August 2013 Open thread

More thread.

Comments

  1. #1 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    Yeah, he’s a wasted talent.

  2. #2 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    our star is the main driver.

    So why is Venus so much hotter than Mercury?

    Why is one half of Mercury’s surface 600 degrees cooler than the other, while Venus surface temperature is the same regardless of whether it’s facing towards the Sun or away from it?

    Any clues, Gordy?

    Figure this one out and you’ll be well on the way to understanding what’s going on here.

  3. #3 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    ‘Any clues, Gordy?’

    Gas pressure?

  4. #4 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    So it’s not the sun?

  5. #5 Bernard J.
    August 17, 2013

    Gas pressure?

    Please say that you’re not referring to the phenomenon that occurs when one pumps a bicyce tire…

  6. #6 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    Oh Bernard, are you saying you weren’t aware of the “there’s no such thing as the greenhouse effect, Venus is just hot because of gas pressure” bit of denialist ultra-crankery?

    El Gordo doesn’t want to discuss the reasons why his ideas lack coherence, he just wants to distract with the next piece of idiocy from his crank blogs.

  7. #7 Karen
    August 17, 2013

    What is that smell ?

    Oh………it’s you barnturd!

  8. #8 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    Back on the models, the rational mind of a luke warmer Judith Curry

    ‘While some in the blogosphere are arguing that the recent pause or stagnation is coming close to ‘falsifying’ the climate models, this is an incorrect interpretion of these results. The issue is the fitness-for-purpose of the climate models for climate change detection and attribution on decadal to multi-decadal timescales.

    ‘In view of the climate model underestimation of natural internal variability on multi-decadal time scales and failure to simulate the recent 15+ years ‘pause’, the issue of fitness for purpose of climate models for detection and attribution on these time scales should be seriously questioned. And these deficiencies should be included in the ‘expert judgment’ on the confidence levels associated with the IPCC’s statements on attribution.’

  9. #9 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    The bottom line is, after saying “it’s the sun” he immediately contradicted himself by asserting some other mechanism is the main driver of climate.

    That one took no effort at all – he’s just demonstrated once again what a waste of space he is.

  10. #10 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    Changing the subject, Gordy?

    Not man enough to admit your “main driver” assertion is nonsense?

  11. #11 Turboblocke
    August 17, 2013

    E.G. at #86: you do understand that the paper you quote says that because Australia flooded and the water couldn’t run off to the sea it contributed to a drop in SLR, don’t you? So what was the point that you were trying to make?

  12. #12 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    I see Luke, having been shown up for a blowhard, abandons argument in favour of more blather.

    Fuck off, Luke!

    ;-)

  13. #13 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Luke

    As is now usual, you have made no substantive response to *any* of the points I raised on the entire of the previous page of comments. Data denial about ARGO (argument from ignorance; from incredulity; a dual logical fallacy) is not a substantive response. Even a *single* logical fallacy invalidates the argument. You have in effect said absolutely nothing at all.

    This is a standard problem with denialist rhetoric. It is empty. So you are going to have to try a great deal harder here. At the moment, it is all cock-waving and swagger.

    Have you got a reference for this btw?

    Earlier in the Holocene 2.5 – 7.5Ky ago the sea level along the NSW coast was 1.0 – 1.5 m higher than at present.

    * * *

    #18

    References:

    Rohling et al. (2013)

    Hansen et al. (2013)

    No handwaving from me. Unfamiliarity with the literature, trivia and argument from assertion by you.

    * * *

    #19

    Since you are so certain of the stability of the WAIS, what about Eemian MSL?

    ~5m *at least* above Holocene but Eemian global average temperature only ~2C at most above Holocene.

    Estimated contributions to the Eemian MSL highstand are ~2m from the GIS and ~3m from the WAIS – indicating substantial collapse.

    Or where else did the water come from? [Please answer this question, Luke!]

    * * *

    #22

    [Luke:] “But it’s all just so much supposition isn’t it – in order palaeo climate forcings (1) catastrophic impacts (3) Milankovitch (3) solar out (4) CO2 CH4 etc last.”

