Bishop Hill Two flood roundups
Feb 15, 2014 Blogs Climate: WG3 I'm taking flak from Richard North (doesn't everyone?) for not linking to him and Booker enough. This is slightly odd because I cited North a couple of days ago and there is a link to his EU revelations in the "Seen elsewhere" column. Still, Booker's article in the Spectator today - a roundup of the floods debacle - gives me an opportunity to air their work further.
It's interesting to compare this rather level-headed take on the floods with Damian Carrington's melodramatic offering of a couple of days ago:
The stormy assault mounted by the extreme weather since December is most relentless the nation has ever recorded, with one extreme attack has smashing in after another. The opening salvo - a huge East coast storm surge - was the most severe since at least 1953; the Christmas deluge sank Surrey and the Levels; the January monsoon was the greatest since at least 1766; ferocious, incessant winds topping 100mph are set to blow away decades-old records.
The problem is that the dull truth - bureaucracy and environmentalism - is just not as good a sales pitch as "OMG we're destroying the planet". The dull truth may well get through eventually, but it will be an uphill struggle against the massed forces of the disreputable.
Reader Comments (42)
Simply beautiful writing: "... uphill struggle against the massed forces of the disreputable."
Well done.
you have to read this opportunism: Dr Adam Corner - New Scientist
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25061-will-record-floods-finally-shift-uk-climate-debate.html#.Uv8_ofl_t6Q
Words fail me on this occasion...
All this hysterical media hype (Channel 4 news, the BBC, the Grauniad, the Met Office, The Green Party, etc etc) about severe weather caused by climate change seems to be one last desperate attempt by the dramagreens and all the watermelons, because they can see the SS Climate Change hitting the rocks and sinking. The cooling climate just refuses to play ball and so all the "science", the EA and EU complicity and the historical precedents are being ignored and replaced by hysterical rantings.
Why not just pump the floodwater through the mains water system? That would see half of it leaked away. By the second go they'd be down to a quarter...
As Paul Homewood by his analysis they either lie outright or are economical with the truth.
North's interview, (http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84708) is well worth a hearing. Though the extent that the EU dictators have taken over our environment regulations is depressing: very depressing.
As far as Richard North is concerned, there are only two types of people left in the world: one type is wrong about everything, and they are idiots, morons, fools, blah blah blah.etc.
The other type are right, but only because he told them so, ages ago, and they won't acknowledge the fact. And that's why they are idiots, morons, fools, blah blah blah etc.
It's very sad, because his site used to be number one on my favourites. It is now just a site where he's utterly foul about everyone. Is it any wonder other bloggers tend not to acknowledge him?
North wrote about the floods stuff a long time back. There is a price to pay for seeing things way in advance.
I missed Ed Davey's latest outburst this week, calling climate sceptics 'diabolical'. Disreputable is far too polite a description of him.
I tend to avoid North because he seems over certain about various theories with slim evidence, where he seems s
o full of himself. I guess his criticism of BH just confirms it.
He's always criticized bloggers for not fortifying enough. But that apart, he writes about climate less and less and it was only natural this would occur. What he forgot inadvertently or otherwise is, -everything- is linked to climate.
Hi Barry,
So how does it feel trying to make friends with the guy who sold up the Lewandowsky paper and now appears to flying in circles around the floating dead bodies?
I have a lot of respect for Richard North's research, but he has become increasingly strident and intolerant of late. Rather like the left, who rail against those whose vision is not as pure as theirs, he is constantly having a go at UKIP, who I would have thought are basically on the same side.
BH - I really don't care whether you link to me or not. The essence of my piece was your reluctance to link to Booker's work. You gave David Rose's Sunday piece pride of place on your blog, but didn't mention Booker's far more informative piece in the Sunday Telegraph. As to the reference to my blog, all you were interested in was the cost of dredging, rather than the EU policy aspect.
On the broader issues, those familiar with my work will know that I am an advocate of the "blogosphere" as a community, for which there are loose rules of "netiquette". One of those - in fact the general idea - of the blogosphere is of a mutually self-supporting community, which cross-linked to each other, and therefore built the collective circulation. This is not and never has been a zero sum game. In the competition with the MSM, cross-linking strengthens us all.
It occurs to me, though, that you have never properly understood blogging, and have no feel for the blogosphere idea. I recall that, after many other blogs had supported you, and broadcast your ideas, you had to be reminded to put a blog roll on your site.
