Saturday
Apr202013
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Still crazy after all these years
Apr 20, 2013 Climate: Parliament Richard North has an interesting report on yesterday's Westminster Hall debate on the future of the UNFCCC process. Peter Lilley appears to have been on fine form.
But lunacy, in the shape of Yeo, Gardiner and Labour's Luciana Berger, seems to have reigned supreme.
Reader Comments (36)
North gets it right, as ever.
Peter Lilley gets better by the day. Sooner or later enough of his colleagues will start to listen and it only needs a few to set the ball rolling.
I live in hope.
Hello, I thought I'd point out the BBC's splash on errors contained within some economic models:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22223190
Whilst an important issue, it is rather convenient that we are presented a long and detailed article illustrating how a paper justifying austerity is flawed, yet there has been very little of the same on the mathematical and statistical errors contained within many of the key global warming documents.
"If ever we were reminded of the importance of not bending to public opinion in the short term, but aiming for the right long-term solution", said Barker, "it was this week, with the funeral of Lady Thatcher, who understood that being unpopular in the short term and not listening to the crowd can often not only be the sensible and right thing to do, but pay dividends in the long term".
Nice to know they are swimming against the tide, first time I have heard they realise that. Now just have to get them to realise they could lose access to their pig trough.
Peter Lilley deserves some sort of Bishop Hill award. Only he and perhaps Graham Stringer seem to understand the madness spouted by our "leaders"
I read all the debate including the China bit. Truly frightening.
Mike Jackson: I suppose you're right to live in hope. But Peter Lilley (who is my MP) has been saying these things for years and seems to have made few, if any, real converts. By "real converts" I mean those prepared to speak up plainly on the issue, unlike the false converts who may agree with him but are too scared of "green" pressure to say so.
Incidentally, looking at the comments on Richard North's article, I was especially interested to note one by "moonrakin" who copied & pasted a comment on BH "Unthreaded" containing a brief but (I think) revealing analysis of what the DECC describes as a "tracking survey to understand and monitor public attitudes to the Department’s main business priorities". I was interested because I did that analysis - see post on April 17 at 4:28 PM. Probably the most significant finding (not mentioned by the DECC in its overview of "key findings") was that very few respondents were worried about climate change. I was rather disappointed that no one here picked up on the analysis.
PS: I posted a follow-up comment on April 17 at 10:05 PM, noting in particular how hardly any of the DECC's respondents have or are thinking of having an electric vehicle. Funny how the DECC doesn't mention these embarrassing findings - although I suppose it should be awarded full marks for publishing the data.
This is North quoting Lilley in Westminster Hall on 19th April:
And this is Lilley in the Commons nine days before:
Nobody in the Commons or Lords put this point so well. By saying something so true, and so necessary, despite it not being 'the done thing', the MP was duly given clarity to diagnose and articulate exactly the same disease in another, very different place. Brilliant work.
Here’s a quote to remember:
Gregory Barker (replying to Peter Lilley):
Here’s a quote to cherish:
Gregory Barker (replying to Peter Lilley):
Berger and Barker - two alarmist friends of greenery - how lucky are the British electorate?
Barker is an apt name for someone who is barking mad. Where do these mad politicians come from and I always wonder what their background is that makes them so divorced from reality? How well did any of them do at school to think that one day they might be making important decisions that affect the whole future of the country? It would be interesting to hear from old classmates of these people.
Geoffchambers: So developing Africa is to be 'allowed' to use a laptop, a phone and possibly a refrigerator? That presumably is so that they can be sure to receive the 'right' messages from the great and the good, and helped to chill out. Perhaps Greg Barker would like to try powering water treatment plants or cooking equipment from batteries, or perhaps light industry could be run with AA cells.
Honestly, what planet are they on.
Check out Ed Davy and John Gummer here:
http://www.globeinternational.org/index.php/foreword-by-lord-deben
"I am delighted that the launch of this 3rd study coincides with the launch of an important new policy process – the GLOBE Climate Legislation Initiative (GCLI). The GCLI will run alongside the international negotiations under the “Durban Platform” and will focus on supporting legislators in 33 countries to advance national legislation on climate change to help create the political conditions for success in 2015.