    Here’s a man who knows not of what he speaks. Catastrophic impacts? The main paleo forcing?

    Reference that if you can.

    Look at mass extinctions. Google up on volcanism, ocean anoxic events, ocean transgression/regression. Get a clue.

    [Please acknowledge your error Luke!]

    * * *

    #23

    As for Milankovitch, yes, it’s there, but it didn’t dominate until the late Pliocene. It needs a cool enough climate system for a large NH ice sheet to form. Hello ice age.

    * * *

    #25

    What about forcing change over the Cenozoic as a whole?

    There has been a ~1W/m^2 increase in TSI as a consequence of stellar evolution.

    But CO2 has fallen from an Eocene Optimum peak of ~1000ppmv or higher to an LGM minimum of ~180ppmv, yielding a ~10W/m^2 decrease in CO2 forcing.

    This tectonically modulated GHG forcing explains the overall downward trend in T from the Eocene Optimum ~50Ma to the Holocene.

    * * *

    #64

    [Luke:] “Rignot has no basis for his position. It’s projection.”

    And you are a scientist of equal stature to Eric Rignot? With published responses to his work that *allow* you to say things like that because you have *demonstrated error*?

    No. You are not, You are a fantasist enabled by the internet. You have never opened a climate textbook in your life.

    [Please admit that you are a know-nothing loudmouth on the Internet with no basis in fact for making claims like this about respected scientists Luke!]

  14. #14 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    #8 Gordy

    Curry is as full of nonsense as some of you lot. <a href="http://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2013/what-will-the-simulations-do-next/Look carefully at the following animation of two runs of the same climate model. Look at the multi-decadal trend vs the decadal variability. That’s what this silly non-argument boils down to. Denialist misdirection about a transient slow-down in the rate of tropospheric warming modulated by variability in the rate of ocean heat uptake. It won’t make any difference to the centennial trend and that is what matters

  15. #16 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    ‘So what was the point that you were trying to make?’

    The story has been around for a couple of years, its good to see the data and the science looks solid.

  16. #17 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Give it up, Gordo. You have nothing. Surely this must be obvious by now? Climate science *isn’t* politics. That is your essential confusion. Resolve that, and you can move forward rationally.

  17. #18 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    ‘Not man enough to admit your “main driver” assertion is nonsense?’

    Our star is still the main driver, but I’m sure you can appreciate that while earth has a magnetic field, Venus does not.

    So I cannot see a runaway greenhouse effect on Venus.

    Earth, magnetic field, alive. Venus, none, dead.

  18. #19 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    The alternative is that you grow into a fully-fledged climate buffoon like Luke. Look at the man. Objectively. Do you want to end up like that?

    Take Lionel A’s excellent advice and read. He recommends Ruddiman. This is a good choice. Be sure to get the second edition.

  19. #20 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    So I cannot see a runaway greenhouse effect on Venus.

    Congratulations! A solid gold Teh Stupid Of Teh Week! Award is on its way to you as we speak.

    Have you *any* idea how absurd you are? Any idea at all?

  20. #21 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Shorter Karen, EG, Luke:

    BleurrrghDenyDenyDenyBlaaahBurbleBletherBollocksDenyyaargh! Yarp!

    With a scatter of irrelevent references.

  21. #22 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    You are a low life scum BBD and although I can’t vouch for Boris, my mate Luke is a fine adversary and more knowledgable on climate science than you will ever be.

  22. #23 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    And that graph is fantasy.

  23. #24 Lionel A
    August 17, 2013

    Luke

    The problem for you old son is that your models are full of shit. i.e. not working.

    OK Clever cloggs, explain why the models aren’t working. This implies that you will have to specify which models you are complaining about.

    Also explain why if we ignored all climate models, we would still know that anthropogenic climate change is under way.

    Go back and seriously address that core issue. Unfamiliarity with MY literature is no excuse. That’s your problem living in an echo chamber… It’s projection.

    At last some truth as you own up to projection.

    It would appear that your echo chamber is very small.

