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.
Robin (6965)
Great post. No wonder the Grauniad closed the comments rather than publish it!
Brute (6961)
the thought of getting older depresses me
Me too, although I only really think about it when I have to write it down. I’m not even sure I believe the figure!
Still, I shall be content if I last long enough to see the warmists properly routed – it won’t be a good day for science, but it might mark the end of over-hyped alarmism for a while…
Hi Brute,
NSIDC apparently had some glitches in their data collection and stopped publishing graphs:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/26/nsidc-pulls-the-plug-on-artic-sea-ice-graphs/
But the raw monthly data are still available on:
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135
Click the month you want and then:
N_06_area.txt for Arctic sea ice extent and area
S_06_area.txt for Antarctic sea ice extent and area
The data show that the loss in the Arctic has been offset by an equal gain in the Antarctic.
Regards,
Max
Bob_FJ:
Re your 6974 – I’ve found in the past that what you say of RC is true also of the Guardian: to keep the moderator at bay, it’s best to not to respond in kind to provocation and insult. But the sudden closure of threads just as they get interesting is frustrating. One interesting observation, however: from the beginning of the thread I mentioned, the sceptical posts were “Recommended” far more often than the alarmist threads. And that’s at the Guardian!
I admire your perseverance at RC. I don’t think I would have the stomach for it.
But far more important. Latest Test score: England 425 all out / Australia 135 for 5.
James P: thanks for your 6976. I was, however, able to recycle it here. See my post yesterday at 5:23pm.
Recycling certainly has its uses.
Bob_FJ:
Australia now at 156 for 8 (yee ha!).
PS to TonyN: this isn’t O/T as bad light has stopped play and today’s poor weather with thunder was not forecast by the Met Office. I pray it improves tomorrow.
Blog rules are strangely silent about cricket and will remain so, at least until the fate of the Ashes are decided. Another evil conspiracyon the part of the Met Office?
What the hell are you guys talking about and what is a cricket score? Fish bait?
Yes but Max, it’s still there………
Daily image update
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
Hey Brute,
As neither an American or an Aussie (or Brit), I can take a neutral stand here.
A soccer game (football over here) can be quite thrilling, even if the end score was 2:1.
In cricket it appears to the uninitiated observer that nothing exciting really happened, but the score was 425 to 135.
Is there something wrong with this picture?
Max
Hi Brute
The NSIDC press blurb for shrinking June Arctic sea ice is notable only because NSIDC did not release a similar blurb for the offsetting growing Antarctic sea ice over the same period.
Does ice melt in the summer and refreeze in the winter? Duh!
How dumb do these guys think we are?
Max
Robin,
I seem to have touched a raw nerve over at RC, which is rather interesting.
My post #248 was accepted except that the final paragraph was snipped, namely:
The most recent observation that I’m aware of, amounting to the same can be seen in fig. 2b in Akasufo’s paper of April/30/09. It is described as a multi-decadal cycle, which scales off to about 60-years. http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/pdf/two_natural_components_recent_climate_change.pdf
I was really surprised by this because I would have thought they could respond with something like “Akasufo has been discredited, see LINK”, or, “go wash your mouth out“. I even wondered if I should put it in for that reason.
So, out of curiosity, I submitted this modification of it:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
256 BobFJ says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
17 Jul 2009 at 9:19 am
Hank Roberts,
Further to my 248, concerning a possible ~60-year cycle superimposed on the underlying trend of global warming:
The most recent observation that I’m aware of can be seen in fig. 2b in Akasufo’s paper of April/30/09. It is described as a multi-decadal cycle, which scales off to about 60-years
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It was accepted in moderation, but has since evaporated without note of it being edited.
Conclusion: They have no defence against Akasufo’s recent paper, and/or they don’t want anyone to read it.
Max Reur 6985
Test match cricket is not understandable until after a long appreciation of the infinite complexities, skills, and tensions in it. It takes years to develop that appreciation.
