Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

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

Powered by Squarespace


but OK - lets's try to avoid another tiresome Y2K debate.)

Oct 8, 2013 at 2:14 PM | Registered CommenterRobin Guenier

Well that's torn it, you mentioned it ;) , luckily I will just agree to disagree and not rub salt into the wound.

Oct 8, 2013 at 6:42 PM | Registered CommenterBreath of Fresh Air

Oct 8, 2013 at 9:54 AM Jit

Yes, thanks for that. It sounded like Bacon was coming to the conclusion that some climate scientists can't deviate from the 'it's all bad' meme. Haven't these people ever taken a psychometric test? Don't they know that answering in absolutes is a sign of untruthfulness?

Oct 8, 2013 at 4:52 PM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2

Oct 8, 2013 at 11:13 AM | Jiminy Cricket: "Good Telegraph article by Bjorn Lomborg".

Yes ... pity (yawn) about his absurd attempt to compare the Millennium Bug, "an almost non-existent problem", with scary CAGW predictions. It was almost non-existent because warnings were heeded and it was largely fixed.

See this: link (but OK - lets's try to avoid another tiresome Y2K debate.)

Oct 8, 2013 at 2:14 PM | Registered CommenterRobin Guenier

Thanks for that.
"The benefits are outweighed by the risks". You have to wonder at the mindset that comes up with that piece of nonsense.

Oct 8, 2013 at 1:46 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Some really interesting things on Unthreaded, as usual, thanks to all! @ Jit, many thanks for the transcript of Bacon's Theory on R5L, I may borrow that one (credit will be yours.)

Oct 8, 2013 at 1:38 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlex Cull

Running a green scam can be bad for your health...


This is what led up to it:


Oct 8, 2013 at 1:18 PM | Registered Commenterjamesp

You wouldn't have seen this on the BBC a year ago:

"Bob Geldof has said the human race might have as little as 17 more years before "a mass extinction event". Why do people make such bold predictions of doom, asks Ben Milne."


"But in this age of nuclear power and climate change warnings, end-of-days predictions come from all manner of sources. Independent scientist James Lovelock made apocalyptic warnings about the climate in 2006, saying that by the end of the 21st Century, billions of people would be wiped out, and the Arctic would be one of the few places remaining habitable. He later said he might have been "alarmist". "

Oct 8, 2013 at 11:55 AM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

Anyone here a member or fellow of the Royal Geographical Society? It looks like its members' magazine has become something of a flag waver for the warmist agenda, rather than giving any sort of coverage to the variety of research there is on climate change.

Oct 8, 2013 at 11:28 AM | Unregistered CommenterWhatamess

Good Telegraph article by Bjorn Lomborg, front page

Keep calm and save the Earth

Oct 8, 2013 at 11:13 AM | Unregistered CommenterJiminy Cricket

I happened to catch a bit of Bacon's Theory (BBC Radio 5) yesterday afternoon. It's a slot where members of the public ask scientists questions. While washing up I heard one about climate change, and was gobsmacked by the convolutions the panel got into to avoid admitting that even a smidgeon of good might come from climate change. I transcribed the relevant section - not sure how many R5 listeners there are here. You can hear it for yourselves on iplayer for the next 6 days. Typos entirely my fault! Enjoy, if that is the word - jit

7.x.2013 Radio 5 Live @ c. 3.39pm

Two of the country's preeminent scientists have joined me. They are Dr Lucy Green, a space scientist - a space scientist - she's based at University College London's Department of Space and Climate Physics, and Mark Henderson, Head of Communications at the Wellcome Trust.

@ c. 3.48

Well I'd like to ask Lucy, and go back to the climate change question, if we're in a period of what should be cooling at the moment, and yet we're seeing increases in temperature. Really it's the balance between the increase in temperature and cooling: we know that a mini ice age could be extremely damaging to populations and civilisation etc; really what is the balance here? Is the element of climate change we're manufacturing, is it really all a bad thing?

Very good question. Lucy, the climate change that's happening - there must be some upsides. What are they?

Ummm... well... I can't think of any upsides offhand -

BACON (interrupting, slight flippancy in his tone):
Do we get hotter weather for longer? In this country, that's an upside.

Well... I suppose that could be an upside, but from a global point of view, I suppose there'll be so many downsides for millions of people -

BACON (interrupting):
But there's nothing wrong with identifying some upsides, you know, it's often a complex picture which is painted by change, isn't it, and, umm, I know it's off-message to talk about the upsides, but can you think of any others?

Ummm... well...

Any others?

I - I mean for me - one of the upsides of the whole debate is that we're learning new science. So I mean OK, this might sound a bit, you know, predictable, but of course, the questions that are being raised now are really important ones. What is driving the climate change and how do we understand that, so there's a female scientist Joanna Hague who works at Imperial College and she's started a really interesting area of research looking at the sun's emissions, and how it affects us, but not the visible light emissions we're used to, but ultraviolet emissions from the sun and how that affects the Earth's upper atmosphere and then how that trickles down to produce climate change that we experience on the ground, so we're learning a lot more -

BACON (interrupting):
Yeah, but more specifically, are there any, are there any animals that are going to benefit from this? Any plants? Are there any countries that will be slightly better off as a result of a bit of global warming?

I'm sure there are. But I'm not sure I'm equipped to answer that one.

HENDERSON (interrupting to save GREEN'S blushes):
I think one of the problems here is that we're talking about warming happening here on scale and at a pace over the course of decades that actually evolution - you talked about animals a moment ago - really can't keep up with that sort of pace in the same sort of way, and so you're really talking about a disruptive influence being unleashed on the world that is really quite difficult to be certain that anything will benefit from - it's far more likely -

BACON (interrupting):
You could get a couple of positive side effects as a result of disruption.

They're quite likely though to be, er, outweighed by the negatives - for example -

BACON (interrupting):
I'm not saying they wouldn't be outweighed, that's not my point, my point is, will there be some benefits?

It depends who you're talking about benefitting, that's the thing, and I think you absolutely have to look at whether benefits are going to be outweighed by the risks, and I think that in this case, it's absolutely the case that benefits will be outweighed by costs. I mean to take an example, some commentators suggest that the, er, that warmer temperatures will mean milder winters in the UK and that still more people die of cold than they do of heat and to an extent that's true, but also we're expecting more flooding, we're expecting more extreme weather as a result of this, more unpredictable weather, and those effects overall are going to have much greater negative impact than we could potentially get positive impact.

BACON: OK, thank you.

Oct 8, 2013 at 9:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterJit

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>