    Now this is a very telling comment:

    So whaddya gonna do – what’s compelling value proposition for the investment when we have massive disease problems with HIV, TB and malaria. Ongoing problems with food security, militarism, change of economic power to Asia etc. You want to bet everything on black or number 42 (AGW) do you?

    Aha! The Lomborg strategy.

    Do you not realise that global warming and climate change will make all those problems many times worse especially as each will amplify the effects of others.

    Good luck adapting to spread of diseases as the globe warms and species migrate and change their range when all ports, and many airports they also being near sea level, are flooded inhibiting the flow of ALL goods.

    How do you think the security of nations is going to be ensured when mass migration takes place from populations displaced by flooding, drought, crop failures, collapse of trophic webbs and pollution with this latter exacerbating that ecological collapse.. Mass migration patterns could be interesting as new routes for refugees open up as Arctic ice melts.

    And I have only scratched the surface of the problems that will be caused by a warming world.

    Now WRT Sandy, you denigrated the mention of that but perhaps you could describe the factors that caused it to develop in the way that it did.

    If what has been displayed here is the sum of your cerebral processes then it sadly portrays a lack of joined up thinking.

  24. #25 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    You are a low life scum BBD and although I can’t vouch for Boris, my mate Luke is a fine adversary and more knowledgable on climate science than you will ever be.

    More lies and delusion from our retired sports writer.

    * * *
    The graph isn’t fantasy. It is simple two model runs. Two *instances* of something. Here in the real world we run only one instance of climate. If you were smarter than plankton, you would understand the point Ed Hawkins (a climate scientist) is making. But you choose instead to deny.

    Give it up, Gordy. You are on a hiding to nothing.

  25. #26 Olaus Petri
    August 17, 2013

    Everything for the cause: The BelMonte Dam.

    “After years of struggle through the legal system, the government approved the dam construction in June 2011 as part of their goal to reduce their Carbon Dioxide emissions by 40% by 2020 (The Brazilian National Government 2011).”

    http://amazonwatch.org/take-action/stop-the-belo-monte-monster-dam

  26. #27 chek
    August 17, 2013

    The Amazonwatch board has a lot of connections to Green groups you previously despised (‘Greenpiss’ being one of yours). Finally growing up are you, Olap?

  27. #28 Olaus Petri
    August 17, 2013

    You don’t get it little Chek, what a surprise! I’m not in favour of the dam, but it’s the likes of you and what you and Deltoid represent that made it possible for politicians to take this action against human carbon emissions.

    But hey fellas, keep up the battle against the imaginary but very evil right wing Elders of fossil fuel obstructing climate sciene and CO2 mitigation.

  28. #29 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Wasn’t Gordy supposed to be doing some checking on the Idso Clan and their lying websites? Wasn’t he supposed to be reporting back on their numerous links to vested interests? Wasn’t he supposed to acknowledge that he was (yet again) utterly wrong about the MWP, which was never a synchronous, globally warm event?

    Is Gordy just pretending that (as usual) he has had his clock cleaned? That would be intellectual dishonesty of the most blatant kind.

  29. #30 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Olaus Petri inhabits an alternative reality in which people who understand physics are evil and responsible for poorly-conceived hydro projects. Meanwhile the vested interests in the energy industry warping public policy and endangering the future of billions for centuries to come are not evil.

  30. #31 chek
    August 17, 2013

    I’m not in favour of the dam, but it’s the likes of you and what you and Deltoid represent that made it possible for politicians to take this action against human carbon emissions.

    You’re confused Olap. Carbon emissions are but one component. You’ll find that increasing energy demand is the main driver of a complex situation beyond your simple-minded sloganeering. It’s hard to tell developing nations not to develop, and even more so when that development eats into a global scale carbon sink.

    Ecuador for instance attempted to raise money to NOT drill for oil in its Yasuni national park in its part of the Amazon, but the initiative hasn’t worked and now the oil companies are champing at the bit

  31. #32 Lionel A
    August 17, 2013

    Cripes, we are back to pinning the tail on the ignoramus OilyPetrol

    But hey fellas, keep up the battle against the imaginary but very evil right wing Elders of fossil fuel obstructing climate sciene and CO2 mitigation.

