Saturday
Oct242015
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Walport’s gloom
I think this article covers all the gloom and doom that can be rustled up on this topic, as yet another alarmist article leads us in to COP21.
Any bets as to what the next article will be on - dying polar bears, melting Himalayan glaciers (or maybe melting polar bears and dying Himalayan glaciers), Maldives’ cabinet meeting under water again, shortage of water, shortage of heat (or increase in water and too much heat), increase in malaria, increase in wars, increase in immigration, reduction in size of … oh there’s lots to come.
Act now -the end may be nigh, but not of this nonsense unfortunately. TM
Reader Comments (29)
Does he mean reduction in ocean alkalinity?
Hazzabin has really upped his output of alarmist crap. He's churning them out at almost 1 a day. Will calm return after Paris?
The BBC had its Team at the Bonn run-up to Paris, and managed to record and broadcast the wonderful piece of theatre when the Mexican guy (just before the worst hurricane evah) pleaded for an agreement, to a rapturous round of applause from the True Believers.
The hurricane in question has now been downgraded to a "one of the worst" by the BBC, but to a mere tropical storm by Mother Nature.
Arctic sea ice gone by next Wednesday, glaciers melting in the Andes, Himalayas etc, permafrost soon to be disappeared in Alaska - Innuit selling beach front apartments for American sun seekers.............Walport - tells the truth?
It's not just Walport, is it?
Did anyone catch BBC/Sky last night and what a load of sensationalizing hyperbole "threatening catastrophe" - it was strange reportage, always a subtext and one could arrive at the conclusion - almost think that, they [BBC-SKY] were wishing on a major disaster - from Hurricane Patricia.
Wind speeds of 256 mph, the biggest evah in the western hemisphere"?
Mexico doesn't suffer from hurricanes, Patricia category five to hit land etc, etc, etc.
OF COURSE, there will be lots of rain, too bloody much and most unfortunately there will also be considerable damage and suffering caused from it, Mexico's infrastructure, its inhabitants will be mightily challenged.
What is observed though, immediately this storm hit land - it ameliorated significantly - they always do and with it being a fairly mountainous region [part of the Western Cordillera] - the terrain interferes with wind speeds and breaks up the amplification of winds.
We knew all of this but as with Walport, the same with al Beeb - there's another agenda going on - ain't it the truth?
For 25 years there has been an unprecedented rise in gullibility, that has taken over the public and politicians imaginations. Climate scientists have got increasingly imaginative about the size and number of problems they imagine might need fixing, and how much they might cost, if not dealt with immediately at vast cost.
During this time, climate scientists have failed to produce any science, and have completely forgotten to tell the public and politicians. Journalists have to leave it to their imaginations.
Climate science, packed full of the biggest nothing between the 2 words.
Could we have some Antarctic 'swarms of locusts wiped out by bushfires' stories, to balance the natural methane gas fired penguin barbeques of Siberia?
Climate science journalism should not be hindered by a lack of imaginative reporting.
The BBC World Service last night came up with some duck or two from a Uni somewhere...hurricane intensification - warm sea, warm air, blah, blah, don't know really and need years of research but there is "background climate change". And because the hurricanes are/will might be more frequent we can find stuff out.
Liars, losers, loons!
It's got all 3 Laws of Climate Science:
1. It's worse than we thought.
2. Think of the children.
3. Big Oil! Big Tobacco! Big Denier!
All the poor Shellfish need our carbon to make their calcium carbonate homes and the CO2 in the atmosphere has only ever been at current low levels once before
Such a tragedy for Harrabin & Co that 'Hurricane' Patricia collapsed on landfall after all the hyperbole about the devastation that it would cause. As my old man used to say from his Navy days - like a fart in a Force Nine.
Walport is a waste of Oxygen. At least King told Climate Porkies with a bit of flair.
Has anyone ever explained how oceans containing orders of magnitude more dissolved CO2 than the atmosphere contains are impacted by a pathetic proportion of mankind's emissions of atmospheric CO2, which in turn is only /400th of 1%?
Imo the ocean acidification claim is simply a diversion away from 2 decades of flat global temperatures.
Climate science has been piling on the fake gloom and doom stories prior to Paris.
Let us all hope that real doom and gloom persists in climate science, after Paris.
Climate scientists and their parasitic climateers do not have a high level of confidence about going to Paris. Let us hope there is no return.
CheshireRed, I think it depends on a requirement that additions of CO2 to the atmosphere are NOT rapidly mixed into the deep ocean, but retained near the surface. Of course this seems mutually inconsistent with Trenberth's missing heat being mixed into the deep ocean as both require substantial mass transfer from the surface. But lack of internal self-consistency never seems to be a huge obstacle in global-warming science.
