Climate Change: It's the Sun, Stupid

[Old Rocks]

Obviously, world socialism is the only thing that will save us.

Obviously capitalism as practiced by the Bush admin and Conservatives is the only thing that will save us from the ravages of prosperity.

 

[Intense]

Here is an honest question. How much CO2 is produced in a 24 hour period around the globe from plant life, in the absence of photosynthesis, both above and below sea level?

Here is an honest question. CO2 being such a great nontoxic refrigerant, Why aren't we taking advantage of that?

 

[daveman]

Obviously, world socialism is the only thing that will save us.

Obviously capitalism as practiced by the Bush admin and Conservatives is the only thing that will save us from the ravages of prosperity.

It's funny how you pretend that all the solutions you cultists insist we implement AREN'T world socialism.

 

[code1211]

The video that Anthony Watts does not want you to see: The Climate Denial “Crock of the Week” Climate Progress

Okay. I watched the video critically. Critically is how I watch most things.

The entire first half of this nothing but a hatchet job and makes no refereance to the actual data collected by Watts. It attacks Watts and all of the institutions and organizations that the speaker feels are Conservative and therefore not only wrong but perverse and evil.

The peice then asociates all of these perverse and evil things with Watts. This is classic propaganda technique. This should be a red flag, a red flare, for anyone hoping to get actual critical thought out of something.

Finally, half way through the piece, we come to a referance to Watts work and, guess what? (Guess Watt?) Watts' complaints are legitimate. Some stations are sited poorly and all temperature readings are adjusted twice for accuracy.

In the most disingenuous part of the piece, the producer shows a graph of temperatures from the poorly sited stations and then imposes over it a graph of temperatures from all stations to demonstrate that there is no difference between the track of the tow readings.

Problems with this:
1. The temperature record goes back to 1880 and the graphs displayed go back to 1950.
2. Notably absent from the description of the temperatures is the definition of what temperatures they are. Are they the raw data temps or the temps adjusted twice for accuracy? No mention of this. I assume that in the interest of science, they would be the adjusted temperatures since these are adjusted for accuracy and accuracy is what we are seeking.

Right?

The problem is that Watts' compaint is that the raw temps are adjusted.

The piece also justifiably points out that it really is warming and uses migration patterns and seasons and other empirical data to support. Like a racist at a lynching, though, they just can't resist finishing with another swat at the corpse and finish off with another attack at the man.

I was hoping that they would say that Watts lied about the poorly positioned stations. They did not.

That Watts lied about the temperatures being adjusted. They did not.

That Watts lied about the actual data on the various readings of temperature from the various sources. They did not.

They agreed with all of his data and conducted an ad hominem attack on him and attacked the conlusions without ever debasing his data.

Agreeing with every bit of evidence seems a weak way to attack research. They could take a lesson from Watts on presentation and just present the data and let the reader or viewer draw his own conclusion.

 

[IanC]

The video that Anthony Watts does not want you to see: The Climate Denial “Crock of the Week” Climate Progress

Watts set up a volunteer organization to audit land temperature stations to see if they complied with regulations. many did not. how is that lying?

what was their proof against Watts? he was booked on Fox News and went to Heartland conferences. WOW!!

are you denying that the temp stations are in bad shape? the video said the good stations gave the same results as the whole population of stations. do you know if that was before or after 'adjustments' had been made, because the video sidesteps that question.

they also pretend Watts asked for the video to be taken down for its content rather than for illegal use of copyright material. hmmm, seems like a hatchet job to me. didn't Mann scream like a baby and threaten to sue people when the "Hide the Decline" video came out? hahaha, your side's double standards are showing again.

edit- even if the temp trends were the same, is that a valid reason to leave temperature stations in terrible conditions? especially after it had been pointed out?

 

[IanC]

Little Green Footballs - Anthony Watts: Disastrously Wrong Again

Anthony Watts: Disastrously Wrong Again
Charles Johnson
Environment • Mon Nov 22, 2010 at 10:07 am PST • Views: 26,575

Pseudo-scientist Anthony Watts of the “Watts Up With That” climate change denial blog posted a bold prediction earlier this year — he said this summer would decisively show that the polar ice cap had stopped declining. He guaranteed this, in fact.

Now the scientific measurements have been taken, and the results are in, and Watts’s prediction is revealed as the denialist propaganda it is; in fact, polar ice has declined to historically low levels, and this summer, both the Northwest Passage and the Northeast Passage were completely clear of ice for the first time in recorded history. Watts is a hack and a fraud, posing as a scientist to feed his right wing audience the soothing false claims they want to hear.

Environmentalist Peter Sinclair’s new video makes this very clear.

hahahahahahaha, I looked at the site. and here is what I found-

UPDATE at 11/22/10 2:51:56 pm:

To be precise, it was not Anthony Watts who predicted the sea ice would rebound, but one of his blog co-authors.

Watts is being slandered for something that he didnt even say!

 

[boedicca]

Here is an honest question. How much CO2 is produced in a 24 hour period around the globe from plant life, in the absence of photosynthesis, both above and below sea level?

Here is an honest question. CO2 being such a great nontoxic refrigerant, Why aren't we taking advantage of that?

And what happens to plant life if we dramatically reduce CO2?

 

[IanC]

Anthony Watts

Just Enough Information to Mislead
Tags: Alan Cheetham, Anthony Watts, Der Spiegel, Nature, Richard Littlemore, WUWT
You can't beat Anthony Watts' team at WUWT (either Watts Up With That or We Use Wishful Thinking, it's hard to tell) for the delicate selection and presentation of "evidence" to argue that climate isn't changing.

