Friday
Jul022010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill 
Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Dec 28 - derreg
on
Curiosidade na Madrugada -
Dec 28 - kekuss
on
Rushed Office Relocation!
Links
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
-
Science blogs
-
Political blogs
-
Other blogs
Subscribe
Copyright © 2006-2013, Bishop Hill All rights reserved.
Reader Comments (125)
Dung and Latimer Adler
Perhaps a bishop's crosier? That way you would be identified by fellow members of Bishop Hill and can use it to defend yourselves from any hostile attacks. But no hitting, though -- just to block the blows.
Actually, I do like the use of a scarf. You could use it to cover your face so they can't take your pictures.
I'm going in Medieval costume, so the warmists will refuse to believe I exist, or maybe I'll go as the Stig - a petrol head with a crash helmet: provocative, yet safe !!
Come on guys you just need an obvious meeting point? I suggest whoever arrives first sets fire to a couple of copies of the Guardian there's sure to be plenty about.
Josh's T-shirts! Style points if you wear the IoP tank one seeing as they're next door to RIBA.
or for the brave-
http://www.partyon-line.co.uk/products/polar-bear-fancy-dress-costume/1447/?source=froogle&utm_source=froogle&utm_medium=comparison_shopping_feeds&utm_nooverride=1
and a hand made badge saying 'please dont eat my liver'
Off the non-topic I know, but there is something in the wind re:Russell report. First we have the letter sent in and accepted by Sir Muir, but put on the web site, now there are various articles appearing in the Guardian about climate science and this whole debate, but no comments are being allowed. One of them, the story that climate scientists have been receiving "death threats" is about two months old, I'm beginning to think that Sir Muir may have been a little more candid than he was expected to be about these, shall we say "people", and their shenanigans, and they've seen the "galleys" and are trying a desparate last attempt to make him change his findings.
Chaps. Some of the comments are becoming a little flippant. Can I remind you that we are discussing The Most Serious Problem Facing Mankind, and unwonted levity detracts from the importance of our task
The way some are going on, one might imagine that the Guardian debate is nothing other than a school trip for the Fourth Form, with buns and ice creams on the charabanc. And the opportunity to pull faces and flick ink pellets at the Prefects.
Perhaps our secret sign should be to each carry the Collected Works of Nigel Molesworth. Since no crazed Warmist has ever evinced the slightest sign of a sense of humour, that should fool them completely. And is not the hero of the book one Basil Fotherington-Tomas, who sa 'hello clouds hello sky' a lot.
Now that surely would be apt. As any fule kno.
geronimo
Yes, something in the ether- did Churchill put it down to that when the Times crossword with all the D-day codewords like Overlord and Pluto appeared? At least it shows that sceptics are useless at hacking- denied access to the nod/wink mischief loop.
Sorry Pharos the Telegraph crossword i believe, the answer to 11 across i believe was Overlord.
Latimer Adler
Monbiot is the sort of weed and wet who win the Mrs. Joyful prize for Rafia work.
@dreadnought
Absolutely priceless...
http://tomroper.typepad.com/tr/2007/11/mrs-joyful-priz.html
The coincidence is remarkable. Tee hee!
I'm hoping the Russell review will be better than the previous versions, and debate can become a little more civilised. Some of the stuff Dr Curry has been doing has been great to try and build bridges, but whether she'll be able to teach some of the old dogs new tricks remains to be seen. Too many people have too much invested, but some are nearing retirement. Hopefully not all of their funds are invested in REDD schemes though.
Also recommend reading Fred's book if you can before the debate. Has some good things to say about the implications for science, which are bigger than the implications for climate science.
But, some interesting pub names in the vicinity of RIBA for the conspiratorial, The Green Man, Crown and Mitre, or Masons Arms? But we must be serious, otherwise 2020 will be year when they finally immanentised the Eschaton. Or 2030, with overruns.
Latimer Adler
Perhaps our secret sign should be to each carry the Collected Works of Nigel Molesworth.
