Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

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

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Hall of Fame, Bishop Hill (comments)

You're cheque's in the post, Dung.

Oct 19, 2015 at 9:01 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

From Russell (of all people!). You can forgive a lot when someone can come up with:

With vines growing well north of Birnam Wood, only a dunce inane would deny the reality of climate change.

Nov 1, 2015 at 11:36 AM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

I missed that one Mike, thanks for pointing it out, it is such a shame that his talents have been placed at the disposal of the bad guys ^.^

Nov 1, 2015 at 11:51 AM | Registered CommenterDung

Russell comment is quite insightful:
Ignoring the strong advances in types of grapes being grown
Ignoring the advances of horticultural techniques
Focusing on only on "climate"

Nov 1, 2015 at 2:23 PM | Unregistered Commenterhunter

Martin A

A bit like Scotland's beer then ^.^

Nov 1, 2015 at 9:06 PM | Registered CommenterDung

Quite a few witty suggestions for naming a Virtual Green Energy Company but only one winner for me ^.^

Westerners Advocating North Korea's Electricity Rationing System

I missed it first time round hehe

Nov 4, 2015 at 6:25 PM | Registered CommenterDung

From the "OMG moment" thread:


"Children just aren't going to know what dependable power is. Uninterrupted electricity for a few weeks will be a rare and exciting event!"

Nov 5, 2015 at 10:52 PM | Unregistered Commenter terrymn

Nov 6, 2015 at 7:02 AM | Registered CommenterJonathan Jones

So the carbon footprint of holding the global warming party in Paris, is going to exceed the benefits of agreeing to the measures that have already been decided.

Under any definition (apart from FIFA, IAAF, IOC etc), IPPC climate science is not sustainable. What is it about International dopes that attracts so much money, bribery and corruption?

Nov 10, 2015 at 1:45 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Nov 10, 2015 at 11:42 AM | Registered CommenterDung

"Links, please" from EM is the equivalent of "these are not the 'droids you are looking for".

Nov 11, 2015 at 9:57 AM | Registered Commenter Mike Jackson ^.^

Nov 11, 2015 at 12:20 PM | Registered CommenterDung

I know this isn't directly from a contributor but I don't see why outsiders shouldn't be allowed an honorary membership, as it were.
Thanks to lapogus for this "A Gaeltacht (Highlands & Islands) perspective on the Met Office's first named storm:"

http://dailygael.com/storm-abigail-upgraded-to-normal-hebridean-weather/.
Grins all round!

Nov 16, 2015 at 3:57 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Dung

""Links, please" from EM is the equivalent of "these are not the 'droids you are looking for"."

In our most recent discussion, " Where is Rhoda's Evidence? (plagiarised by Dung)", I have supplied seven links so far. You have supplied none.

Nov 16, 2015 at 7:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

EM
Be fair to Dung.
I was the one who posted the original after you prevaricated about the precise effect of increasing CO2 in your test tube.

Nov 16, 2015 at 8:00 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Dec 11, 2015 at 8:17 AM ...and Then There's Physics,

Yes, I made similar arguments back when AGW was going to cause droughts in the UK and we were all urged to buy tropical plants for our gardens.

But apparently the science was settled differently then.

In those days, I hadn't realised that CO2 is fundamentally a magical molecule and will demonically cause whatever weather has just happened.
Dec 11, 2015 at 9:24 AM | Registered CommenterM Courtney

Not just ONE gem, but a veritable mine of gems!

Dec 11, 2015 at 11:34 AM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

My link to the unthreaded article no longer works. Here is the posting.
_______________________________________________________________________________________


Posted on the Guardian, but probably imminently to be deleted, so here it is for posterity!

what actions are they they going to take that will make a difference

.None whatever. China will double its emissions. India will more than double them. They have already announced this. The number of coal fired power stations globally will rise by some 2000+.

Actually, the politicians are acting quite responsibly by their lights. They are determined to take no action to reduce emissions, because the action required is politically impossible in democracies. But they are also determined not to incur the opprobrium of being seen as that dreaded thing 'a denier'.

They have therefore drawn the only possible conclusion: say one thing, and do another. Agree that there is a great and urgent problem, agree that 97% of scientists think so, then adopt lots of resolutions, proclaim the problem solved, shake hands, congratulate the hosts, and go home to token gestures and otherwise business as usual.

For the rest of us, what are we to think? The mania is on its last gasp, thank goodness.

We will have another ten or twenty years of rising emissions and no material warming. It will become apparent that the climate was not well understood by the Prophet Arrhenius nor by the modellers of the late 20C. The seas will not rise any faster than they have for centuries, extreme weather events will be no more common, droughts and floods will happen as they always have, largely influenced by local land management policies, and there will be some desertification caused by this, as well as some recoveries from it.

