Friday
Oct142011
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Speaking of books
Oct 14, 2011 Climate: other Donna Laframboise's new book about the IPCC is out. It looks like this is going to be a good one:
Blooming brilliant. Devastating" - Matt Ridley, author of The Rational Optimist
"...shines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC" - Richard Tol, Professor of the Economics of Climate Change and convening lead author of the IPCC
"...you need to read this book. Its implications are far-reaching and the need to begin acting on them is urgent." - Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics, University of Guelph
Reader Comments (186)
Got it via low carbon Kindle one minute after reading this post, I love technology :) Love the title of Laframboise's book too.
Just downloaded it and read to chapter 8.
"...shines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC" - Richard Tol, "
I couldn't agree more.
Bought it, downloaded it, read it (well a few pages anyway, so far)
And even the hardcopy edirion is quarter the price of Mann's proposed book. That guy seems really to be losing it.
I see the paperback edition is out next week - hopefully should coincide nicely with my finishing of Svensmark & Calder.
Pleased to see I'm not mentioned in the preview on Amazon - but if anyone spots my name in the rest, please let me know! However hopefully I am far too boring to have come to Donna's attention!
No your not Richard ;-)
Far too honest! She doesn't do boring.
This was my first (cough) low carbon Kindle download ever. Other plans for mowing lawns etc have been reshuffled this weekend.
Donna's book systematically compares the claims that the IPCC makes about itself in the media to what is really going on.
Most of the material was pre-published on her blog, but put together it makes for a chilling read.
Chilling, that is, for those who, like me, think that the IPCC is, in principle, a useful organization.
Richard Betts: I did a search of my pdf version, and fortunately you are not there. Fortunate, because, as the Daily Bayonet calls Donna, she is Minx the Merciless.
Richard Toll: I agree with both points; chilling, and in principle, useful. Well, not chilling, so much as vein popping. As I wrote Donna, I can only read a chapter or two at a time, before the red veil descends.
Apparently its socially acceptable (marginally) to laugh out loud reading a book in public. Swearing, cursing, and muttering to oneself is not.
Wow, what a brilliant response to the other publishing news of the week. Mann overboard?
Downloaded at breakfast, neglected this am's paperwork to read most of it and posted first Amazon UK review.
I love Donna's analogy of the over indulged teenager who's never been said "no" to. Especially apt when you read that many of the "leading scientists" given positions as IPCC contributors and lead authors turn out to be green activist grad students without a paper to their name - shades of Michael Mann's miraculous rise from PhD student to climate eminence in one mighty bound.
Donna shares with Matt Ridley, Judith Curry and our own dear Bish that understated, sober and devastatingly meticulous style which is such a contrast to the hysterical hyperventilation of the Romms & Gores of the world - and much more convincing to anyone with an IQ bigger than their metric shoe size.
Also, like the Bish, she references names, dates and sources so that all her assertions are checkable.
I think it will have as least as large an effect on climate politics as HSI since it's cheap, easily available and an easier read for the non-climate obsessive - because it's not technical and doesn't need to disentangle any of the "team's" statistical labyrinth.
Hopefully - a climate game-changer.
I'm looking forward to reading it. It would be worth taking more care when writing Amazon reviews as typos put people off and make them less likely to believe reviews.
"it is an parisan organisation"
Que ?
Is this only available on kindle, or in .pdf format? As a young curmudgeon, I prefer hard copy!
Oh, sorry, read up and it will be released in actual book form next week.
Great, but I don't have a Kindle, and can't afford a Kindle, and I guess as it is an eBook my library won't stock it as such and anyway I don't have a Kindle...
Shame. Would love to read it
You can download free software from Amazon when you buy it, for PC, Mac or Ipad - took just a minute to be up and reading on my Macbook.
Sorry Bob - clearly my missing a letter out makes the book absolute crap.
"Great, but I don't have a Kindle, and can't afford a Kindle, and I guess as it is an eBook my library won't stock it as such and anyway I don't have a Kindle... "
I'm sure you can buy one out of your next Exxon cheque.