As both an American and an Irishman with a Spanish name, I believe in a more "in your face" approach. Carry a copy of The Hockey Stick Illusion. Besides, it would help finance the Bishop's escape -- err -- I mean vacation
As for the joviality, what else are we going to do until the release of the Muir -- ah, whatever it is?
There is plenty of time to gnash our teeth after that.
I know a number of PhD, even hired hired a few in the past.. And like ANY other cross-section of people.
There are great ones, stupid ones, and the majority are just average… (relatively speaking to the rest of the population)
Anybody, that has hung around a science lab, completed an MSc, knows what you need to do to get a phd Hang around long enough, help the the professors ‘teach’ their pet subjetcs to the undergrads. Do most of the boring ‘leg’ work, data collection, data archiving, writing code, collecting samples, etc
I don’t remeber the exact quote, but someone likened a PhD.
To knowing absolutely everthing there is to know about a grain of sand, but being oblivious to the beach…
I could have hung around the lab, for a few more years to get a cybernetics phd, or jump university department to get a meteorolgy one (Reading University, good dept, and has the Walker Institute, now) money, funding was available. But I jumped ship and got an IT career. Some people were brilliant, some people were adept at playing academic politics, some were both, most were average(that probably includes me, -average – but I was aware of it, unlike some ),
ie jobs a bit thin on the ground (early 1990’s) virtuall half of the peple I knew at university, stayed a bit longer at university, get an MSc or PHd, enjoy the ‘attractions’ (can’t remember her name ) of student life, partly why I did a MSc .
Mainly though to get betterqualified for a job, jumping disciplines from Applied Chemistry to Cybernetics (ie IT )definetly helped get me a job (Chemistry had quite a lot of programming/computing introduced, – results, analysis, etc, as part of the course, that got me interested)
Some never left the departments( I know a few), lots of the guys grew beards and lost their hair… some married some of the undergrads (some more than once) the ones good at academic politics got better at academic politics, peer reviewed publications, made assistant profesors, and the great ones made full professors.
Just because someone has a PhD, in one area of ‘climate science’ does not make them an expert to pronounce on the hundred other areas of specialisation. Some people are amazing, cross disiplined, interested inareas outside of their specialisation, and aware of the ‘beach’
(Another analogy, is how many Nobel Prize winners, make pronoucementt (that get listened to, because they are a nobel prize winner) that makes them look completely stupid.
No doubt full blown ‘climate science’ titled Phd’s are on their way, UEA I believe do a Masters now.
MSc Climate Change and International Development
http://www.uea.ac.uk/dev/MScCCID
MSc Climate Change
http://www.uea.ac.uk/sci/studyscience/postgraduates/env/msclimateschange
Would one of the above ‘trump’ a , for example, astro-physics MSC, or PhD, etc
Would a ‘ climate science’ PhD make someone a bigger ‘voice of authority’ than a Professor of Atmospheric Physics, etc.. say from MIT, or anywhere else for that matter..
Allready we see, ‘climate scientists’ are the experts, to be deferred to..
Just a thought.
I know, let us all wave our JPMORGAN ClimateCare carbon offset certificates, we bought for the journey in.. (ie rail)
http://www.jpmorganclimatecare.com/
To make a point about carbon trading (JP MORGAN CHASE bank!) and to confuse the environmentalists, campaign against climate chnage activists (george monbiot, el presidento)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about an MSC in climate change, to get your 'voice' of 'climate authority'
http://www.uea.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.114971!/MSc%20Climate%20Change.pdf
University of East Anglia – Climate Research Unit
Msc Climate Change – Course profile above…
ONE YEAR
Course Profile
Compulsory (120 credits)
Research Skills (ENV-M60Y)
Dissertation (ENV-M62X)
The Science of Climate Change (ENV-M535)
Climate Change: Science, Society and Policy (ENV-M594)
Options Range (60 credits)
examples of available modules:
Introduction to the Economics
of the Environment (ENV-M521)
Atmospheric Physics (ENV-M563)
Atmospheric Chemical Change (ENV-M577)
Environmental Assessment (ENV-M523)
Sustainable Consumption (ENV-M551)
Fundamentals of Meteorology (ENV-M509)
Air Pollution Chemistry (ENV-M572)
Natural Resources and Environmental Economics (ENV-M524)
Physical Oceanography (ENV-M51Y)
Applied Environmental and Waste Management (ENV-M504)
Geophysical Modelling (ENV-M531)
oh look, an Atmospheric Physics Module, probably to help the guys with geography degrees (tim mitchell ) get up to speed, on physics,
oh look, geophysical modelling (learn a bit of programming?)
