Tuesday
Dec022014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Benny at the Senate
Dec 2, 2014 Climate: Parliament Benny Peiser's testimony at the US Senate is now available on YouTube.
Dec 2, 2014 Climate: Parliament 
Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Apr 24 - harryjkevin91
on
Seeking Help With Dissertation -
Apr 18 - chricton123
on
The Benefits of Using Tutorbin for Custom Writing Services
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 (108)
SImple but telling points well made. Well done Benny, I say.
That was quite good.
Donna on the deal with China
Who is that guy sitting to the right of Benny?
Doh! That would be to Benny's left, my right. I think that he is an economist.
He is Stephen Moore, Economist (as you surmised).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Moore_(economist)
Lucid, compelling and possibly something of a revelation to those willing to hear it. Europe has a long road back to sanity.
A brilliant, concise explanation of the problem. It should be compulsory listening for our politicians.
I am interested to hear that Dr Peiser is finding that questions are being asked in Europe about the dogma surrounding the EU's past unilateral Climate "madness" (my wording)
I hope he is correct but as yet I see little evidence of it. But I suspect he is closer to what is happening than most.
His testimony and the way he answers questions is very impressive. I can see the likes of Caroline Lucas, George Monbiot Roger Harrabin et al spluttering through their cornflakes this morning,
The written testimony is excellent. From the conclusion:
This should be compulsory reading for our politicians.
"Don't make the same mistakes or you will suffer the same consequences".
This would explain the latest bit of BBC baloney on their Breakfast show, this morning: this year is looking to be the hottest year on record! Note: not warmest (thereby making it a pleasant thing, in most people's eyes) but HOTTEST – which, as everyone knows, is a Bad Thing. There were other points raised, all quite obviously with the intention of keeping the scare-ratio high, in the hope that they will drown out such moderate views.
Yes RR, I saw that and did my customary PAH!!
('Himself' is getting used to me chucking toast at the TV whenever Harrabin comes on)
Looks like Stephen Moore's biography on wiki has been " massaged" by someone who is "anti libertarian" anti Cato Institute and would like to discredit him.
I wonder who?
I was also put off my breakfast when I inadvertently saw and heard Roger Harradin. It would have no connection with the jamboree going on in distant Peru, I suppose
The late lamented Peruvian Michael Bentine must be shaking his head.
From Phillip's and therein via Benny's quote:
Hardly "unilateral" is it?
I'd say on a descending scale of 10 - down to one - where the top means green lunacy fully installed - and the bottom is 'safe to keep away out of it'; - Britain is about 8, Germany 7, France 1, Italy 2.5 and the rest Denmark, Holland, Sweden about 6, Spain has retired from the green idiocy, Portugal and Ireland I don't dare guess and....... [eastern Europe].............do not rate.
I'd also like to offer an alternative phrase for "The EU's unilateral climate policy" - I'd call it, "The EU's unilateral and purposefully designed industrial suicide agenda".
Further and unless, the European demos.....the great proletariat wake up, there's not much hope that the green nutters who help run and draft laws within the Brussels Mafia will be deflected at all, we need a political and a people's revolution.
BTW Mr Peiser, an expert and rather accomplished performance, for which some here in the UK: mark and applaud to the roof tops!
Athelstan: I have spoken to a wide range of the “European masses”, and most seem to be fully aware of the debacle that is the EU, but the general air is of impotent resignation: “What to do?” being a common response. My impression of Europeans is that they are far more subservient than the British have tended to be, but history has shown that, when they eventually rise to revolution, the results can be very unpleasant. The philosophy of Catastrophe Theory seems very apposite, here.
Meltemian: another point that buzzed in my head was the repeated mention of Australia’s recent 2-week “heat wave” – does anyone remember the similar 2-week “heat wave” of March, 2012 in the UK? Then, we were warned that this heralded a dire summer of excessive heat, heat deaths, and drought – it would take years to return the water-table to its normal level! “Doom, doom, gloom and yet more doom,” was the general gist of the messages pumped out to us by the BBC, when most of us wanted to revel in the prospect of a good summer, for a change. Mother Nature then showed her wit, giving us one of the coldest, wettest summers many of us can remember. Don’t put your winter woollies away just yet, Australia.
