable time in Pearl River Delta communities I have also visited the Opium War museum there. The Chinese have not forgotten the humility of their defeat then.
Now the tables have turned. There is no more all-powerful British Fleet to support the opium dealers of the West.
China is the economic powerhouse of today, which has taken away a large part of the manufacturing base of the USA and (to a lesser extent) that of Europe. It has become the 3rd largest economy of the world (behind USA and Japan) and is the largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasury securities at $845 billion (incl. Hong Kong).
It is apparent that China has no intention whatsoever to curb her growth, fossil fuel use and the resulting increase in the standard of living of her population just to pay tribute to a carbon mitigation and taxation scheme being promoted by politicians of the West. Why should they?
A “trade war” with China would only hurt the West, and the Chinese know it. They have the power now, and it is every bit as formidable as the British Navy of the 19th century.
And they have not forgotten the humility of their defeat back then.
India is in a similar position. And they have also not forgotten the humility of the British Raj,
I believe Mortished is right. It will be a cold December in Copenhagen for those who want to sell anti-global warming cap and trade schemes to China or India.
And it looks like Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is having problems pushing through a new U.S. Senate version of the climate bill recently narrowly passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. If this fails, or is so watered down with compromises to be meaningless, December will be even colder in Copenhagen.
And then there are all those thermometers out there, as well.
Max
TonyB
Thanks for reference to Peter Taylor’s book “Chill”. Have ordered it.
Max
TonyN: re your 6870, I doubt if Copenhagen will bring matters to a head. My guess is that all participants, including China and India, will go to great lengths to ensure the outcome sounds firm, determined and united with lots of tough talk about targets and expectations. The fact that there will be no binding commitments so that all this rhetoric will be meaningless will be hidden away in the small print. Ironically, our best hope is that the militant environmentalists will be so outraged by what they will see as a betrayal that they will drag this reality into the open.