But if that is a bit hard, can probably choose, the other options to get your 60 credits.
Choice quote from the blurb:
“You will also learn about research methods, consisting of empirical approaches to climate reconstruction (e.g. tree ring analysis),data preparation and analysis, detection of anthropogenic changes and theoretical or model-based approaches to climate prediction.”
Entry Requirements
This programme is open to students with a good first degree in environmental science or a related discipline.
I know, I could knock one of these off, given a spare year. I bet the majority of people commenting here could as well, (whatever you believe or do not believe)
Then you too, could get a job on the CAGW, IPCC, NGO, political, etc bandwagon. See the blurb below
“The MSc Climate Change is based in the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the School
of Environmental Sciences (ENV). The course is designed to provide you with in-depth interdisciplinary knowledge of climate change science, society and policy. The course content equips our graduates for careers in areas as diverse as government agencies, business consultancies and academia.”
(JPMORGAN Climate Care Carbon offests – look a good career, bank bonuses?!)
Sorry for the cysnicism, it’s late, and just spent a couple of hours, getting three, 6 and unders to bed.
Night All
Publication date/time confirmed
The publication date for the Independent Climate Change E-mails Review report has been set for 13:00 on the 7 July.
bish -
u get a mention by harrabin:
5 July: BBC: Harrabin's Notes: Getting to the bottom of Climategate
In this case, UEA's Professor Davies passed on the list chosen by the university for approval by the Royal Society, asserting that it included the most controversial UEA papers.
A couple of society Fellows signed off the list after a brief email exchange, even though neither of them was expert in UEA science - and the list was sent on to Lord Oxburgh.
Two determined bloggers, Steve McIntyre and Andrew Montford, have been trying to unpick this process. They think it looks at least slack, possibly worse...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10507144.stm
how on earth can harrabin and others be stopped from using "climate sceptics" when they mean "CATASTROPHIC ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING SCEPTICS"?
"But climate sceptics believe they have been short changed"
Harrabin's Notes: Getting to the bottom of Climategate
“The Muir Russell review is planned to set the seal on this long Climategate affair, which has surely been damaging to science but one thing is for certain - the panel will not examine the validity of the UEA climate science overall.
A spokesman for Muir Russell told me recently this was a matter for the Oxburgh Panel - a puzzling comment considering that the Oxburgh review clearly did nothing of the sort“.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10507144.stm
Unfortunately some morons play into the hands of warmists by writing abusively to climate scientists giving them the excuse to claim a victimhood which would be laughable if it wasn't so nauseating.
And of course the likes of The Guardian tediously eat it up:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/05/hate-mail-climategate
But one passage stood out for me:
"Dr Myles Allen, head of the climate dynamics group at University of Oxford's Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics Department, said
(.....)
"I suspect part of the reason people feel they have to attack climate scientists is that politicians and environmentalists have a tendency to hide behind the science," he said. "In the run-up to Copenhagen, we often heard the phrase 'the science dictates' - that we need a 40% cut in rich-country emissions by 2020, for example - when in fact only a very specific, and politically loaded, interpretation of the science implied any such thing. If people who claim to be on the side of the science use scientists as human shields, it is hardly surprising that the scientists end up getting shot at."
Of course if
a) the likes of Hansen and Mann hadn't been so hysterically doom-mongering and
b) if people like Dr. Myles ("Nuffin' to do with me, mate") Allen had spoken out against what he now claims was an over-reaction, perhaps the whole thing could have been discussed rationally and the naughty boys wouldn't now be making them cry.
