In a new scientific paper, the Russian head of the Space Research Laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, Dr Habibullo Abdussamatov, is telling us not to be concerned about "catastrophic global warming". What we should be worried out, he warns, is a deep temperature drop.

View full article here

Although, perforce, we have to use them, words are inadequate in describing our lemming mindset.
We have totally lost our marbles.
RES NON VERBA

Lord Monckton??

AGW looks like a thing which politicians find extraordinarily convenient. In the UK, the three major parties, mainly career politicians, are fully signed up to it. The BBC trumpets it at every opportinity. The EU finds it convenient. The public can be frightened into accepting all sorts of things they otherwise wouldn't stand for. A huge industry has grown up around it and conventional companies are finding ways to make it pay; reduced carbon footprint paint is a glorious way to get people to pay the same price for a lower quality product on the grounds that they can feel good about it and if they don't, they ought to. In short, the political class have persuaded themselves that it's all true and much within their ends anyway.

The public is growingly annoyed, but so much political capital has been invested, the politicos of all stripes have more in common with themselves than the voters anyway, that maybe not even a couple of 62/3 type winters will deflect them. I can't see any of the main parties in the UK denouncing it all as a bout of mass hysteria, which they now accept is obvious nonsense. They see themselves too much as managers rather than leaders.

It has to morph into something else. Climate change or climate chaos are OK stopgaps. Energy security, but that implies there's an 'us' to be kept secure; the 'us' could be the EU, but no one really believes the EU is an 'us'.

I suppose it could be quietly forgotten and all the major parties (and the EU) quietly withdraw from it, de-emphasising it bit by bit.

"...Where now is that person of similar stature now, to warn us that we are being driven to disaster by baying fools, of the likes of Lord Stern?"

There are several, with more coming out of the closet every day.

Probably the greatest is Steve McIntyre, who, with his colleague Ross McKitrick, stood alone since 1998 in questioning the science behind the Global Warming Scam. During this time his investigations were deeply unpolular, and he was subject to vilification and a continuous process of non-cooperation form the scientific community, who flouted rules and disobeyed their own directives in a coordinated attempte to keep him from exposing their lies.

All the understanding which is now beginning to grow of the enormity of this fraud owes it's origin to the thankless work McIntyre did in keeping the base tenets of science alive.

In a just and reasonable world, he would be the prime candidate for a Nobel Prize for single-handedly saving science. Too bad that his major contribution is to show that this is NOT a just world....

That all of our major politicians and their parties support AGW, could well be a large part of our contempt for them.....along of course with all their other lies and thievery.

PS. That Russian paper makes so much sense. Tks.

Yes, but I think his stance is that the Mann Hockey Stick graph was flawed and its use by the IPCC as a poster child was completely wrong. It's wrong to base policy on a flawed paper and it's wrong to persist with a flawed paper as a basis for policy, ignoring the fact that it's discredited.

This is a somewhat different from being a general champion against AGW. As far as I know, he restricts himself to the statistics behind proxy studies and doesn't make pronouncements outside that. Given the reliance placed on proxy studies and the Hockey Stick, this is indeed an important thing he's done. The Hockey Stick story goes far beyond simple error, or pushing for a pet theory, which happens all the time in science, and amounts to fraud.

I think AGW is an area where lots of specialists in particular areas say that claims made in relation to some aspect of AGW concerning their field are wrong, but climatology is a science, maybe 'study' would be a better word, which draws on all sorts of specialisms.



Yes.

McIntyre is obviously important, but I'd argue that the sceptic champion must be Anthony Watts and his team at Watts Up With That. His site has taught large numbers of people the basics of climate and has acted as rallying point for sceptic scientists and interested public alike.

With the government hammering air travellers with emission taxes a Labour MP, forget his name, on PMQs put a question to McSnottie.

He said, his Afro-Caribbean constitutents are complaining about the high tax on flights, presumably on flying back & forth to the Caribbean, McSnottie, said he would meet with the ACs about their concerns.

So does this mean he's going to give them a discount, will he tell them that he believes that 'black carbon footprints' contribute less emissions than 'white carbon footprints'.

It's baffling why the AGW freaks are not permanently lobbying NASA about their carbon footprint, they keep sending things into space, all those emissions, another rocket today. Are NASA exempt?

Dodgy Geezer & Comet,

Good posts. I agree.

I have the greatest respect and admiration for Steve McIntyre. I especially like his impartiality and the way he keeps a tight rein on his blog, even when he's cut out some of my own 'contributions' (not necessarily in my own name ). A very strong character. Dead straight too.

And yes, if I had anything to do with it he'd get a Nobel Prize. Maybe one day he will. I'd like to think so. But, as Dodgy Geezer implies, they might have to create a new one to reflect his role in saving science and holding it to the highest standards.


Sandy,

Nothing I've said above of course in anyway detracts from Anthony Watts's work for whom I have the highest regard too. It's just that there's something about McIntyre's uncompromising nature that strikes a particular chord with me. I don't know why. It just does.

As I see it and using the AGW crowds own data, China and India emit the bulk of the CO2 these days, if the warmists believed thier rhetoric they would be pleading for us all to stop buying products made in those countries but they dont, this can only mean they do not believe in CO2 driven climate change. Pushing this would lead the USA into a nasty corner, as Chine owns them.

Copied from a Russian commenting on WUWT


Disdainful laughter, the key to regeneration?

Yes! Mockery is the most poweful weapon we have.

Al Gore admits CO2 does not cause majority of global warming.

http://www.infowars.com/al-gore-admits- ... l-warming/

That would be the same Al Gore now "set to be first carbon billionaire"?