I was particularly taken with a comment from BP quoting the FT:
Most especially when taken into consideration with what he had to say about the stupidity of the German model: first, load the energy prices with green taxes etc so that you have doubled the price in ten years and then, in order to keep your industry in country, subsidise that industry it to the tune of 3 billion Euros. Lunatics!Readers must understand that to prove the Enhanced GHE, the warmists must demonstrate the mean temperature of the ~30 m atmosphere adjacent the 16 deg C surface must be c. 15.5 deg C lower than that of the surface, hence we would have to wear gloves and scarf at night in he tropics.
This is proved by a trivial S-B calculation (I assume an atmospheric Emissivity of 0.75). As there is no such evidence, there can be no Enhanced GHE. No Enhanced GHE and why are these Eurolunatics intent on dragging us kicking and screaming back to the Stone Age?
**The physics is shown in Sir John Houghton's 1977 treatise 'Physics of Atmospheres', p 2.5. I find it astonishing therefore that as co-founder of the IPCC he decided that Hansen\'s Perpetual Motion machine of the 2nd Kind was the real science.
Athelstan: not quite what I meant, but you do make a good point. The Catastrophe Theory that I mentioned is an accepted branch of maths, and can be multi-dimensional. A simple illustration of catastrophe theory is the saying, “The last straw that broke the camel’s back.” In other words, you can load up a strong carrier only so far, and when its weakness shows, it is sudden, and shows catastrophically. Should you use a weaker carrier, it might not carry so much but, when overloaded, its weakness is not so dramatic – “The last straw that buckled the donkey’s knees,” perhaps?
Sociologically, a proletariat that shows little or no resistance to malfeasance and abuse by its rulers will eventually snap, and turn very, very nasty (the French revolution being a very good example). The British have tended to be somewhat less tolerant of such shenanigans, thus changes have been less violent – though the English Civil War did unleash a lot of retributions that had been simmering (the battle at Towton, in Yorkshire, being one of the bloodiest on British soil). However, I feel that there is a simmering resentment building in Britain, and we are not being allowed to vent it. When, or if, it does blow, it could turn out to be very, very nasty, indeed – and politicians could well be at the forefront of those minds seeking revenge. My own, wholly unscientific, observations are that the same could also be true across Europe.
Why is Benny Peiser talking to a Senate Committee about climate change and climate policy? He's a sports anthropologist with no expertise in either.
Dec 3, 2014 at 10:04 AM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent
I think the proletariat or as some politicians like to call us the "Plebs" do remember the pronouncements from the MSM. Happily they treat them with the contempt that they largely deserve hence the almost Universal disinterest in all things "Climate change." I think the problem is the disinterest. We are in danger of sleep walking into a communist super state, watched by cameras everywhere, policed by riot squads going the Governments bidding and propagandised by the MSM. Once the Government can get the Internet under control, and they are working on it, their dream of absolute power (for the good of the plebs of course), will be realised. The plebs, meanwhile, will still be watching football and Strictly something and fighting over cheap flat screen TV's.. Perhaps they (or us) deserve what is coming.
Superb. A master of his subject at work sharing some sharp insights. Well done Benny Peiser, and the GWPF!
Meanwhile back home, one supposes the eco-campaigners masquerading as journalists will, if they pay it any heed at all, will be looking not so much at reporting the wise words of Peiser but rather to review their 'damage limitation' options. They will thus disgrace their erstwhile profession a little bit more.
A very good performance Benny! If you want to inflict maximum harm or your economy and your people then adopt Europe's energy policy.
Monty -- Perhaps Peiser's actual academic credentials aren't the deal maker/breaker in this case. Note how the actual 'experts' have so often not delivered the real info in these gatherings, hence the existence of BH in the first place, no? Also it's hard to sense from Peiser that he's either uninformed or out of his depth in any sense here, no?