What you do with your blog, though, it your own affair, but I thought you owed Booker a little more, by way of exposure than you give him, and your approach was mean-spirited. Even now, it has taken this little spat for you to link to his Spectator article. Yet he also needs the traffic to keep his editors happy.
however, if you and your readers want to read my intervention the wrong way, be my guest. You don't need any invitation from me to grasp the wrong end of the stick.
Wow - so just as Al Gore invented the Internet, apparently Richard North invented the Blogosphere, and so has the right to explain to us plebs how it should be used. Arrogant perhaps?
PS. Perhaps Booker would get better level of references if he wasn't hiding behind a paywall.
@steveta_uk Tell me please, by what strange alchemy does being an "advocate of" the blogosphere become converted in your mind into a claim that I have invented it? On the other hand, in the absence of any such claim, how does advocating the development of the blogosphere for the common cause become "arrogance"? What was that about stick, wrong end of?
As to the Telegraph paywall, if you access it via Google incognito - or the Firefox, etc, equivalent, you will by-pass the paywall. Or is my telling you that just another manifestation of my "arrogance"?
Wise words mate. I couldn't find a link to BH on the EU Referendum site.
Criticised for not linking then criticised for linking...damned if you do comes to mind.
Mailman
@ Richard North
Why do you feel it's appropriate to pontificate with the air of hubris what someone else thinks?
Why do you feel it's required that someone to link to you?
Why do you feel you have sufficient facts to draw conclusions about intentions e,g. "mean spirited"?
Just curious.
Living in New England, I thought that we had been experiencing an unusual cold snap. Nothing compared to the UK, though, I see.
"ferocious, incessant winds topping 100mph" - not quite, old chap. Mind you, the weather woman on R4 this morning was blathering on about "winds in excess of 75mph plus" which made me choke at the tautology.
I rather think Richard North answers his own question with his posts above. I, too, used to read EU Referendum, but was ultimately put off by what I perceived to be an 'I know better than anyone else' attitude. He'd get far more attention if he were either funnier, or at least less cantankerous with absolutely everyone. Shame that he has to attack someone who is essentially on the same side. No doubt I'll get an earful in reply, but this is just my opinion. Presumably I'm entitled to it, just as BH is entitled to link to who he chooses.
"The problem is that the dull truth - bureaucracy and environmentalism - is just not as good a sales pitch as "OMG we're destroying the planet". The dull truth may well get through eventually, but it will be an uphill struggle against the massed forces of the disreputable"
Absolutely right. This seemingly trivial mechanism is part of the fundamental basis for the differential selection of memes, which results in memeplexes such as religions, or secular ones like CAGW. For a fulsome examination of such mechanisms beneath CAGW, see the post & essay here, as guested at WUWT & Climate Etc last November.
You can tell.
You can tell how worried they are by the hyperbole they are now employing and linking the aforementioned "almost unparalleled crisis" or, actually just normal winter weather to "incontestable proof of man made global warming" - these alarmist shill politicians, pernicious priests of green and its apologia, eco warriors and Socialist hangers on, are desperate and full of misanthropic intent and they could see that the whole green gravy train was sliding down the chute to where it belongs, the vast waste pit of human hubris.
CAGW is old hat, bunkum and rot but an awful lot of men and women depend on promulgation of the lie because their jobs or put a more apt way, cushy sinecures depend on spinning the great lie. They are truly all sitting in the brown trousers department - precisely because their cosy scam cabal has been exposed, defenestrated and found to be just what it is: a monumental tax grabbing lie and ponzi scam.
As the last few days have proved, there is indeed life in the old consensus yet.
Indeed, the liars and snake oil pedlars are kicking back and the floods are perfect transport. Carelessly, egregiously trading on human misery and claiming the moral high ground at the same time is what they do and quite shamelessly - and "never let a 'good' natural disaster go unused" - to tell your lies and promote the side of the man made global warming myth - we saw all of this over the pond with Hurricane Sandy - though Obama has been told to shut his cake hole on that particular score and in time over here - the UK storms will be shown to be winter weather, nothing else.
Still the battle still rages on...and this is no level playing field the alarmists are legion, we are but a few....
Though, if a few mutinous, individualistic and intelligent yet determined men and women, bloggers can spike the alarmist guns so thoroughly and leave them [alarmists] to screeching audacious hyperbole, and in the face of formidable odds against the combined forces of the western political and academic consensus.
Imagine what we could do, if we we actually presented a coordinated and united company - because in the court of public opinion - we are winning hands down and they hate us for it.
@Rob Schneider I have a little difficulty working out how you divine from what I have written that anyone should be required to link to me. As far as I recall, I seem yo have said that I am unconcerned as to whether BH links - or for that matter, whether anyone else does.
