Bulldog Bob

To tell the truth, there has been very little that has piqued my interest in the climate scene since my long break began all those months ago.

But my goodness, David Rose's splash in the Mail on Sunday over the weekend was something else wasn't it? Those paragons of virtue at Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, overseen by our old friends Nick and Bob, have been, well, nicking other people's results and passing them off as their own, the better to fleece the taxpayer of a bob or two (or nine million).

That certainly made me sit up and take notice.

Here's Josh's take...

Ward off - Josh 367

As you may know, Microsoft recently launched a Chat-bot called 'Tay' as an experiment in "conversational understanding." "The more you chat with Tay", said Microsoft, "the smarter it gets, learning to engage people through "casual and playful conversation." " 

But as the Verge noted.

Unfortunately, the conversations didn't stay playful for long. Pretty soon after Tay launched, people starting tweeting the bot with all sorts of misogynistic, racist, and Donald Trumpist remarks. And Tay — being essentially a robot parrot with an internet connection — started repeating these sentiments back to users, proving correct that old programming adage: flaming garbage pile in, flaming garbage pile out.

Sounds familiar? Well, we learned the other day that Bob Ward's Twitter account may be manned by something very similar.

Click to read more ...

The Bob-bot strikes again

 

At the end of last year, Bob Ward had this to say about a new paper on climate sensitivity:

A new paper on climate sensitivity that @mattwridley and other peddlers of denial will pretend does not exist: https://t.co/RJWJFNODkR

— Bob Ward (@ret_ward) December 31, 2015

In fact, far from being ignored by the sceptic community, the paper in question, by Marvel et al., turned out to be something of a car-crash and was the source of steady stream of more-or-less amused blog posts in the months that followed.

This morning I couldn't help but wonder if someone has replaced Bob with a bot, preprogrammed to issue identical tweets in the response to any new paper on climate sensitivity:

New paper on climate sensitivity that @mattwridley and other climate change 'sceptics' will pretend does not exist: https://t.co/nXqOqxkz3D

— Bob Ward (@ret_ward) April 8, 2016

The paper, by Tan et al., looks as though it's a GCM-with-observational-constraints effort. 

Global climate model (GCM) estimates of the equilibrium global mean surface temperature response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2, measured by the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS), range from 2.0° to 4.6°C. Clouds are among the leading causes of this uncertainty. Here we show that the ECS can be up to 1.3°C higher in simulations where mixed-phase clouds consisting of ice crystals and supercooled liquid droplets are constrained by global satellite observations. The higher ECS estimates are directly linked to a weakened cloud-phase feedback arising from a decreased cloud glaciation rate in a warmer climate. We point out the need for realistic representations of the supercooled liquid fraction in mixed-phase clouds in GCMs, given the sensitivity of the ECS to the cloud-phase feedback.

I can't imagine quite how large the gap between a 5.7°C-ECS climate simulation and the historical temperature record is going to be. I wonder what fairy story will be conjured up to explain that away.

A retwardian precis

At the Royal Society on Tuesday night there was a meeting about the Paris climate agreement. It was chaired by Lord Stern. During the Q&A session afterwards, Benny Peiser asked a question as follows:

Given that the Paris deal isn't legally binding and given that the Republicans have repeatedly declared that they are not bound by the Obama administration's pledges, what would happen to the Paris deal if a Republican candidate were to win the Presidential elections?

Bob Ward decided to precis this in a tweet:

Benny Peiser @royalsociety event reveals @thegwpfcom is pinning its hopes on @realDonaldTrump becoming President to scupper #ParisAgreement

— Bob Ward (@ret_ward) February 23, 2016

...an extraordinary statement for a normal human being but not, alas, for our Bob, a point made quite forcefully a few moments later:

@EcoSenseNow @royalsociety @realDonaldTrump of course not. @ret_ward is a notorious liar.

— GWPF (@thegwpfcom) February 26, 2016

Bob's funding feedback

The government's plans to stop grant recipients from using the taxpayer's largesse to lobby government has got the usual suspects all worked up: Bob Ward is his normal dismal form in the Guardian (Unknown funding blah! Check! Ideological blah! Check! Free-market blah! Check!).

Of course this is a prime example of a public-funded lobbyist lobbying using public funds to ensure that public funding of lobbyists continues.

It can't go on.

Talking of comedians

If you thought the antics of the greens at the Cuadrilla inquiry were silly, take a look at Bob the Blether's latest in the Independent, outlining a vast right-wing conspiracy centred on, erm, 55 Tufton Street, Westminster. 