Judging from the free sample, this book is just an extended ad hominem attack. After dismissing the concept that humans can influence climate as "a bit silly" - based on nothing more than her feelings, LaFramboise spends the rest of time discussing people's ages as if that had any bearing on the radiative properties of CO2. How about discussing whether anything that these people wrote, you know, was actually, ...er.. wrong?
Coupled with thinking that Niels-Axel Morner is a 'top scientist' (as opposed to a complete crank - dowsing anyone?), this is hardly likely to sway anyone bored enough to wade through the whole thing.
Frank:
Ah yes, ad hominen attacks. Horrible things.
Horrible indeed. Thanks for illustrating.
Oh dear so Frank you don't like it? well don't fret Mr Mann's fictional account of the world as he orders it will no doubt be more to your liking and will be out so you can buy that and feel purged!!
Frank
Well now we know where you stand. Ad homs are a no-no unless they come from you, is that right?
Mörner a crank? I don't think so.
Perhaps you could fault him on his work on sea levels instead of denigrating him for his beliefs in other fields. Can you? Chapter and verse would be good.
Frank: your
dowsing anyone?
This is a William Connelly invention. At one time Wikipedia had a link to back this assertion. Following the link gave a description of a Danish village, with no mention of dowsing or of Morner. Its false.
Your
How about discussing whether anything that these people wrote, you know, was actually, ...er.. wrong?
Perhaps, you know, you actually need to read the book. A large portion is about the mistakes made, and the lack of error correction in the IPCC.
Another large portion is about the fact that the IPCC broke its own rules about referencing grey material, and about publishing timelines. Its hard for the reviewers to find mistakes, when material was referenced, that was published a year after the reviewers were finished. Again, against the IPCC's own rules.
Another large portion was about the conflict of interest throughout the IPCC, and about the IPCC not having COI rules. I find this truly remarkable in a large organization. One of the IPCC Lead authors, Christenson, referenced 16 articles from a single edition of Climatic Change. He was the editor of these articles. The articles were also published a year after the IPCC deadline, and with out any IPCC Reviewer looking at them.
If you want to criticize a book with out reading it, feel free. But also realize that it makes one appear more than a bit stupid when your assumptions are shown false.
Frank, quote, "LaFramboise spends the rest of time discussing people's ages as if that had any bearing on the radiative properties of CO2"
Don't be daft Frank.
From what scientists, government and international agencies have said everyone knows that the radiative properties of CO2 have caused (so far);
Prostitution, incredible shrinking sheep, invasion of jellyfish in the Mediterranean, surge in fatal shark attacks, Boy Scout tornado deaths, global conflict, beer tasting different, suicide of farmers in Australia, bigger tuna fish, longer days, shorter days, collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden, cow infertility, UFO sightings in the UK, rise in insurance premiums, heroin addiction, frigid cold winters in Great Britain, cancer, death from heart disease, diabetes, stroke, respiratory disease and even accidents, homicide, suicide, water -borne disease outbreaks, heavier and wetter snowstorms treacherous for travel and ambulation, Lyme disease, swarms of allergy-inducing stinging insects, along with mosquitoes and devastating pine bark beetle infestations and the spread of forest and crop pests, 40,000 dead crabs , unrest in the Middle East, screwed-up love making, the Japanese earthquake-tsunami, horrible rash of tornadoes in southeast United States,the Arab Spring, extended severe allergy seasons, Lyme disease, malaria or dengue fever, trauma, depression, high blood pressure and heart disease,and increased threat of wars, violence and military action against the UK, migration of possibly rabid Vampire bats from Mexico.
The list is ever growing, so you never know there may be a link between AGW and age - both begin with 'ag' and end in 'we(e)' - pun intended.
Am I the only person who is not making money from writing a climate related book?
jason - you don't need to if your are funded by BIG OIL.
................................. don't tell me you missed out on that as well?
