Bishop Hill Royal extremism
Mar 12, 2015 Climate: WG2 Royal Society The Royal Society's policy people are working hard on their carbon footprints, jetting off to a conference in Sendai, Japan on the subject of disaster risk reduction, with particular reference to weather events.
Weather disasters are a bit of a theme in Carlton House Gardens at the moment. In the last few days the society has also produced a policy statement on the subject, which called for a top-down approach based on central planning and target-setting. Vorsprung durch Sozialismus! There was also a report at the end of last year.
Throughout all of these documents there is a sly elision of weather and climate. If you go back to the announcement of last year's report you will read:
We have examined people's resilience to weather- and climate-related extreme events, in particular, floods, droughts and heatwaves.
In other words, they examined people's resilience to extreme weather. This time they are rather more brazen, stating that:
...future climatic and demographic changes will increase the exposure of people and their assets to [extreme weather].
..a position that few readers here think will mistake for one that has been informed by consideration of the science.
The society's surge of activity of course forms part of the their political lobbying effort ahead of this years' UN Framework agreements on disasters and development, and in particular the Paris climate summit. As they explain in the policy statement:
The three United Nations frameworks provide a unique opportunity to mobilise activity and build people’s resilience to extreme weather in a sustainable and equitable way.
...which does at least make it clear how the climate change is being used to push a political agenda. They need to spin a threat of climate change in order to move the politicians in the desired direction. Shame about the impact on the reputation of science, but that has long since ceased to be a concern of Royal Society.
Reader Comments (27)
I do admire the confidence with which those clever chaps at the Royal have jettisoned evidence as a totally unnecessary part of science. In post-modern science, if you believe it is true it is true. That only works for the anointed of course. Others are simply not worthy.
When it comes to climate resilience I find wool is superior to cotton, but modern synthetics now function just as well in many circumstances.
Here is the opening paragraph of the Royal Society charter:
"We have long and fully resolved with Ourself to extend not only the
boundaries of the Empire, but also the very arts and sciences. Therefore
We look with favour upon all forms of learning, but with particular
grace We encourage philosophical studies, especially those which by
actual experiments attempt either to shape out a new philosophy or to
perfect the old. In order, therefore, that such studies, which have not
hitherto been sufficiently brilliant in any part of the world, may shine
conspicuously amongst Our people, and that at length the whole world
of letters may always recognize Us not only as the Defender of the
Faith, but also as the universal lover and patron of every kind of truth: "
Funny how "Defender of the Faith" persists to this day, but in a different disguise.
First, they told us, "Weather is not Climate"; then they told us that "30 years of Weather gives us climate"; now they tell us that "Climate causes Weather", and the new meme is: "Climate-related Weather" - replacing AGW/CC.
And all to give them the excuse to say: "...a unique opportunity to mobilise activity and build people’s resilience to extreme weather in a sustainable and equitable way." For "mobilise" read "organise"; for "sustainable" read "controlled"; and for "equitable" read "socialist".
It's brave of Carlton House to face the risks of cosmic ray variability
Will you remain calm in the light of this new piece of physics/
I'm already resilient to extreme weather, thanks, with an XL Driza-Bone, L'Aigle Wellies and a fine Drover's Hat. Can I skip the rest of this hoo hah? And will that make me exempt to climate justice taxation?
Russell, the first sentence of the thing you link to appears to be bollocks. Why should anyone read further?
The heck with becoming more resilient. As soon as poss. I'm off to a more equitable climate.
I was in an 80degrees sauna yesterday..Had to get out too coldish.
"sir" Paul Nurse should be made to answer why he believes jetting first class to Japan is better for the environment than a video conference.
I guess the RS is a bit like the BBC which says this about JeremyClarksongate:
It's a bit of a surprise that nobody can ignore the BBC guidelines, except the BBC when it wants to.
The RS can also ignore its charter when it suits it.
Why fly and cause bad weather when you can video conference online?
http://www.gotomeeting.com/online/home
"Why fly and cause bad weather when you can video conference online?"
There are several compelling reasons:
- It's more fun
- It's free of charge, expenses paid
- There's a bar around the corner at the conference center
Compare that to popcorn while starring at a screen.
"Climate-related Weather"
Tautology.
"Why fly and cause bad weather when you can video conference online?"
benpal,
Why fly in the bad weather you yourself caused and cause yourself an anxiety loop?
Any further evidence needed we are dealing with the insane (Warmers) here?
Andrew
They fly to Japan because virtual Geishas suck, the real ones doesn't.
(no comments please)
I hope they get here soon. After an unusually mild winter, we've just had a wicked low pressure system move through bringing a blizzard. I'm afeard the system was a couple of days early. Shame.
Sendai (Miyagi) has probably the most benign climate in Japan. Winters are cold but relatively dry (snow free). Summers are hot and humid, but without the debilitating summer heat of Tokyo. And there's always the Pacific to take a dip if you feel the need for a freshener.
Will soeone explain pair formation by gammas in excess of 2 GEV to poor Martin A?
He seems to be having difficlty reading even popularized science.
Perhaps a better description of international climate change shindigs, should be Synods.
Bad weather for many city dwellers, occurs when their umbrella turns inside out, and disintegrates. This makes great TV news clips as a demonstration of EXTREME weather, and gives office workers something to whinge about, as they explain their rain soaked, and disheveled appearance.
The quest for cheaper umbrellas has led to a decline in their engineering quality, and this may explain part of the publics misunderstanding about the exact nature of global warming.
if we just shower a tiny little less, sir paul nurse can have an extra trip first class around the world, to save
the world.
never mind all big efforts to destroy the world that came and are coming from Marxist[s] {snip]
Venus......... I would be happier if Sir Paul Nurse only flew half way round the world, and stopped.
Antipodeans might not be happy though.
Russell
"He seems to be having difficlty reading even popularized science."
You seem to be having difficlty commenting...
Re Nurse, this is worth revisiting.
His appalling hubris was revealed again in the 2013 Christmas Lectures, when he made a guest appearance on a bike with 'no bell'. I turned off at that point.
Cosmic radiation causes fluctuations in global temperatures, but doesn't cause climate change
Define climate change
Mar 12, 2015 at 4:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterRussell
Russel- However you read the sentence, it's bollocks. EM radiation does not include charged particles, whatever their genesis. Do you dispute that?
But I think you have form for making out that nonsense is sense.
Warren Buffett, who owns a large insurance company, sad recently that there was no evidence of an increase in extreme events based on the insurance records at the company. Perhaps the Royal Soc don't (or can't) read?