John D-D
But just imagine the outcry from BH and others if it was the other way around. Imagine if climate science and IPCC was being supported at a Senate hearing by (say) an English graduate. The first thing BH and posters would say was : "what does X know about climate change? He/she is an English graduate!".
It needs to be written large and clear----HARRABIN IS A TOTAL DISGRACE TO THE PROFESSION OF JOURNALISM.
I see at least two of you watched BBC Breakfast this morning! Did you also hear Bill Turnbill refer to Climate Change as "partly" caused by Human activity, or was it just me? My cereal was spluttered all over the place I couldn't believe my ears @ 7am!!!!
Sorry Monty you must understand something in life.
If someone is commenting on a topic and talk rubbish it is fair game to point out and to use the fact that they have no qualifications or expertise and hence that is ther reason they come out with rubbish.
On the other hand if someone is unqualified and talks sense then you should not use their lack of qualifications to diss their arguments. Especially when you can't :-)
Ivor Ward (10:40 AM): you may well be right. However, what is missed is that, when there are blackouts (and there will be, with the present policies), and they get more common and more frequent (as they will do, with the present policies), the plebs will not be getting their fix of Strictly Get Me X Ice Talent, and they will be looking for someone to blame for that.
Stacey: +10*!
It needs to be written large and clear---HARRABIN IS A TOTAL DISGRACE TO THE PROFESSION OF JOURNALISM. Remember he organised the 28gate seminar for the BBC in 2006, which laid down their policy towards the CAGW alarm. Its a pity he ca'nt be charged be charged with bringing his profession into disrepute.
RR Dec 3, 2014 at 10:31 AM
I couldn't agree more with your analysis and the English when roused are a frightening prospect .......even now after 40 years of politically and social contrived thinning; dumbing down and upheaval causing a demographic catastrophe.
Harrabin is a lobbyist, not a journalist, we had a shocking example today on R4 where he went from a cherry-picked example of temperature changes at a single place in central England to certainty about what was causing it.
On the subject of politicians in Europe asking questions about Green Dogma, a recent study springs to mind about the aids virus evolving (in its best interests) so as to be less fatal to its hosts.
Harrabin also mentioned drought in California (which the actual science says is nothing to do with global warming) and somehow forgot about the record cold in the other side of the USA. Yet whenever skeptics pointed out the record cold winters of just a few years ago, Harrabin et al. were all over it talking about cherrypicking and 'nobody said cold winters couldn't happen' (ignoring that someone at the MO did say that) and anyway, the gulf stream shift (that can't happen unless the earth stops rotating according to Carl Wunsch) caused by global warming will make things colder in Britain.
When the recent press-released hype about the ozone hole recovery came out, Harrabin even managed to slip in an entirely unrelated pastiche at the end about a flood in Kashmir that had nothing to do with global warming either; though omniscient Harrabin thought it must do - well because his gut told him so even if the actual science said otherwise.
These balloons just contradict themselves all the time: There is no need even to mention the science at all, just throwing back their own words at them is enough to expose them as rank idiots! Journalists used to be skeptical by nature. What the hell happened to them?
Monty,
I'm sure you're referring to Bryony Worthington, who helped draft the Climate Change Act of 2008 and whose qualifications include a degree in English literature at Queens' College?
Why is Benny Peiser talking to a Senate Committee about climate change and climate policy? He's a sports anthropologist with no expertise in either.
Dec 3, 2014 at 10:34 AM | Monty
================================================================================
If you'd bothered to watch the video, you will see he is talking about Energy policy. Which is in fact pretty easy even for a lay person such as I to consider and explain.
Dear me.
God help us.
I too would like to add my congratulation to Benny Peiser. His testimony only lasted for around five minutes, but he made his case beautifully - clear and succinct. I was surprised he did not face any hostile cross-examination, like previous witnesses, Roy Spencer and John Christy. Benny had a long flight to give his testimony. I hope he was able to claim expenses. He deserved them!