Here, for example, is a post that trumpets a Nature article on the climate effects of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. WUWT also credits the reputable German publication Der Spiegel as an intermediate source for this information and then posts the graph (left) as easy visual proof that what's happening in climate today is all part of a normal up and down.

But have a close look at that graph. First, it doesn't come from the Nature paper or from Der Spiegel. It was cobbled together on a denier site run by an engineer named Alan Cheetham. Second, the yellow lines showing a downward resumption on the right side are based on - well, actually, on no data points whatever. While Cheetham may have a crystal ball, a touching optimism or a cavalier disregard for objective presentation, he has no evidence at all.

But he has a fan in Anthony Watts. Watt does that tell you?

without looking into this more closely it seems obvious that " the yellow lines showing a downward resumption on the right side are based on " the continuation of the pattern of the ocean current oscillation! of course I can see why Old Rocks can't understand the concept of pointing out patterns, that would entail thinking. did they really think the article wasn't about showing a pattern?

Dude! your proof that Watts is a liar are awfully lame. nitpicking details, ad homenum attacks, guilt by association just dont cut it. especially when the evidence against the other side is so much stronger.

 

[IanC]

2010 February Wott's Up With That?

Interesting site, I'm going to look at it some more when I have some time.

Sometimes the insults directed at a man say more to his good character and work than compliments can.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[westwall]

Anthony Watts

Just Enough Information to Mislead
Tags: Alan Cheetham, Anthony Watts, Der Spiegel, Nature, Richard Littlemore, WUWT
You can't beat Anthony Watts' team at WUWT (either Watts Up With That or We Use Wishful Thinking, it's hard to tell) for the delicate selection and presentation of "evidence" to argue that climate isn't changing.

Here, for example, is a post that trumpets a Nature article on the climate effects of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. WUWT also credits the reputable German publication Der Spiegel as an intermediate source for this information and then posts the graph (left) as easy visual proof that what's happening in climate today is all part of a normal up and down.

But have a close look at that graph. First, it doesn't come from the Nature paper or from Der Spiegel. It was cobbled together on a denier site run by an engineer named Alan Cheetham. Second, the yellow lines showing a downward resumption on the right side are based on - well, actually, on no data points whatever. While Cheetham may have a crystal ball, a touching optimism or a cavalier disregard for objective presentation, he has no evidence at all.

But he has a fan in Anthony Watts. Watt does that tell you?

without looking into this more closely it seems obvious that " the yellow lines showing a downward resumption on the right side are based on " the continuation of the pattern of the ocean current oscillation! of course I can see why Old Rocks can't understand the concept of pointing out patterns, that would entail thinking. did they really think the article wasn't about showing a pattern?

Dude! your proof that Watts is a liar are awfully lame. nitpicking details, ad homenum attacks, guilt by association just dont cut it. especially when the evidence against the other side is so much stronger.

olfraud has never been accused of being rational.

 

[IanC]

for teapartysamaurai-

The man who repeatedly beats the Met Office at its own game - Telegraph

...In the eyes of many punters, he puts the taxpayer-funded Met Office to shame. How on earth does he do it? He studies the Sun.

He looks at the flow of particles from the Sun, and how they interact with the upper atmosphere, especially air currents such as the jet stream, and he looks at how the Moon and other factors influence those streaming particles.

He takes a snapshot of what the Sun is doing at any given moment, and then he looks back at the record to see when it last did something similar. Then he checks what the weather was like on Earth at the time – and he makes a prophecy.

I have not a clue whether his methods are sound or not. But when so many of his forecasts seem to come true, and when he seems to be so consistently ahead of the Met Office, I feel I want to know more...

you may yet turn out to be right about the sun, although probably not in the way you thought.

 

[IanC]

And what happens to plant life if we dramatically reduce CO2?

I wouldn't worry about that too much. Even if we bring human civilization to the brink of collapse by shutting down all CO2 producing activities there will be little change in the CO2 levels. Either the natural increase in CO2 that lags temp increases will continue or global temps will reverse, leading to decreases in CO2 down the road. But humans can only add to CO2, not reduce it.

 

[Muhammed]

Climate Change: It's the Sun, Stupid

That is really the crux of the matter. No matter what temperature you think the Earth should be, whether you think it should be warmer or cooler or think it is just right for Goldielocks, you still cannot tell the Sun what to do tomorrow and expect it to obey.

All those global warming whacko nutjobs are so fucking stupid. They have been brainwashed by the mass media.

 

[Muhammed]

Dude! your proof that Watts is a liar are awfully lame. nitpicking details, ad homenum attacks, guilt by association just dont cut it. especially when the evidence against the other side is so much stronger.

You cannot expect Global Warming Cult to succumb to logic.

Mention climategate and they go deaf.

 

[Mr. H.]

This is a cool video clip:

APOD: 2010 December 15 - A Huge Solar Filament Erupts

 

[IanC]

Dude! your proof that Watts is a liar are awfully lame. nitpicking details, ad homenum attacks, guilt by association just dont cut it. especially when the evidence against the other side is so much stronger.

You cannot expect Global Warming Cult to succumb to logic.

Mention climategate and they go deaf.

we all look for evidence that supports our side and try to ignore things that don't fit. confirmation bias.

but to ignore the climategate emails and all the rancid dirt they exposed is pretty farfetched. and the whitewash investigations that found the principal actors 'unguilty' just made things worse.

 

[editec]

So who here doubts that the overall global temperature, both the atmosphere and the ocean is rising?

Anybody?

 

[IanC]

So who here doubts that the small increase in global temperatures since the Little Ice Age are almost entirely due to natural causes, with a small effect from increased CO2 that is probably smaller than the adjustments made to the historical data?

 

[Old Rocks]

Yessirreee........ Them thar pointy headed Libarul scientists are telling us people in Real America lies.