    Oh no you don’t.

    How A Powerful Group Of Corporations Quietly Tried To Roll Back Clean Energy Standards, And Failed Miserably

    When the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, wants a law passed, it has all the resources to make that happen.

    The organization is known for helping to advance corporate interests by writing and then pushing to pass conservative legislation at the state level. With funding to the tune of $500,000 from billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch’s foundations from 2005-2011, and $1.4 million from Exxon Mobil this past decade, it shouldn’t be a surprise that ALEC has had many successes in its 40 years of existence. ALEC has most notably pushed “Stand Your Ground” and “Right-to-Work” legislation through state legislatures across the country. The organization has also created model legislation with intended loopholes that allow energy companies to withhold names of certain chemicals used during hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

    GOP Senators Parrot [1] Anti-Science Talking Points At Climate Hearing

    All of the Republican members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee question the science behind climate change. Fueled by millions in donations from the fossil fuel industry, on Thursday, these Senators used the committee as a way to simply parrot the tired talking points of Koch funded organizations and industry leaders, denouncing what 97 percent of climate scientists have agreed on.

    and

    many more similar to chose from with from the top link at that above:

    New internal documents obtained by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) reveal new methods that fossil fuel companies, agrochemical interests and corporate lobbying groups will influence certain state policies in the coming months through the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC.

    ALEC’s annual meeting is taking place in Chicago this week, just as Common Cause and CMD have filed a complaint to the IRS over ALEC’s corporate-funded “Scholarships” for state legislators–ALEC is a tax exempt non-profit despite their mission of facilitating an exchange of company-crafted laws with state legislators in closed-door meetings.

    ALEC’s Energy, Environment and Agriculture task force is drafting new model bills on behalf of its members like Duke Energy, ExxonMobil, Koch Industries and Peabody. ALEC’s anti-environmental agenda in Chicago is available for viewing (see E&E PM and Earthtechling). These are the new model bills ALEC and its energy, chemical and agricultural interests are finalizing this week:

    .

    [1]There are a number of similar parrots contributing on this thread isn’t that right Luke and gordolocks.

  32. #33 Luke
    August 17, 2013

    Well that’s livened the place up a bit hasn’t it.

    But you’re a dour lot but just like I have experienced in a few drive by shootings at Nova’s. But at least if you keep the sledges down unlike at Wattsupyerbum you won’t be snipped over there.

    But yes – you’re a sour lot that swings at everything. Loosen up.

    Importantly only Vince had the guts to have a go over to Nova’s and have a go and copped a fair bit – good try Vince – however KuknKat (aka kookers, Kat Krap and Kooky Kat) did him like a dinner – and where were you guys in support.

    Over here huddled around your introverted little Ruddiman camp fire. It’s your duty if you’re true believers to get onto the big denier sites and engage. FAILURE TO ENGAGE guys. Piss weak.

    KuhnKat at http://joannenova.com.au/2013/08/watch-as-co2-rises-and-falls-over-the-arctic-every-year/#comment-1308440 shot poor old Vince down – crashed and burned.

    Take your Mums with you.

  33. #34 Luke
    August 17, 2013

    “Good luck adapting to spread of diseases as the globe warms and species migrate and change their range when all ports, and many airports they also being near sea level, are flooded inhibiting the flow of ALL goods.”

    _ WHAT – we can’t engineer or cope with 0.3-0.5 m by the end of the century. Laughing !

    Diseases – Reiter and malaria remember – oh the shame.

    “How do you think the security of nations is going to be ensured when mass migration takes place from populations displaced by flooding, drought, crop failures, collapse of trophic webbs and pollution with this latter exacerbating that ecological collapse.. Mass migration patterns could be interesting as new routes for refugees open up as Arctic ice melts.” OR NOT – all based on post modernist shit science of the worst order – take GCM that doesn’t work – add to shitty species extinction model – publish in soft receptive journal. All these problems you list exist now, regardless of climate drivers and you’re focussed on one “maybe” aspect of the problem based on the models THAT ARE NOW FALSIFIED.