And they call us conspiracy theorists!

In related news, the owners of the Independent are considering closing it down.

Heretics 3, Jesuits 0

IPSO has published its latest judgement on a case brought by Bob Ward against David Rose, the third in as many years. This revolved around a story last year about GISS's claim that 2014 was the warmest on record and their failure to note the significant possibility that that it might not be.

I must say this seemed a relatively small point to me, but it clearly got Bob Ward's blood boiling, in the way that the Jesuits would get a bit upset over minor theological transgressions. It's not so much the details of the offence as the source of the challenge to authority that upsets. No quarter for heretics.

Click to read more ...

Debunk alarm - Josh 336

There's been a minor kerfuffle of bruised feathers on Twitter today about the speedy way our host debunked the latest paper from the LSE. It does seem that blogs are increasingly agile in spotting duff science - something I am fairly sure is a good thing and should be universally approved of.

Cartoons by Josh

Integrity and scholarship at the LSE

Bob Ward and the Grantham Institute are jumping up and down this morning about a new paper the Institute has published. It's fair to say the conclusions of author Fergus Green, as reported in the Grantham Institute press release are striking:

Countries will benefit economically from almost all of the actions needed to limit global warming to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels, according to a paper published today (PDF) (13 July 2015) by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and ESRC Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy at London School of Economics and Political Science.

The paper suggests that individual countries have large incentives to make ambitious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and to agree to strong collective action at the United Nations climate change conference in Paris in December.

Remarkable stuff, I'm sure you will agree, overturning much of what we thought we knew about the economics of global warming mitigation. It's even more surprising when you learn that Mr Green is not an economist at all, but a post-graduate student who was until recently a lawyer at a firm in Australia.

Click to read more ...

The inhumanity of the true green believer

This morning, I asked Michael Liebreich - a green-tinged businessman and potential candidate for London mayor - about his views on aid for fossil fuel projects in Africa. He supported them.

It's generally a ban on coal projects, except in exceptional circumstances. Yes, I'm comfortable with that.

And when I suggested that his support was despite the death toll from indoor air pollution, he said this:

And all because I don't want our taxes spent on solutions that are neither cheap nor quick nor healthy. OK.

Click to read more ...

Bob spurned

Bob Ward's latest attempt to silence dissenters from the climate consensus has ended, once again, in ignominious defeat, with the Independent Press Standards people telling him that his complaint against David Rose necessitated his taking a running jump.

Conclusions

17. The complaint was not upheld.

As I have noted previously, as far as Ward is concerned the process is the punishment, so I think it's likely that he will try this line again in the future, regardless of his failure this time round.

For whom the bell Tols - Josh 311

Richard Tol says that Bob Ward is 'engaged in a smear campaign' against him. Reading quite a bit of what Bob has written over the past few years, and not just about Richard but about many others, it is difficult not to agree.

H/t to Anthony Watts who came up with 'SpongeBob SmearPants'.

Cartoons by Josh

Official: Bob Ward is a smearmonger

This was just posted by Richard Tol. I reproduce it here for public edification:

Mr Robert ET Ward BSc, employed by the London School of Economics and Political Science to promote the research of the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, has engaged in a smear campaign against me.

At least, according to the Daily Mail.

Mr Ward was not so pleased with that characterization of his work, and complained to the Independent Press Standards Organization.

Yesterday, IPSO ruled that a "smear campaign" is a perfectly fine description of Mr Ward's work.

My response to Mr Ward's work is here.

Professor John P. Abraham highlighted Mr Ward's work in the Guardian. See my response. Unfortunately, the Guardian is not regulated by IPSO. The Guardian is regulated by the Guardian.

Update on Jan 29, 2015 by Bishop Hill

Richard Tol has now posted the decision notice of IPSO. I don't think the decision is exactly as he described it.

Hitchens on freedom of speech

A propos of my recent flurry of posts on freedom of speech, here is Christopher Hitchens on the subject. Some lessons in there for Lord Deben and Bob Ward I would say.

Bob misrepresents the science again

Bob Ward's interview with Conor Gearty is fun, with the film-noir style making Bob look even stranger than normal. His views are amusing too, having only the loosest connections with the science. Take this bit on the 2-degree target.

This is straight from the science...we've seen from the evidence that if we go above global warming of more than 2 degrees we will be facing very severe risks that the world has not seen for millions of years...

Click to read more ...