Heads up Moderator! Tiffany Spam! First I have ever seen on here!
[Thanks. Dealing with it now. Father J.]
I need clarification folks?
As far as I can make out I need to be wearing:
A carnation behind the ear.
A Gulf petroleum, BP or Exxon T shirt.
An endangered plant in a button hole.
A scarf (but not Aldershot F.C. so as not to be mistaken for Mr Adler)
Medieval dress (plus crash helmet?).
An IOP T shirt (over or under the BP one?).
Tiffany jewelry???
The Collected Works of Nigel Molesworth.
The Hockey Stick Illusion.
A Bishop's crosier.
A Maple Leaf Hockey Stick.
A home made badge saying "please dont eat my liver".
I also need to visit The Green Man, Crown and Mitre, and Masons Arms on the way.
I need to be accompanied by a topless Katie and set fire to any available copies of the Guardian as soon as I get in.
As a very unfit 62 year old some of the above may pose a problem, in particular getting past the Green Man.
Ups I meant Mr Alder
@dung
I think that the jewellery is optional. Otherwise you have summed up the approved dress code nicely.
Just to add further savour, Fat Bigot over at CA is inviting Steve Mc to 'the best curry in London'. Perhaps we should get invited to that too....food for the body lest the intellectual fare dished up by George and co. does not satisfy our needs?
But a medieval suit of armour may have some practical drawbacks after a very spicy meal :-0
So the Russell (Independent Climate Change E-mails Review) report is out at 1pm tomorrow. I wonder how many of the great and the good will have seen an advance copy so that they can get the propaganda in first?
Times main headline (at least in my edition) 'UN report on climate change was 'one-sided'- Study for Copenhagen ran risk of being alarmist ' Everything gets a mention except 'Amazongate', I wonder why ?
Philip, well The Guardian seem to be throwing in the kitchen sink at the moment for some reason, whether or not they actually know the conclusions of the inquiry. Yet another front page piece:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/06/1010-campaign-carbon-emissions
They have barely mentioned 10:10 in months so things must be getting desperate.
"Harvey, of course, insists that 10:10 has been good value for money. Since it launched, she estimates it has achieved half a million tonnes of carbon dioxide in pledged reductions. Put another way, that's broadly equivalent to the annual CO2 output of 50,000 Britons. "Our costs to date have come in around £440,000 and that's mainly [staffing] costs. This works out at about 80p spent per tonne of CO2 saved."
Though, of course they don't actually monitor results or put pressure on anyone to adhere to their fuzzy PR commitments, which is useful as we don't know how much of a fiction their estimation of CO2 "saved" is.
Artwest et al. Worth reading through the Guardian commitments to '10:10', some real fruitcakes among them. Tottenham Hotspur are going to use Email instead of paper, it's a wonder no-one has thought of this before, and London Underground are cutting off the escalators at off-peak periods.If you've ever lugged a heavy suitcase and a rucksack from the bowels of the earth, you'll be delighted at this, and I shan't be drinking Adnan's ales tomorrow night !
Apologies if this has already been posted but I have just received the below from the GWPF who appear to be making full use of Steve McIntyre's UK trip. Is it possible for someone to video and to post the GWPF event (and the next day's Guardian debate) on YouTube for people who are unable to attend?
"Climategate after the Russell Review
Discussing the 'Climategate' Affair and the CRU Inquiries
Speakers
* Stephen McIntyre (Canada)
* David Holland (UK)
Tuesday, 13 July 2010, 19:00 - 21:00
Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining, 1 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5DB
Seats are available on a first-come, first-served basis.
To register, please e-mail: info@thegwpf.org or phone 207 9306856
On 7 July, Sir Muir Russell will publish the findings of the Independent Climate Change Email Review into what is commonly known as the 'Climategate' Affair. The Global Warming Policy Foundation is holding a public meeting to assess the procedures, conclusions and implications of the Review and the lessons of Climategate.