    Done any personal environmental remediation yourself lately? Of course not.

  34. #35 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    FAILURE TO ENGAGE guys. Piss weak.

    Amusing, coming from an opinionated but ill-informed bully who refuses to engage substantively when challenged *repeatedly* to do so.

  35. #36 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Try to remember, Luke, that being wittered at by numpties is tedious. So why bother visiting idiot goat-fucks like Nova and WTFUWT? Nobody knows what they are talking about, moderation is usually hostile, and making any headway amid all the ignorance, buffoonery and denial is impossible.

  36. #37 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Please also recall that being WRONG IN CAPS because you don’t have a fucking clue what you are talking about achieves nothing at all.

    You are using the term “falsified” incorrectly and you don’t seem capable of understanding that the troposphere ≠ the climate system.

  37. #38 Luke
    August 17, 2013

    BBD – Do you ever take a toilet break or sleep?

    My opening post here unanswered. The fundamental issue of modelling the global climate has now failed the most basic test – and all you can do is divert. The emperor has no clothes.

    Why bother visiting idiot goat-fucks – well Jo and Davey aren’t that dumb – smart enough to rate the pants off you lot and actually control the debate. Almost every day. And where are you here – on an endless open thread – WOW !

    Keep on theme at Nova and the border guards won’t snip you. But I suspect you’re not up to it. These guys are pretty well armed to the teeth. Kooky Kat saw Vince off in a few hours.

  38. #39 Luke
    August 17, 2013

    The big problem with all the palaeo work you’re in love with is that catastrophic astrophysical or volcanogenic events, Milankovich cycling or solar variability either individually or collectively would have dominated over CO2. Untangle that ! It’s all about framing the question.

    Major extinction event – lots of detrital material – lots of H2S – lots of sulfate aerosols – where does this sit vis a vis CO2 forcing – it’s a biogeochemical nightmare.

    Meanwhile back at the here and now the models have fucked up.

    Prediction of GMT – wrong
    Improvement of models in 20 years – bugger all
    Tropo hotspot – not there
    Evap trend – wrong way
    Antarctic sea ice – growing (what a bugger)
    Deep ocean heat – statistically dodgy (IMHO of course)
    Averaging multi-model ensembles – sounds skanky and so you get stuff like rainfall could be 10% greater or 20% less
    Resolving extreme event behaviour needs more grunt and probably new physics at micro-scale
    No real trends in droughts or floods.
    Community divided on tropical cyclone behaviour
    Do we understand what caused the MWP or LIA – probably not (not well).

    What worries me more though is http://meteora.ucsd.edu/~jnorris/sio209.fa11/Johanson2009.pdf fate of the sub-tropics is a big gig

    Interestingly on the reduced evap story and that appearing to be due to more stilling of winds you do find funky stuff like http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2011JCLI4198.1 WTF !!! what would we know really

  39. #40 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Luke

    Please address my earlier comments properly. You are being evasive. I know you cannot defend your position, but I want to see you try.

    In summary:

    Earlier in the Holocene 2.5 – 7.5Ky ago the sea level along the NSW coast was 1.0 – 1.5 m higher than at present.

    No reference despite request. Also note that pointing to any regional change in sea level is irrelevant to the point of dishonesty. Global mean sea level has *not* fallen by 1.5m since the mid-Holocene. But global MSL was at least 5m above Holocene MSL during the Eemian which requires a substantial collapse of the WAIS. Unless you can account for ~3m MSL increase some other way. Which it so happens you can’t. Your attempt to avoid acknowledging this was both clumsy and intellectually dishonest.

    #18 Demonstrate error in Rohling13 and Hansen13 or accept the paleoclimate-derived estimates for S.

    #19 Where did the water come from if not the WAIS? See above.

    #22 Bolide impacts are *not* the primary driver of paleoclimate change. Admit your error.

    #23 Familiarise yourself with Cenozoic climate change before blethering further about Milankovitch.

    #25 No other forcing has changed as much as CO2 forcing during the Cenozoic. This provides an over-arching mechanism that explains the general cooling trend from ~50Ma. It demonstrates the role of CO2 forcing in climate change on a geological scale.