As President of GLOBE International I will be working continuously with GLOBE’s network of legislators across the world to advance the legislative response to climate change. Domestic legislation puts in place the legal frameworks to measure, report, verify and manage carbon. It helps to advance national positions and serves as a platform for greater international collaboration. No international treaty would be feasible, or credible, without commensurate legally binding action at the national level."
Lord Deben speaks:
http://www.globeinternational.org/index.php/lord-deben-s-speech
"Now you notice the pride with which the minister has said how advanced is the British climate change legislation. All ministers have said that, the previous government was thrilled to have implemented it. But if I tell you the real story of it, it was that it was Parliament; across the board that forced it on the government, even though those who are most concrenmed in government are always frightened of being tied to a proper programme for the future.
So it was Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Labour backbenchers; all sorts of people together who said ‘we want this’ ‘we’re going to have it’. And that meant that ministers in the Labour government, shadow ministers in the Conservative opposition and leaders in the Liberal Democrats really had to take on board what Parliament was saying. And that has given us in this country a very advanced form of climate change legislation.
I believe that we are not only forced by the facts, but we are also forced by any sensible policy of protection to deal very, very toughly with the threat to mankind that this represents. I have been saying to people, because I Chair the Climate Change Committee in the UK, I’ve been saying to people that I think I am an insurance man."
John Prescott in China:
http://www.globeinternational.org/index.php/news/item/xie-zhenhua-launches-legislation-study-in-beijing
"Lord Prescott, Europe's lead negotiator at Kyoto, former UK Deputy Prime Minister and now Vice President of GLOBE International said "China is developing serious and comprehensive legislation and in Europe they have a partner that will support them.""
National Action is the key: http://cdkn.org/2013/01/opinion-national-action-is-key-to-accelerating-international-progress-on-climate-change/
"The 3rd GLOBE Climate Legislation Study has been undertaken with CDKN’s support by the Global Legislators’ Organisation (GLOBE) and the Grantham Research Institute at the London School of Economics. The findings, released this week at a ministerial-level launch of the study at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London, show that 32 of the 33 surveyed countries have progressed or are progressing significant climate and/or energy-related legislation."
The present political class was indoctrinated by incorrect climate science in the same way as the rest of us were. However, I can truthfully say that when I used the Hansen claims to tout for work, I always put in the caveat 'assuming the climate models are correct'.
Thus politicians like Berger or Barker are no worse. They took advantage of the band wagon little realising that Hansen used incorrect physics from Sagan and Houghton to develop the models. However, the politicians can't backtrack and won't until forced to do so.
People like me have backtracked because we can without losing face. Thus after CG1 I set out to examine all the science, a very interesting voyage of discovery which started 3 years ago when I saw slow-moving cumulus clouds create April showers and realised Sagan's aerosol optical physics is wrong. No cloud albedo cooling means AGW is not hidden. It's the clouds that are the AGW!
Out of respect for BH I shan't go into my latest bit of physics which shows how clouds act counter the ToA CO2-dip 'forcing', to which 'the team' has migrated as its last redoubt: PhysTodayRT2011.pdf
The Emperor has no clothes and even his closest retainers are starting to realise it.
Philip
Not sure about Barker's schooldays, but did you know this?
'Barker also developed strong links to the Russian oil companies, being Head of Communications at the Anglo Siberian Oil Company from 1998–2000 and also worked in Russia for the Sibneft Oil Group, owned by Roman Abramovich.'
(from his wikipedia page)
dennisa - from the Conservative 2010 election manifesto section on climate change p91:
//
ambitious goals for reducing emissions
Climate change is a global phenomenon, and that means the world must work together to reduce harmful emissions. a Conservative government will work towards an ambitious global deal that will limit emissions and make available substantial financial resources for adaptation and mitigation.
as part of our commitment to move towards a low carbon future, we can confirm our aim of reducing carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. in government, we will lead from the front by delivering a 10 per cent cut in central government emissions within twelve months and by working with local authorities and others to deliver emissions
//
http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Activist%20Centre/Press%20and%20Policy/Manifestos/Manifesto2010
"Barking" Barker (replying to Peter Lilley):
"As the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) said, the reality in the developing world is that most people require very small amounts of energy. Typically, they need it to use a laptop, a phone and possibly a refrigerator. Battery storage is not only viable, but happening at scale. There are nearly 500 million people in India off the grid, and hundreds of millions of people in Africa."