There's no such thing as ocean acidification because the oceans are alkaline. FACT.
Funny that you mention the Maldives: "The vice-president of the Maldives has been arrested in connection with an alleged plot to assassinate the president, say police and officials." BBC, 10 minutes ago.
Curious George, no climate scientist has yet been arrested for trying to assassinate science. But anything could happen between now and Christmas, to make the world a better place.
Climate scam artists repent! The end of the gravy train is nigh!
Polar bears being drowned by melting glaciers in the Maldives zoo while trying to flee global warming
An unprecedented success in climate science is forecast to be be correct.
They predict that Paris in November, is normally cooler than July in Paris.
The clinical diagnosis is: despair junkies.
I see that the number of casualties as this storm hit was .... zero. A similar sized storm which hit the Philippines in 2013 killed 6,300.
If there was ever an argument for rapid development of poor countries, this is it. The Green/Left, of course, won't wear that.
I found it interesting that the BBC Today presenter (probably egged on by Hazza) tried to get Christiana Figueres to decry the British governments cuts to onshore wind and other green subsidies, at the end of this piece last Thursday. Figueres didn't bite.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p035wphg
There was a time when you could challenge Roger the Dodger's garbage on the BBC Blogs. Not anymore and I wonder why?
Rick Bradford
So simple, so obvious.
Nobody, not even the most rabid of climateers, is suggesting that reducing CO2 emissions, even to the level they would prefer, will put a permanent end to cyclones, hurricanes, heatwaves, floods or drought.
All but the most rabid agree that the cost of trying to do so would be impossible to meet.
So the logical thing to do, as you say, is to make the poor richer (preferably without making the rich poorer) and thereby prevent unnecessary deaths from the above-mentioned phenomena.
I wonder of we could get somebody to suggest that at COP21?
This may not be the best thread but a recurring theme herein is the claimed no GW for 18 years or so. I haven't done an extensive stats analysis as any statistician will tell you that if the data are not up to it then GIGO will result. But anyway I refer to the met office HADCRUT4 for what they are worth.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/diagnostics.html
I see a slight decline (0.3C, couldn't hide all that one) from around 1880 to 1910 (about 30 years, estimate slightly confounded by ruler conflict with touch screen technology). Then similarly (close shape) from 1940 to 1970 where the claimed possibly slightly hidden decline is about 0.15C, each followed by a rapid increase over the next 30 years or so (I made no attempt to hide the incline), and it looks remarkably similar to the previous incline.
So then 30 years (2000) on we hit a downward (hidden?) trend again which we will argue over for the next 15 years until it probably goes into a natural 30 year warming cycle again. And the 30 years flat lining will all be forgotten again. "It's a travesty". Never cheer before you know who’s winning.
David Shaw, I want to know whether we can expect another unprecedented drought like 1976, or another unprecedented storm like 1987. Could it be that CO2 has halted similar events from happening again?
Obviously the unprecedented cold winters of 1947 and 1962/3 have not happened again, which is a good thing, but climateers do not like to mention the perils of a colder world.
I do not think that the Maldivian Cabinet will be meeting underwater. That was in 2009 by former president Mohamed Nasheed. Earlier this year he was arrested under anti-terrorism laws. Last week the current Vice-President Adeeb arrested over 'bomb plot'was arrested last week . It would seem a potty government has been replaced by something much more sinister.
Kevin Marshall, achieving power and money is made so much easier, with the global warming scam, than all this bombs and bullets stuff. Greedy con artists everywhere, not just in Island nations, have known this for years.
As well as loads of money, Al Gore even got a Nobel prize, which Michael Mann decided to take the credit for.
How odd is this
HarradinHarrabin's horrible article.Mollusca, Echinoidea and Arthropoda, (clams, crabs, sea urchins, etc) utilize Hemocyanins for oxygen transport.
Hemocyanins are copper based proteins used instead of iron based blood supply.
Expecting all of those crabs, star fish, sea urchins, clams and all kinds of shellfish and crustaceans to suffer from extra copper when their blood requires copper is like expecting humans to suffer from extra iron in their diets.
Ya gotta admit, that is one stupid idiotic alarmist article.
G Charlie. I did not attribute any of the large trends I spoke of to CO2. I believe it plays little or no role. They are the result of natural cycles I believe. One off events are far more unpredictable, and I'm sure you are aware is the reason for their lack of repetition. My old applied maths prof predicted a mild ice age in a few hundreds of years back in the late 70's . I see nothing to doubt his vastly academic based prediction.