    #64 Retract your rubbish about Rignot.

    Then we can move on. Your rubbish about the models has been dealt with upthread, so repeating it is pointless.

  40. #41 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    The big problem with all the palaeo work you’re in love with is that catastrophic astrophysical or volcanogenic events, Milankovich cycling or solar variability either individually or collectively would have dominated over CO2.

    Incorrect statement of facts and argument by assertion. Addressed repeatedly above (#25 previous page; see above).

    You are making a miserable mess of this. And you know it, hence the bully-boy aggression tactics, evasion, Gishing etc.

    Now, engage substantively and I will take you apart.

  41. #42 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    Dr Roy Spencer:

    Spencer is listed as a “scientific advisor” for an organization called the “Interfaith Stewardship Alliance” (ISA). According to their website, the ISA is “a coalition of religious leaders, clergy, theologians, scientists, academics, and other policy experts committed to bringing a proper and balanced Biblical view of stewardship to the critical issues of environment and development.”

    In July 2006, Spencer co-authored an ISA report refuting the work of another religious organization called the Evangelical Climate Initiative. The ISA report was titled A Call to Truth, Prudence and Protection of the Poor: an Evangelical Response to Global Warming. Along with the report was a letter of endorsement signed by numerous representatives of various organizations, including six that have received a total of $2.32 million in donations from ExxonMobil over the last three years. [13]

  42. #43 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    catastrophic astrophysical or volcanogenic events, Milankovich cycling or solar variability either individually or collectively would have dominated over CO2.

    *guffaw*

    [Citation needed]

  43. #44 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    By the way, Luke, is that an actual picture of you? That would explain so much.

  44. #45 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Yes, Roy really is a *true believer*. Not to mention in bed with the shills. The Cornwall Alliance is not quite what it seems.

    As always, ignore the posturing by the front men and follow the money.

  45. #46 Luke
    August 17, 2013

    Bullshit Bunk and Dickhead – you’re a flake – models are falsified and you’re just sitting around with a bunch of losers on an extinct backwater blog atoll. Have a blog sook or prosecute your argument.

    But really nobody gives a fuck what you think. You’re a legend in your own stinky little bedroom having a Walter Mitty moment.

    You’re shit scared on engaging your real critics over on Nova etc. Sitting around with your criminally intense back-slappers having a circle jerk in obscurity.

    Get a job you turd.

  46. #47 Luke
    August 17, 2013

    Stu – seems like you need a good head butting. Don’t pick on my looks – I’m very sensitive. Cunt don’t take liberties.

  47. #48 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    With apologies to those who have seen this before…

    Luke, were you aware that none other than James Hansen himself is profoundly sceptical of “the models”? Did you know this?

    * * *

    TH: A lot of these metrics that we develop come from computer models. How should people treat the kind of info that comes from computer climate models?

    Hansen: I think you would have to treat it with a great deal of skepticism. Because if computer models were in fact the principal basis for our concern, then you have to admit that there are still substantial uncertainties as to whether we have all the physics in there, and how accurate we have it. But, in fact, that’s not the principal basis for our concern. It’s the Earth’s history-how the Earth responded in the past to changes in boundary conditions, such as atmospheric composition. Climate models are helpful in interpreting that data, but they’re not the primary source of our understanding.

    TH: Do you think that gets misinterpreted in the media?

    Hansen: Oh, yeah, that’s intentional. The contrarians, the deniers who prefer to continue business as usual, easily recognize that the computer models are our weak point. So they jump all over them and they try to make the people, the public, believe that that’s the source of our knowledge. But, in fact, it’s supplementary. It’s not the basic source of knowledge. We know, for example, from looking at the Earth’s history, that the last time the planet was two degrees Celsius warmer, sea level was 25 meters higher.

    And we have a lot of different examples in the Earth’s history of how climate has changed as the atmospheric composition has changed. So it’s misleading to claim that the climate models are the primary basis of understanding.

  48. #49 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    You look like a bullying prat to me. Are you going to call me a cunt too?