Worthington actually calls herself 'an architect of the UK's Climate Change Act'.
Rather than Benny, we could of course refer to Dieter Helm on UK energy policy who calls it a 'slow-motion car crash' and on the EU policy says "it is hard to make up the result — higher prices, lower competitiveness, serious risks to security and more carbon consumption". But we all know these simple truths. The difference is only that some stubborn folk just refuse to admit it. Meantime plans are afoot to try to increase the lifetime of our nuclear fleet to 60 years as an insufficient but absolutely necessary measure.
On another note the recent oil price crash has reporters at the Beeb worrying about the fortunes of Iran, Russia, Venezuela and all other backward oil potentates. Apparently an oil price drop is even 'an effective tax cut' - presumably something we should be worried about and just ignore the well-worn relationship between oil price and growth, presumably becasue some blinkered greens told the Beeb luvvies that it wasn't necessarily true in their vision of a future where renewables become competitive.
Monty
Why are you suggesting that the Director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation is not a proper person to represent that body on a matter of policy.
Presumably he was fully briefed on the subject he was asked to speak on as would any government minister be in a similar situation. Or do you have a problem with Ed Davey being Energy Minister with his degree in PPE? I certainly do, but not because of his degree!
Pray tell us what you are qualified to pronounce on and promise to confine yourself to it in future.
Radical Rodent
Worse still they had that lying toad from EAU on the news tonight. We are all going to die. Then EM started appearing in the BBC comments.
Monty
WHY? Why would that be a problem ?
These balloons just contradict themselves all the time: There is no need even to mention the science at all, just throwing back their own words at them is enough to expose them as rank idiots! Journalists used to be skeptical by nature. What the hell happened to them?
JamesG
Might be balloons but I think buffoons is more apt.
Previous post:-
Looks like Stephen Moore's biography on wiki has been " massaged" by someone who is "anti libertarian" anti Cato Institute and would like to discredit him.
I wonder who?
Dec 3, 2014 at 9:22 AM | Glebekinvara
Well i would suggest a WC would be a suitable starting point
"Why is Benny Peiser talking to a Senate Committee about climate change and climate policy? He's a sports anthropologist with no expertise in either." --Monty
That sort of statement is known as argumentem ad hominem. Putting it in terms you may actually understand, it's irrelevant, immaterial, drivel, rubbish, boroshitu, nonsense, claptrap, garbage, balderdash, and illogical.
Outstanding stuff. Concise, plain language that even the most doltish politician could understand.
I particularly liked the way he stuck to the high ground - pointing out the political "consensus" in Europe about their disastrous policies, and the dire consequences thereof. Very smart approach, steering clear of the shoals of EU party politics and accusations of partisanship.
GWPF are very lucky to have him.
Dec 3, 2014 at 11:13 AM | Monty
BH and posters would say was : "what does X know about climate change? He/she is an English graduate!".
Why, you must be referring to Steven Mosher of Berkeley Earth - 'He attended Northwestern University where he graduated with honors and BA’s in both English Literature and Philosophy.'
Mosher needs no ad hominem, his own statements prove his actual qualifications. He has never met a statistical concept he understands. It is horrifying so many people see him as some sort of authority.
Mark
Its too bad this hearing was now and no it after the new Senate starts next year. Since the Democrats are currently in control of all Senate committees, and they just got the boot from the electorate, what Mr. Peiser had to say means very little. Granted, there are Republicans on the committee, but the chair controls everything.
Fortunately, Boxer is the one getting the boot from the chair, so things can only improve.
Mark
Billy Liar: "Why, you must be referring to Steven Mosher of Berkeley Earth - 'He attended Northwestern University where he graduated with honors and BA’s in both English Literature and Philosophy.'
You've rather missed the point. AFAIK Mosher doesn't appear at Senate Committees as an 'expert' in the field. Why would he, given there are so many climate scientists that could be called upon?
However, Peiser is portraying himself as an expert (and by the usual crowd on BH and WUWT) despite having no relevant qualifications. Strange that!