Is this only available on kindle, or in .pdf format? As a young curmudgeon, I prefer hard copy!
Robinson
Great, but I don't have a Kindle, and can't afford a Kindle, and I guess as it is an eBook my library won't stock it as such and anyway I don't have a Kindle...
Shame. Would love to read it
Jeremy Poynton
Robinson and Jeremy: Its also available as a PDF file. You get to the download site from Donna's site, or here:
https://www.aplusdownload.com/cgi-bin/apluspro/scripts/apluspro.cgi?action=4&item_number=iap0001&iap0001_qty=1&cd=iocmvjwgc
It appears that the author misunderstands the IPCC brief and seems to believe that the IPCC has a role to review whether AGW exists. This is incorrect. The IPCC is based on the premise that AGW DOES exist and is charged with the function to determine the extent of AGW and its impacts and mitigation, thereby to guide policy makers.
Mac
For the benefit of those who may have forgotten about it or indeed were unaware of it, perhaps it's worth providing the link to John Brignell's list of things caused by global warming.
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
Unfortunately it looks as of John's ill-health has caught up with him again which means there has been no update on Number Watch since July and that also applies to the links in the global warming list quite a few of which are now dead (as is the way with the internet).
However, all the subjects listed have at some time (even if sometimes a bit tongue-in-cheek) been quoted as a possible result of global warming.
Robinson Is this only available on kindle, or in .pdf format? As a young curmudgeon, I prefer hard copy!
"A 250-page paperback edition priced at $20 should be available by the end of next week from Amazon.com – which ships internationally."
Spen
You're right. But that's no excuse to ignore your own rules about what is acceptable data for inclusion in the IPCC reports and to refuse to correct any errors which result.
Neither is it acceptable (as Les Johnson has just pointed out) to have a lead author referencing his own work without any checks or balances.
Nor is it acceptable to have environmental activists involved at any level. While we can argue that scientists have a responsibility to be honest about their findings (cynical though we might be on occasion) there is no such burden on the activists, many (most?) of whom take the view that the end justifies the means and their end is a root and branch re-ordering of modern society, AGW being merely the current medium of choice.
Hang about a year or two and when AGW becomes "unfashionable" — by which I don't necessarily mean incorrect, just no longer something that can persuade the punter to delve into his wallet — they will have something else up their sleeves.
Bio-diversity is top of the likely list at the moment.
Frank writes:
"Judging from the free sample, this book is just an extended ad hominem attack."
If I am arguing that person X is a fraud or whatever and I give substantial reasons for believing that he is a fraud or whatever then I am not committing an ad hominem fallacy.
The ad hominem fallacy is not in the criticism of the man but in changing the subject from what the man said or wrote to the man's characteristics. The fallacy is in changing the subject. It is a fallacy of relevance.
Arguing that a man is a fine example of pond scum can be a perfectly good argument. Learning that some people who produce IPCC works are pond scum is a very important thing to learn.
Spen writes:
"It appears that the author misunderstands the IPCC brief and seems to believe that the IPCC has a role to review whether AGW exists. This is incorrect. The IPCC is based on the premise that AGW DOES exist and is charged with the function to determine the extent of AGW and its impacts and mitigation, thereby to guide policy makers."
Do you mean to imply, as you do, that the scientific reasons for believing that AGW exists can be separated from the reasons that support claims about its extent or mitigation? In practical terms, do you believe that the scientific articles containing the reasons for believing that AGW exists can be separated from those that address the extent or mitigation of AGW? The burden of proof is on you.
Spen and Mike.
"Risk" not "the fact". Properly constituted, depoliticised, externally audited and truly open and transparent the IPCC could do what it says on the tin, but don't hold your breath.
Mac,
A few years back, a Miami Beach Coffee Table magazine (Ads for expensive watches, photos of Celebs du jour, expensive printing and oversized) included an article by an MD to the effect that the incidence HIV related diseases would also increase with global temperature.