At some point in the next 20 years we will get a better understanding of climate mechanisms and particularly feedbacks and discover that CO2 is not a control knob for the planet. Historians will look back on Paris and smile at the idea that politicians pretended to really believe they could control the planets climate to within 0.5C.

But what will happen to the believers as this unfolds? You need to read 'When Prophecy Fails' to understand. The less events in the world confirm their apocalyptic expectations of imminent disaster, the more strongly they will believe, and the more ferociously they will attack the sceptics. The more they will feel they are a misunderstood group who are the only ones with the key to salvation of the human race on Earth. The more they will attribute all kinds of dishonest motivated reasoning and corruption as the reasons why the rest of the world does not share their views.

Within their own grouping, the apocalyptic vision will become more and more extreme. As the planet fails to warm, we will, paradoxically, see cries from the laity that warming this century will be 8-10 degrees. Sea level rises of several metres this century will be forecast. Those within the movement who are more moderate will be expelled.

As the scientific consensus moves towards the view that emissions are not a serious problem, more studies will be produced for the faithful showing that if you torture the numbers enough, 97% of those that really count are believers.

Eventually the warmists will turn into just another rather weird splinter group like the various Trotskyite sects. But this will probably take another 30 or so years.

If you want a real life case study, not only 'When Prophecy Fails', but also read up on the history of the Jehovah's Witnesses. They have prophesied the end of the world repeatedly. It never has happened as forecast. But that has not discouraged them in the least. The failure of the planet to warm will not discourage the warmists, either.

Dec 13, 2015 at 8:04 AM Charles Corday

Dec 14, 2015 at 6:39 AM | Registered CommenterMartin A

Mair, from the Sierra club, came across as a complete airhead. I would not trust that guy to fill my tank with the correct fuel
Dec 15, 2015 at 10:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterEternalOptimist

A gem of the first order!

Dec 15, 2015 at 11:34 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

In reply to Unregistered CommenterRaff on the "Let's get real about climate models" thread, CommenterMartin A
said:

If you know in advance that there is no possibility of validating the model, or in other words, testing the hypothesis, then its construction is merely what is technically termed, in real science, "a wank". Why would you write it? Yes indeed, why?

Amen. A lot of models are good for a wank, but reality is probably very different.

Jan 10, 2016 at 2:59 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

From tomo in response to Phil Clarke (well one of them anyway) on the 'Cue Violence' thread 01012016:

the UK otoh has near morbid constipation as a result of ill informed , toxic antics of venal political idjits and looney eco-zealots proclaiming quacky fantastical cures for climate hyperchonria.

simply delightful ^.^

Feb 1, 2016 at 1:55 PM | Registered CommenterDung

My bold in the quote below.

Imagine a world where your 'water policy' turns out to be yet another EU policy 'Race Horse' that ends up, as it always will, looking like a Camel.

A kind of hybrid between Greek water policy and Norwegian water policy. All via a completely EU funded 'fake charity' calling itself ''Food and Water Europe''...

Feb 12, 2016 at 10:05 PM | Unregistered Commenter3x2

Sort of sums up much of what is wrong with the world of politics, IMHO.
But a great phrase, whatever the political context.

Feb 13, 2016 at 2:40 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

At Cliscep, where comment moderation tends to be light to non-existent, Man in a Barrel said that ATTP had the intellect of a snail, which led to this response from Catweazle:

MIAB: “ATTP – intellect of a snail”

Excuse me, you are being very disrespectful to snails.

Most snails I’ve come across comfortably exceed ATTP in the intellect stakes, and are orders of magnitude less slimy to boot.

Plus, as a valuable source of nourishment for hedgehogs and song-thrushes, they fulfil a useful purpose in the grand scheme of things, something that climate “scientists” singularly fail to accomplish.

Feb 24, 2016 at 11:47 AM | Registered CommenterPaul Matthews

Anything Stern says is a dogs dinner, especially the IAM's stuff

Feb 25, 2016 at 12:43 PM | Unregistered CommenterNeilC

Woof, woof!

Feb 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

"You ain't no fissicist bruv."

Dec 15, 2015 at 1:29 PM | Harry Passfield

Guess who he talking about ?

(Edinburgh University's seemingly full time Fantasy Climate Commenter )

Mar 15, 2016 at 11:23 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Thank you, thank you kim.

For really, really, long trips, they can attach another trailer with a gasoline tank. Chugga, chugga, choo choo.
=======================
Mar 7, 2016 at 9:27 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Mar 16, 2016 at 12:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

What first attracted you to $100 billion carbon trader Jeremy Grantham, Bob ?

Apr 8, 2016 at 11:10 PM | Unregistered Commenter esmiff

Apr 10, 2016 at 11:13 AM | Registered CommenterJonathan Jones