Buy

Books
Click images for more details

The extraordinary attempts to prevent sceptics being heard at the Institute of Physics
Displaying Slide 2 of 5

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Why am I the only one that have any interest in this: "CO2 is all ...
Much of the complete bollocks that Phil Clarke has posted twice is just a rehash of ...
Much of the nonsense here is a rehash of what he presented in an interview with ...
Much of the nonsense here is a rehash of what he presented in an interview with ...
The Bish should sic the secular arm on GC: lese majeste'!
Recent posts
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Entries in Mark Lynas (7)

Wednesday
Sep022015

Changed times

By almost any measure, the UK - and England in particular - is seriously overpopulated. According to the Optimum Population Trust, our numbers are growing by more than 320,000 a year. Addressing this doesn't mean forced sterilisations or a Chinese-style, one-child policy, but it does mean giving incentives for people to have smaller families and addressing rising levels of immigration.

Mark Lynas, vintage 2007

Perhaps today the circumstances have changed...

Thursday
Nov132014

A worrying tendency in Mark Lynas's work

Last week Mark Lynas accused Matt Ridley of climate denial. This appears to have been an allegation that popped unannounced into Lynas's head and found its way from there to his blog post without even a thought, let alone a cursory attempt at checking to see whether it was true or not. Shortly afterwards, Lynas was forced to retract the allegation and apologise.

And just in case anyone should think that this was just ignorance about the climate debate on Lynas's part, readers should be aware that he has known what a lukewarmer is for a long time.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Nov072014

Ridley's response to Lynas

This is a guest post by Matt Ridley and is a response to this post by Mark Lynas.

As far as I know Mark Lynas is an honourable man. He changed his mind on the benefits of genetically modified crops, going against the views of nearly all environmental campaign groups and bravely putting up with much criticism for doing so. I know how he feels, because I have done the same – changing my mind about the dangers of climate change, going against the views of nearly all environmental campaign groups and putting up with much criticism for doing so.

That Mark does not agree with my change of mind on climate (which happened gradually but was cemented by the way the green and scientific establishments reacted to the Climategate controversy) is fair enough. I don’t, however, understand why he chooses to take the low road in his attacks on me. His latest blog post is entitled “On Matt Ridley’s latest attempt at climate change denial”. He knows full well that I have never advocated climate change “denial” and that that very phrase was invented as a way smear sceptics who think the dangers of climate change are being exaggerated by associating them with holocaust denial. Yuk.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Oct212013

Battle of Ideas: What is 'new environmentalism'? cartoon notes by Josh

On Sunday I went to a Battle of Ideas debate/seminar titled "What is 'new environmentalism'?" produced by Ben Pile who was also on the panel. This included Mark Lynas, Joe Smith and Casper Hewett with Timandra Harkness as the very able and amusing chair.

Click to read more ...

Saturday
Mar092013

Lindzen at the Oxford Union - Cartoon Notes by Josh

Updated on Jul 15, 2013 by Registered CommenterJosh

The Oxford Union debate with Richard Lindzen was one of the most fun Climate Science events I have been to recently. Here are my cartoon notes to add to the Bish's post and other comments.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Sep282012

Ouch

The defence of windfarms put forward by Mark Lynas and Chris Goodall, which was discussed a couple of days ago, has now had a response from Gordon Hughes. Hughes is less than impressed with the two greens' table manners:

A final note on civility. After my GWPF report on the economics of wind power, Mark Lynas contacted me by email with a substantial number of requests for elucidation and additional data. I replied promptly and at considerable length. He is entitled to take a different view of the evidence and to reach different conclusions about the impact of further investment in wind power on future emissions of CO2. However, it is neither courteous nor constructive in the broader context to create a straw man that is supposed to represent my position when I have provided detailed analysis and arguments that are clearly different. It is an elementary precept of both journalism and academic enquiry to check whether the views presented are accurate. No attempt has been made to carry out such checks in this case.

He seems even less impressed with their analysis of the electricity grid:

[T]he Goodall-Lynas evidence is incomplete. It relies upon data about the plants which are supplying electricity to the grid. It takes no account of the CO2 emissions of plants that are operating as spinning reserve. For simplicity, let us suppose that all spinning reserve is provided by gas combined cycle plants (CCGTs). If changes in wind output are balanced by changes in the level of spinning reserve, then the total amount of gas that is burned – and, thus, CO2 emissions – is completely independent of change in wind output. In terms of the Goodall-Lynas evidence, higher levels of wind generation displace gas generation one-for-one. But, there is absolutely no saving in CO2 emissions because the gas plants carry on running as before but they are just feeding less electricity into the grid. The reason for the error is that their figures take no account of what is happening in the parts of the electricity system that they have ignored.

There's much more in this vein. Read the whole thing - it will cheer you up no end.

Saturday
Mar102012

Wind Energy: to the nearest whole number - Josh 156

I thought a handy illustration of a few facts about Wind Turbines and Wind Energy might be helpful.
(Higher res version for printing here)

Especially as there has been a bit of a Twitter storm over Matt Ridley's superb piece in The Spectator on Wind Energy, see at his blog here.  

Mark Lynas claimed that the article had no facts in it. Mark then asked for references, which Matt duly provided (all in the blog article). Mark either didn't like the references or is still busy reading them. We are still waiting for an apology from Mark for his completely unfounded Tweet.

Could be any time soon...

Cartoons by Josh