Stephen McIntyre and David Holland are internationally recognised critics of the flawed expert advisory process that governments continue to rely on. Both are the subject of frequent references in the 'Climategate' emails (McIntyre is mentioned over 100 times) and both contributed written submissions of evidence to the Muir Russell inquiry. According to the BBC, McIntyre "arguably knows more about CRU science than anyone outside the unit - but none of the CRU inquiries has contacted him for input."
The meeting will be chaired by Dr Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
About the Speakers
Stephen McIntyre
Stephen McIntyre, a Canadian citizen, is a mathematical statistician and the most prominent critic of the so-called Hockey Stick graph. Since becoming involved with climate change issues some years ago, he has become a leading and internationally recognised critic first, of the handling of data and the treatment of evidence by prominent and influential climate scientists, and second, of flawed IPCC procedures. Besides his numerous publications, he has made a major contribution to the debate through his prizewinning blog, ClimateAudit.
David Holland
David Holland is a retired engineer. He was a co-author of a leading critique of the Stern Review, and more recently has published a far-reaching criticism of IPCC methods and procedures."
Look guys the Russell Review will just be like the Lord Hutton inquiry.
Despite the evidence of wrong doing (the trick - the abuses of peer review - the personal insults - blocking FOI requests - hijacking the IPCC process - deleting data and emails - etc) Sir Muir Russell will point the finger of blame squarely at sceptics ( McIntyre was wrong - it is right to reject sceptical science - it was the sceptics who harrassed the scientists - it was wrong that climate scientists were subject to FOI requests - the IPCC findings are sound - the scientists were just tidying their desks - etc).
Conclusion: The scientists did nothing wrong, it was the sceptics who are completely at fault here.
As I said the Guardian public meeting on Climategate will turn into a show trial of sceptics.
You have been warned!
Gnashing of teeth already. I can hardly wait until 13:01 London time tomorrow. Fortunately, I will still be asleep in California. Until the noise wakes me like a magnitude 7 earthquake, that is.
All in all, I am expecting nothing from the Muir what-ever-it-is. It will say nothing, it will change nothing, it will amount to nothing, because it is nothing.
I really hope I am wrong. I really hope that it is objective and makes a bunch of people rethink their positions. However, I sadly doubt it.
Once again, I repeat. This is not about science. All the "scientific" frufoo is just window dressing on rhetoric designed to sway the hearts and minds of the public to joyfully open their wallets and dump money into the Exchequer and pockets of already rich men.
We really need to return it. This is a war of words, not facts.
Dung
A copy of The Hockey Stick Illusion with the cover facing out should do. However, do hold it in both hands to use as a shield when the rabid warmists see it.
Peter Hayes
Tiffany Spam!
Sorry, that one got by me. Could someone explain? You know how out-of-touch the old folks can be. :)
Interesting Science articles
Unlike Nature, Science does seem to stick with science. Just out, hot off the -- err, ePress, I guess. I will let them speak for themselves. These will give you something to amuse yourselves while we all wait for the Muir what-ever-it-is. I guess you have to go to Germany to find real scientists nowadays. These are abstracts, but say enough.
Here
Here
I would post the actual articles except I am bound by my membership with them not to.
“As I said the Guardian public meeting on Climategate will turn into a show trial of sceptics”.
Mac I think your comment is possible true and a point to watch out for. Personally I think Monbiot will be pulling a sicky and someone who knows what they are talking about will chair the debate.
Bishop: I finally got my copy of the Hockey Stick Illusion and have been avidly reading. An excellent book, very readable, and I must echo comments made elsewhere that this should indeed be required reading for climate scientists. Thanks again!
Thanks Don.
artwest, toad, and other Guardian watchers:
The 10:10 article on the Mass Movement which will Change the World has been up ten hours now, and has attracted just six comments, five of them raspberries from us denialists.