And that low energy use is precisely why they have poverty, disease and famine: The definition of the Third World.
Well Barking Barker, if that's what you want go ahead and live there in the same way with the same energy use.
What a moron!
Richard Betts- the other day you said on this blog that water vapour was increasing in the atmosphere (as predicted).
Well NASA have just released their latest NVAP-M survey of global water content derived from satellite data and radio-sondes over the period from 1988 to 2009. This new data is explicitly intended for climate studies.
Total atmospheric water content is FALLING despite a relentless slow rise in CO2. This fall in atmospheric H2O also coincides with the observed stalling of global temperatures for the last 16 years. All climate models predict exactly the opposite. Something is clearly amiss with theory.
care to comment?
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/
"As the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) said, the reality in the developing world is that most people require very small amounts of energy. Typically, they need it to use a laptop, a phone and possibly a refrigerator. Battery storage is not only viable, but happening at scale. There are nearly 500 million people in India off the grid, and hundreds of millions of people in Africa."
Give it a few years and the Western World will be off-grid, also. Nice to know that we're to be allowed to keep our laptops and mobile phones. We won't need fridges - just pop the beer on the back doorstep.
No need to acquire clean water or cook food then? All the off-grid Indians have to do is turn on the water or the gas, not much energy required!
I shouldn't be shocked at such willful ignorance, but I am. What a state of affairs.
Does this idiot really believe that, given the opporunity, this is how billions of people in India, China and Africa would choose to live?
Isn't there anybody with any influence on Cameron who can point out to him just how much his ministers are despised when they throw up statements like that? Isn't there anyone who can drag him and Osborne out of their little Westminster bubble and show just how far down the road they have gone in destroying the country they are supposed to be governing?
She's a Labour and Co-operative MP, not a minister. There was a fuss over her nomination for a safe seat at the time.
From the Daily Mail 31 January 2010:
"Bitter Labour infighting has broken out after a glamorous ex-student leader linked to Tony Blair’s son Euan was selected as the candidate for a highly prized Labour seat"
Well I shouldn't worry too much about Norman Barker (qualifications BA (hons) German and history - so no science there) who is in my opinion likely to lose his seat in Lewes East Sussex in 2015 knowing the people in the area - so thankfully we can be rid of that prejudiced oaf.
Naturally Labour mp Luciana Berger has zero qualifications in science as well. So that makes her the perfect shadow spokesperson for Labour on climate change. She has a BA (hons) in commerce and spanish, and a MSc in Governments, Politics and Policy. Another complete fail from our political class who are not fit for purpose talking about issues they clearly do not understand properly and clearly are only being briefed by vested interests. Things seriously have to change.
Sounds as though the hon. member for Liverpool Wavertree is up for the part of Marie Antoinette in her local school play...
What crass, patronising ignorance - AND ditto Greg Barker as he's quoting her..!
Are these people for real..?
@DJ: Greg Barker and Norman Baker [transport minister] are in different seats!
I know you'll laugh and think I'm silly, but isn't the point of us sending developing countries squillions in Overseas Aid so that they can DEVELOP their countries to be more like us - er - 'civilised' nations..?
Barker and Davey go beyond incompetent; they are negligent. As for Berger, of whose existence I was blissfully unaware until this episode, she's clearly another shining example of the superficially well-educated but monumentally stupid automatons who currently flourish in our debased parliament.
I have crossed swords with Ms Burger a number of times on her blog before she became an MP (and started censoring comments she didnt like) and she always struck me as nothing more than a wet limp fish who has NEVER worked a day in her life outside of the Government. So it's not surprising she has absolutely no clue how people in the real world WANT to live. She lives in a labour leftist socialist ideal utopia where real world concerns such as access to cheap, reliable and plentiful electricity isn't a requirement because the Government will always be there to provide.
As she has never worked a day in her life outside of the government she has no idea that its exactly those kinds of people who will be paying for her socialist utopia!
And finally, yes, I would!!! ;)
Mailman
This exchange was one of the most amusing pieces of comedy I have read on Hansard:-
Mr Lilley: Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that although extinctions are taking place, particularly localised extinctions, they are almost exclusively due to change in habitat as a result of economic development, not as a result of change in temperature? I believe that only one species is known to have been rendered extinct by a change in temperature.