If I were to ask you to watch a skilled game of chess without you knowing the rules, would you experience any excitement, especially if it lasted five days?
To all aficionados, let’s hope that AGW does not become a problem for a win by England!
Actually, the weather becomes part of the game, and perhaps one thing hard for the novice to understand is that a draw, where one side is in a position of judgementally being unable to win for whatever reason, then strategy is usually changed to “play for a draw“. Now wait for it; deliberately playing for a draw can be exciting and paradoxically can be a desired result. In other words, the side in the stronger position probably failed to take the best decisions, as was seen in the first test match, where Australia arguably should have declared their innings closed early, rather than build a massive score. (The result was a draw)
And, and, and……………………………
Further my 6988, and since TonyN has declared open season for “The Ashes”
I should add that there is an expression; “Cricket is a funny game”, meaning such peculiar things as that even when a certain end result seems to be currently overwhelmingly apparent, the reverse may turn out to be the actual ending.
For instance, even though at the end of day two of the second test match, England appears to be in an overwhelming position of strength, there are still three days to go, and Oz could still win or almost as good, force a draw. (the latter being a defeat of the ability of England to exert a win, even from a position of strength)
For instance, demonstrating the way things can chaotically reverse or collapse, Andrew Strauss, the English captain scored 161 runs on the first day of this second test, but was dismissed quickly on day two for no score. (‘tis a funny game)
And, in the first test match:
Australia appeared to be in an overwhelming position with a massive score in their first innings, followed by a dramatic collapse of the English bats. However, England recovered to a magnificent draw, at the end of five days of tension!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BTW Brute, don’t be cheeky;
I think you have some game over there called “World Series” something or other? Is it what you call football, a sissy game, where the guys ponce-up in a lot of silly looking padding?
(Causing one English commentator to describe it as: “Not a very good game”, which BTW, is quite a devastatingly subtle insult in pure Anglo.)
Your population is a little over 300 million? Who joins in for this “World Series“ thingy?
Well, I’ll have you know that there are a lot of nations around the world that compete internationally in cricket, and some of them are cricket crazy, notably India, population ~ a billion. Then there is also Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, South Africa, New Zealand, West Indies, England, and Australia that are arguably at the top of the pyramid, travelling the real world to compete. (apologies to any I’ve missed from memory, but the less strong include Zimbabwe, Netherlands, Ireland, Argentina, Canada, and more)
Bob_FJ: so Australia all out for 215, England elected not to enforce the follow-on (an interesting decision) and have started their second innings – now at a dogged 52 for 0 after 12 overs. A strong position for England. But, so often they have completely frittered away strong positions that I am bound to fear it could happen again. As you said, gripping stuff.
In contrast, my opponent Enrique (at the Delingpole thread) has left the field.
(Sorry, Brute.)
JZ:
Perhaps this is a trivial point – but, when we reach post 6997 this thread will have achieved 10.001 posts in all: Whitehouse subthread 1289 + Lynas subthread 1715 + 6997 here. As yours was the first post (on 19th December 2007), it might be appropriate if you were to bag 10,001. Only 6 to go.
Bob,
I was teasing…….a little intercontinental societal ribbing. “The World Series” is the championship series of American baseball (a descendent of British Cricket).
The Super Bowl is the championship series of American Football, the “Sissy Game” you’ve referenced which is descended from Rugby (which is brutal as no padding is involved).
As they say, “It Takes Leather Balls To Play Rugby”.
Good luck to whichever team you’re cheering for.
Robin:
You just shot my fox! I didn’t think anyone else had noticed.
IPCC lead author on Global Warming conclusions: “we’re not scientifically there yet.”
As I wrote way back in December of 2007, I was ambivalent regarding the topic of global warming (leaning toward skepticism). After following this thread for all this time I realized that data does not support the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory.
That being said, any responsible politician that supports government CO2 regulation is either:
(A) Woefully uninformed (inept) or
(B) Ideologically opposed to the capitalist system in favor of a socialist society (and all it entails).