Permit me an element of curiosity, therefore, as to why so many people who feel the need to confront or challenge me, feel the need to construct straw men.
As to whether BH was "mean-spririted" about Booker, I'm entitled to my opinion. Booker has been a good friend to BH - he has mentioned him several times in his column, and been supportive of his work. Yet, I see a continued absence of references to Booker on the BH blog. I draw my own conclusions. Are you suggesting that I am not entitled to do so?
@writer45 You are indeed entitled to your own opinion, and to express your opinion of EU Referendum. You are also entitled to make your assumptions, but do not assume that I necessarily care whether you read EU Ref, or even that I want "far more attention". Unlike most, I actually make a living out of my blog and write it for an audience which is probably way above your pay grade. I neither need nor want your "attention".
Truth be told, Richard, those last two sentences of yours ("Unlike most, I actually make a living out of my blog and write it for an audience which is probably way above your pay grade. I neither need nor want your "attention".") do make you look to be a petty, pretentious snob. Can you do better?
I reckon he could do major pretentious snob if he tried.
Grumpy - we did get 102mph at the Needles yesterday, and I was surprised that only our local BBC news mentioned it. I hope we get it again when the proposed 'Navitus Bay' offshore windmill array goes up...
"I see a continued absence of references to Booker on the BH blog"
A quick search reveals over 20 main items on Booker and over 1600 references in comments!
Blimey, we don;t have to work very hard to make our case about poor old Richard North - we just sit back and read him doing it himself! He seems a man wracked with hatred.
I read both Richard North's blog and Bishop Hill's blog. I have some familiarity with the EU, EU legislation and the EU legislative process and find Richard North's blog very good. I don't claim climate expertise, but nevertheless find Bishop Hill's blog equally informative and very good. I don't have problems with the postings, language, or attitude of either blogger. I respect the emphasis on sourcing and accuracy of each blog. I'm mystified what has sparked all this aggro. Please don't explain! I've heard the term 'flame wars'. Now one has broken out, I don't like what I am reading.
Stephen Prower
Stevenage
Can't we call a truce in this war of words between Bishop Hill and Richard North? We all have annoying quirks. Even I am not perfect! (I just say that because I'm so modest). It is best to put up with the aggravating qualities of other people, especially when we are more or less on the same side.
The last time I e-mailed a "story" to Richard that he had not at that time seen the result was an exclusive on EU Referendum with no acknowledgement of its source whatsoever.
I don't particularly care but it does seem a little hypocritical of him to be quite so precious about others.
@Alan Read "I reckon he could do major pretentious snob if he tried."
Yeah ... but I need a little notice to work up the enthusiasm. But, at the moment, they're making it so easy that I can hardly see its necessary :-)
>> an audience which is probably way above your pay grade. <<
See foot, aim, pull trigger. Idiot. These days North's primary problem is that he is running out of people of *any* pay grade who (a) feel inclined to work with him and (b) feel able to trust him. Almost entirely self inflicted, however.
Yesterday's man.
I'd giggle if I had a head.
Guys, why are we wasting ammo on our friends?
Both Bish and Dr North (and indeed, Mr Booker) number among the good guys. A careful reading of Richard North's comments here show him polite, and with a point. It's likely that this little affair can end with no permanent harm done.
If they wish to fall out, that up to them. It is NOT fine for the commenters to make that decision for them.
DDB,
OK, we should play nice. In fact I have a lot of respect for the work of BH, Dr North and Chris B too. They do what I can't - and cant is all I have. Henceforth, I shall reserve my self-righteous indignation for gently upbraiding poor Chandra (if ever Johanna stops rabbit-punching him and kicking him when he's on the floor).
Blue on blue...
Didn't I predict that I'd get an earful from Richard North in reply to my comment? Once again he demonstrates exactly why people continue to have a pop at him. I would not be so presumptuous as to assume EU Referendum needs my humble "attention," but to be so wilfully insulting towards ordinary readers of his blog demonstrates a profound intellectual snobbery. If readers other than those who meet his elitist target 'pay-grade' are so insignificant, why take the time and trouble to reply to every comment with such spiteful and childish insults? Richard North demeans only himself by doing so. Cue malicious rant in reply.
Poor Damian
he has been watching to many BBC doc's on WW1 -
"relentless the nation has ever recorded, with one extreme attack has smashing in after another. The opening salvo - a huge East coast storm surge - was the most severe since at least 1953; the Christmas deluge sank Surrey and the Levels"
Is that HMS Surrey then :-)
ps. Headless - you are probably an Emperor penguin, all will be well in the end, or is that Swans at the North Pole)