Although past issues of this magazine are archived online, the article seems beyond recall.
He left it to the reader to guess what the mechanism for this might be.
Is this only available on kindle, or in .pdf format? As a young curmudgeon, I prefer hard copy!
You can print the PDF. If it has small pages, print it 2-up and double sided: 63 sheets.
"Am I the only person who is not making money from writing a climate related book?"
Oct 14, 2011 at 1:37 PM | jason
Well, not me Jason but I have never denied written a book on it or that I have worked in the oilfields for over 25 years now and I have been paid a substantial wage for not only being away from my wife and children and working in the biggest shite holes in the world but none of that changes the science or the corruption of science as many engineers I know will agree.
I take pride in the fact that I have taught lesser educated people (not their fault) how to do a job right first time, enabling them to earn more and support their extended family. I doubt few of them would even understand the argument going on as they tend to survive without electrical power and have little access to the Internet. What is your point or was it sarcasm without warning us? ?
oops "denied" in the wrong place...more proof reading practice
I am looking forward more to the other great publication of the year...
Michael Mann's emails from his time at the Univ of Virginia.
Coming soon provided there is a favourable outcome to the latest court hearing due Nov. 1st.
I cannot wait to take them out of context.
Grat book, can't wait.
dowsing anyone?
Very scepical until last year when the local farmer showed me how to do it, hes much better than me but its helped me find water pipes in the middle of field this year when I replaced my mains pipe this year. When you are hiring a digger by the hour it concentrates the mind.
IPPC could soon to be toast in the Good Ole USA;
“We are standing atop the next American economic boom…energy. The quickest way to give our economy a shot in the arm is to deploy American ingenuity to tap American energy. But we can only do that if environmental bureaucrats are told to stand down,” Rick Perry.
Environmental bureaucrats cast as the bad guys: but somewhere it had to be tested for traction. Donna could be on the money with the book release.
Books - carbon sequestered.
Your Grace,
Some time ago and for a laugh, I subscribed to the service known as "Climate Change sceptic blog alerts" which sends e-mail alerts to me about "bad" articles on the net. I am supposed to go to the articles (helpfully linked in the e-mails) and place appropriate comments which subscribe to the CAGW Orthodoxy.
You will be pleased to know that the latest e-mail I have received from this service, dated 14/10/2011, timed at 16:11, mentions both this article (Speaking of Books) and the preceding one (Mann of Letters)!
Any trolls in the Comments section of either article probably subscribe to the same service as me, though for entirely different reasons.
Until they are burnt.
breath of fresh air "dowsing"
A new owner of an old place nearby with only water by tanker was introduced to a local who had mentioned in conversation that she could 'feel' underground water - he gave her a chance and she indicated a spot. He then got in a ''professional' who also identified the same spot. After some time, he called in a drill rig and hit an underground stream. Makes no sense but I know it to be true.
Re Spen
Therein lies the problem. It often tries too hard to find evidence that AGW exists to guide the policies that the NGO's who've infiltrated the IPCC want. Those helped Greenpeace buy their nice new yacht, which according to Richard Black, they don't quite seem to know what to do with. Other than use it for fundraising jollies I suppose.
If instead the IPCC stuck to being a neutral, policy non-prescriptive body that trawled the thousands of papers and economic data, condensing that into a "State of the Climate" document, it would be more useful. Policy makers could then trust it as being less biased and the rest of us would have a handy guide to what's been going on with the weather.
Book ordered, and reminded me to find an academic bookshop here in sunny Dublin.
simpleseekeraftertruth
I believe you when you say you know the story to be true, but you do not help me believe the local woman could not have any prior knowledge of the waters location.
US = $4.99
EU = €4.88
UK = £4.99
It's not only the IPCC that needs an 'exposure'....... I didn't realise that a mouse click could differ in price that much
Sorry to be OT, but I thought that this was quite funny.
http://poorlydressed.failblog.org/2011/10/14/fashion-fail-the-evidence-is-indisputable/#comments