While it could be that these politicians are too indolent to research the topic, I doubt that a person achieving the level of Senator/Congressman (or President of the United States) could be stupid or lazy enough (or irresponsible) to not become informed on the topic which involves rearranging the economic system of the United States (if not the world) and voting in favor of legislation that will cost this country upward of a Trillion dollars in taxes and government regulation.
I can only conclude that politicians supporting the theory favor a socialist system (slavery of the citizenry).
Initially, I thought that it must be that people were simply uninformed or brainwashed into believing that the myth that is global warming was legitimate. Now I know that anyone that supports the theory is purposely ignoring the facts proving the CO2/Temperature Rise has no correlation.
I naively thought that education and passing along the information that disproves Anthropogenic Global Warming would eventually turn the tide in the debate and common sense would prevail; however, I’ve come to realize that the facts don’t matter to these ideologues………that the entire ruse is meant to wrestle control of industry from private citizens and, (through intimidation, agenda driven science, payoffs, deception and government fiat), to achieve government control of private industry.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_system_has_government_ownership_of_the_means_of_production_and_is_usually_associated_with_a_totalitarian_dictatorship
This is the bottom line. These are not conclusions based on scare tactics or “right wing hyperbole”……this is happening right now in the United States……No doubt about it.
Some people, (such as Peter Martin), may favor a Socialist form of government. He has gone as far to admit it, (although could not bring himself to admit that Socialism is the ultimate political goal of the Warmist initiatives).
The environmentalist/socialist agenda is a freight train careening down a track and will worm itself into society in some form or another despite the fact that it is not occurring. (I pray, for the sake of future generations, that I’m incorrect).
Now, the only course of action is to beat them at their own game.
JZ,
I’d appreciate your thoughts on this……………
TonyN,
Considering the webpage prohibition regarding mixing politics and the science involved in this topic…………In my mind, the two are so intrinsically intertwined that it is impossible to separate the two. “Global Warming” is the excuse to execute Socialist doctrine (either unwittingly or purposely).
Re: #6975, JZ
Now would seem to be as good a time as any to admit that this dumb Englishman was confusing the Washington Times with the Washington Post when he posted that link.
Robin, Reur 6990:
I think the decision to not force the follow-on may have been partly to rest Flintoff as much as possible given his apparent fragility to physical stress failures in bowling of late.
Yet he might be devastating in shortish bowling bursts, in the next innings, given some recuperation, and bat well as an all-rounder beforehand.
Should read:
……despite the fact that Anthropogenic Global Warming is not occurring.
Everyone:
Robin is right, #6996 was the 10,000th comment since David Whithouse started the ball rolling. When the New Statesman published his article, the suggestion that temperatures had ceased to rise and might even be falling was only being discussed on the net. Now it is mainstream, so he was well ahead of the field.
We owe thanks to David for going public when it was still risky to do so, and congratulations for being right.
My thanks to all those who have contributed to this thread, and also to the many more who visit it without commenting. If there is any other thread of this length on the net, I haven’t heard of it.
It is perhaps appropriate that the actual 10,000th comment is OT and about cricket.
Brute (6992)
American baseball (a descendent of British Cricket)
A descendent of Rounders (aka French cricket) surely..?
And if people think ‘World Series’ is presumptive, how about ‘Miss Universe’? That would be an interesting competition, if genuine…
James,
Miss Universe would be interesting for the sake of “diversity”.
I’m not certain which came first although I would assume that American baseball came afterward.
I’ll have to switch through the television channels and find out if this momentous event is being covered here in the U.S.
I should amend my previous post to include the term “World Series of American Baseball“.
Also a misnomer, as the only baseball teams involved are American (and I think a Canadian team or two). Curiously, nowadays many American baseball players are foreign nationals, (South American/Caribbean). I believe Japan has a league also that plays “American” baseball…….
Personally, I’ve never followed American Baseball…….I find it as interesting as watching paint dry.
(I think we’re going to bring the wrath of TonyN upon us for drifting off topic).