I predict that the audience at the Guardian’s Climategate inquest (or Shenanigans Wake) will be 95% sceptic (and 3% skeptic). I shall be wearing a white coat and humming “we’re coming to take you away”.
Dutch IPCC inquiry:
BBC version
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10506283.stm
Telegraph version
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7872791/IPCC-climate-change-report-played-down-positive-impacts.html
Times version snippet ( full article behind pay wall)
http://www.thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1195-un-report-on-climate-change-was-one-sided.html
Economist version (the best)
http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2010/07/bias_and_ipcc_report&fsrc=nwl
BBC bias, anyone?
OK when I arrive at the debate venue I reckon I will have the following:
A carnation
An endangered plant (well actually a dead plant which is overkill I do accept that)
A scarf
A copy of "The Hockey Stick Illusion" (held as a shield as suggested!)
A hand made badge saying "Please dont eat my liver" ( Cant remember why?)
A Hockey Stick (If I get it past the bouncers)
A British Petroleum T shirt
I will require instant recognition and moral support -.-
Dung, that will make you easy to draw ;-)
I will be there feverishly cartooning so do say hi..
Josh
And of course I hope we will all manage to congregate for a drink afterwards - looks like there will be a good number of us.
I will be wearing a brown leather jacket, clutching notebooks, pens and look alarmingly like George Monbiot, apparently.
See you there.
worth reading it all, plus comments:
5 July: BBC: Richard Black: Dutch courage for climate mainstream
Meanwhile, some of the IPCC’s harshest critics within mainstream journalism are having to retrench on some of their most contentious claims…
The Canadian National Post and Financial Post newspaper group is being sued for libel by Canadian scientist Andrew Weaver – a particularly interesting action, in that it seeks to make the paper liable for readers’ comments appended to articles as well as for the articles themselves.
There’s a chance, I gather, that even more explosive libel suits may follow…
As this series of reviews unwinds, we see a landscape in which the central claims of mainstream climate science is judged to be untouched: a landscape in which man-made climate change is very likely happening, and its effects are projected to be significant in many regions of the world, particularly in regions populated by the poor.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2010/07/dutch_courage.html
Somebody have a pint of Guinness for me! Wish I could be there, charging the windmills.
Very interesting piece by Roger Harrabin on the BBC Today Programme just now (I would guess around 7.45am if anyone is using the iPlayer), in which he details a number of reasons why sceptics have problems with the various UK CRU enquiries. It includes Phil Willis sounding exasperated with the remit of the Oxburgh review. A link will presumably appear on the Radio 4 site a bit later.
Roger D
Caught that on R4 this morning, normally would just giggle on my way into work when Harrabin is dragged in but there seemed to be a significant tone change. Wouldn't go as far as to say an about face but it is tempting me to think that something more significant will be coming out at 13:00 than I expected!
Roger Harrabin's piece also had a comment from Steve M.- at last!
World’s leaders accept the demise of the global warming Agenda
Nice little article that should be posted onto every door in Whitehall!
http://www.examiner.com/x-48249-Santa-Ana-Statehouse-Examiner~y2010m7d6-Worlds-leaders-accept-the-demise-of-the-globalwarming-Agenda
Prediction: Sir Muir Russell to exonerate CRU and lambast the sceptics.
The Harrabin interview is here if anyone wants something to do while waiting for lunchtime.
Thanks, Roger D. Harrabin is a bit more open-minded than Black or Shukman, but still an alarmist. Hacked emails anyone? Interesting times ahead. Who can read 500 pages the fastest? I guess there will be a conclusions section with 7 bullet points. Anyone else care to guess the number of conclusions? Oh and 3 recommendations.
From Guardian Live blog:
11.00am: Now I hate to be a tease, but I have just got a copy of the Muir Russell review – under pain-of-death embargo until 1pm. So I can't say more but it has led me to my first reverse ferret of the day of the day: the report is 160 pages long, not 500.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/jul/07/hacked-climate-science-emails-climate-change
Whitewash Alert Status: Code RED
PaulH: So did the other 340 pages just get deleted, by accident of course?