Barry Gardiner: No, I do not accept that at all—not at all—because if the right hon. Gentleman looks at marine life in the oceans, he will see what is happening in tropical coral reefs because of the changes in temperature in the oceans. Whole ecosystems are quite simply being destroyed by the changes in temperature in the oceans.
Mr Lilley: The hon. Gentleman said that we were living through the biggest extinction since perhaps the Palaeozoic era, and he implied that that was through climate change, but he has been unable to cite a single species that has been rendered extinct through climate change. I invite him to do so, or to give me a source where I could find that information.
Luciana Berger rose—
Barry Gardiner: I give way to my hon. Friend.
Luciana Berger: I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. I was able to do some research on my iPad during those interventions, and I was able to identify just one such species—the Ecuadorian harlequin frog.
Mr Lilley: That is the one that I was referring to—I said there was one.
Luciana Berger: Forgive me. Well, I just found that first one; I will endeavour to find some more species during the course of our debate. That was the first one that came up in my Google search.
Hahaha, bet she thought she had him! Stupid girl.
Mailman
Apr 20, 2013 at 1:03 PM | Don Keiller
Oh, come on, Don! That's not fair ... RB has repeatedly indicated that his preferred mode of blogging is to "skim" ... and he just might miss your inconvenient question. As he seems to have missed Marion's recent postings of his inconveniently incompatible declarations past.
But that being said, one might wonder why the Met's "team Sesame Street" [h/t Omnologos] - aka myclimateandme.com - have not made note of this on their (somewhat erratically updated) blog. Perhaps the verdict is that the analysis to which you referred is not as "interesting" as ... well, that of Marcott et al.
Alternatively, perhaps RB and his colleagues are aware of this data and the implications you have summarized; but remain handwavingly - but oh-so-authoritatively - "unconvinced".
When I were a lad in the old Colonies, I was proud of my British heritage. Then I grew up and, over the years, read some history, some science, some engineering, some Fine Arts and quite a lot of education. Sadly, the old Empire seemed to become a thing of the past about the time someone described the British armed forces during WWI as "Lions led by Donkeys". Sadly, this top-down madness appears to be a British character trait of their leadership that is currently exhibiting itself in both houses of the Parliament.
I still treasure my British heritage but see it now as an interesting bit of cultural history which has very little to do with the modern United Kingdom.
And I too await a reply to Don Keiler's queston asked of Richard Betts.
Apr 20, 2013 at 2:58 PM | Unregistered Commenter simon abingdon
Simon
My comment was in fact referring to Barker who is a minister.
The fact that he was quoting (approvingly) an ignorant little girl does not alter my view of him in any way.
@Mike Jackson
Yes, sorry, I didn't read carefully enough. I wrongly assumed that Barker and Berger must both be from the (Government) Opposition. Stupid boy.
Scene: a photo-opportunity for a British Overseas Aid Minister in a hot, dusty, barren, village of mud huts somewhere in the heart of Africa...
Surrounded by what, off-camera, the Minister has just referred to as 'piccanninies', he bends down and says, in his best Imperialist tones: 'Now here you are, little chap - a laptop; a mobile phone, and your Mummy has a nice new refrigerator - we're sure that that's all you need to grow up a productive citizen in the 21st century...'
Don Keiller
I think we are talking about different timescales - I mean decade-by-decade, whereas you are looking at the values since the peak in 1998.
A comparison between models and observations, for both temperature and total column water vapour, can be found in Figure 4 of this paper. Although the WV dataset is not NVAP-M, and is in different units, it shows similar year-to-year variability (NB the graph in the paper shows deseasonalised values whereas the NVAP-M graph retains the seasonality). The models (grey bands) agree with the observations pretty well, with both showing year-to-year variability but with higher values in the 2000s than the 1990s and 1980s.
So I think this comes down to a similar debate as for global temperature in terms of what is the key feature of the data - the decade-by-decade changes, or a run of consecutive years over the last decade or so. The theory and models suggest that global temperature and specific humidity will generally keep rising decade by decade if the radiative forcing continues to increase.
The real issue is global socialism trough global government?