Thursday
Jan232014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Diary date: AR5 hearing
Jan 23, 2014 Climate: Parliament This is just up on the Energy and Climate Change Committee website:
Energy and Climate Change: IPCC 5th Assessment Review
28 January 9:30 am
Witnesses:
- Professor Sir Brian Hoskins, Grantham Institute
- Professor Myles Allen, Oxford University
- Dr. Peter Stott, Met Office
- Professor Richard Lindzen, MIT
- Nicholas Lewis, Independent Climate Scientist
- Donna Laframboise, journalist.
My understanding is that there will be two panels, with the upholders of the consensus up first followed by the dissenters.
Reader Comments (22)
"the upholders of the consensus up first followed by the dissenters"
And what's the betting that several committee members will have to leave after the 1st half?
Any debate would be a walkover, coming before the CCC - the alarmists have first say but the real expertise comes later.
A 50/50 split. That's a big improvement on the previous inquiry!
Unlike the 1930s and 1940s, this form of warfare isn't with tanks and troops. Instead, it's about using political influence to put in place stealth hypothecated taxes going directly to the elite whilst pretending to the people that it's for their own good thereby delaying the counter-revolution.
The only sensible response from independent scientists is to destroy the IPCC's case thereby isolating the carbon traders and their bent politicians. They in turn are setting up delaying tactics, of which this meeting is the first of many.
I am getting the impression that the warmists know the game is up, they are merely looking for that good old escape route to save face, & claim that they were never truly convinced by the "science", but they were just invoking the dreaded "Precautionary Principle"!
I wonder who selected the first three. I would describe them as three of the UK's leading alarmists and I wouldn't trust anything that they said.
Not sure you're right about Myles Allen, Phillip. Once or twice lately he has given the impression of being on the edge of an "oh, whoops!" moment.
About the other two, I agree. Hoskins will parrot whatever line his puppet-master decrees; Stott will do anything to avoid Slingo's stiletto heels in his tender parts (as would I, probably!).
What is encouraging is the order of the hearing and the three realists they have chosen to listen to.
And if half of them do leave half way through, steveta, they provide an open goal for anyone to write to them and ask why and suggest fairly pointedly that it appears their minds are closed and they are not prepared to listen to other points of view and do they honestly consider that is an attitude that befits a democratically elected representative of the people.
And what would be their constituency chairman's view on that behaviour, I wonder?
Anyone wishing to contribute to Donna Laframboise's travel and subsistence costs can make a donation via the tip jar on her website.
Stott will do anything to avoid Slingo's stiletto heels in his tender parts
Jan 23, 2014 at 10:52 AM Mike Jackson
He's motivated by his belief in the religion, not by fear of Slingo.
"Anyone wishing to contribute to Donna Laframboise's travel and subsistence costs can make a donation via the tip jar on her website.
Jan 23, 2014 at 11:02 AM | Martin A".
I paid her a wee contribution through PayPal. I encourage others to do likewise. Having been invited is an opportunity for someone like Donna to put her "stiletto heel" into the IPCC and their antics in that forum.
Do you guys ever get bored? Particularly Mike Jackson and Philip Bratby...you must spend so much of your life here.
Give 'em hell, Donna..!
"Do you guys ever get bored?"
Yes when people ask inane questions!
"Do you guys ever get bored? Particularly Mike Jackson and Philip Bratby...you must spend so much of your life here."
Presumably you know this because you have observed them spending so much of their life here. Tell me, do you ever get bored?
Wow!!! That's a BIG improment on previous panels. Equal weighting of sceptics for a change, never thought I'd see the like!!
I'm still waiting for Stott to provide me with the data to support his claims that Cameron was "right" to "suspect" there is a link to climate change. Despite asking for the data he has so far refused to provide anything.
"I'm still waiting for Stott to provide me with the data to support his claims that Cameron was "right" to "suspect" there is a link to climate change. Despite asking for the data he has so far refused to provide anything."
Data or no date the MET Office suddenly realised they had to support the Prime Minister or somebody from the Cabinet Office called to ask for "help" for the PM.
At least they have a bumper crop of written submissions.
I particularly like Lindzen's introductory page 1 concluding paragraph-
'The fact that the focus of climate alarm keeps changing (from global cooling to global warming
to climate change to extreme weather to ocean acidification to ......) is suggestive of an agenda in
search of a scientific rationale. Given the destructive, expensive and corrupting nature of the
proposed (or, alas, implemented) policies (as well as their demonstrable irrelevance to climate)
leaves one with a disturbing view of the proposed agenda. It would appear that the privileged
members of the global society regard as dogma that the rest of humanity is a blight on the planet,
and all effort should be devoted to preventing their economic improvement and development. If
this selfish and short-sighted view is what the privileged regard as morality, then God help us all.'
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/energy-and-climate-change/Professor-Richard-Lindzen-(IPC0047).pdf
Prof Myles Allen often gives a pleasant impression.
That is because his words are not restricted by any attachment to the truth. It is easy to appear most sincere to any group if you hold all groups as equally useful.
He will say whatever is good for his career.
But his career will not improve the store of human knowledge.
A fine example of 'balance'. Will the BBC now follow suit?
Thanks for that Pharos - Jan 23, 2014 at 6:06 PM,
and wow he does stick it to them, it has echoes of and chimes with Lord Lawson's scathing rebukes.