  49. #50 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    Bully, MRA most likely, dare I guess libertarian, and UNABLE TO PROVIDE A CITE FOR A SINGLE THING.

    *Yawn* 2/10, need smarter trolls.

  50. #51 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    #46 I thought you’d refuse to engage with me. You lose the argument by default and are revealed as a bluffer. To nobody’s great surprise, I imagine.

    * * *

    I don’t *need* a job, bully-boy. I made my money and retired early. Hence the free time to engage at length with arseholes like you.

  51. #52 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    But really nobody gives a fuck what you think. You’re a legend in your own stinky little bedroom having a Walter Mitty moment.

    Projecting like a poisoned dog…

    :-)

  52. #53 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    But BBD, he has a beany and cool shades. That he’s posing in his mom’s basement has nothing to do with it!

  53. #54 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    Just FYI, Luke, your physical threat and mysogyny are duly noted.

  54. #55 Lionel A
    August 17, 2013

    Now you are becoming tedious, like many before you, by repeating crank based nonsense

    My opening post here unanswered. The fundamental issue of modelling the global climate has now failed the most basic test – and all you can do is divert.

    whilst evading direct questions about any specific models you are denigrating. Look up thread.

    Meanwhile back at the here and now the models have fucked up.

    Meanwhile back at the here and now the models have ME (Luke) fucked up.

    There fixed that for you.

    As for engaging at Nova, WUWT etc,. it is best not to dive into a pig pen because you will always come out smelling of crap. And that is what you have done Luke, far from livening a place up you have dragged a nasty smell in with your persona – which doesn’t seem all that pleasant at base either. I think you need med’s, or a social life.

    Maybe a decent thinking lady friend would do you good or are you a misogynist too.

    I can honestly say that you come across as the most unpleasant person I have yet to see here, there have been other strong contenders.

    BTW and yes I have completed some personal environmental re-mediation lately. And yourself?

  55. #56 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    ‘and where were you guys in support.’

    Deltoidians don’t travel well and they wear girlie blouses, definitely not a flash mob.

  56. #57 chek
    August 17, 2013

    Like anybody would choose to waste their time at a shill’s blog, throwing pearls before a shill’s blog inane commenters.
    Get real.

  57. #58 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    I dutifully pottered over to the DK Corral to see the invincible (sorry) KuhnKat bring Vince up short.

    I cannot speak for Vince, but it is possible that he couldn’t be bothered to respond to an error-riddled Gish Gallop that ends with the unmistakable braying of Teh Stupid celebrating itself.

    Here it is (link at Luke’s #33):

    Vince Whirlwind of disinformation taunts:

    “Let me guess, in your little fantasy-data-world, the glaciers haven’t melted, Arctic ice hasn’t dwindled, sea levels aren’t rising, and the ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica aren’t shrinking at an accelerated rate, right?

    Are your beliefs backed by any published science? Or are they more the product of your belief?”

    Lemme see, published work claims that geothermal activity is partially at fault for the galloping glaciers of Greenland. Published work claims that the cental glacial area is GAINING mass while the fringes are losing. Published work shows that BOTH of those trends, galloping glaciers and mass loss, is slowing.

    Published work shows that the Himalayan glaciers are NOT losing glacial mass although some are some aren’t.

    Published work shows that many glaciers that were “rapidly” losing mass are slowing and some, like Mt. Kilimanjaro have actually REVERSED and are again gaining mass.

    The oceans have been rising since the end of the last glaciation.

    The Antarctic has been cooling and increasing its sea ice to record levels. Only the western glaciers have been thought to be losing mass. Like Greenland the heat flux from the core is slightly higher underneath the western glacier due to thinner materials below. Yeah, that is all PUBLISHED work.

    So, we are left with your OLD alarmist papers that have all been superceded by RECENT observations or simply SANE interpretations of what is actually happening.

    As far as the touted POLAR amplification, it has not been happening in the Antarctic for at least 30 years and now the Arctic seems to be turning on you!!

    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

    Can you even say SUCKER?!?!?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    * * *

    Let’s look at the data:

    GIS mass balance change and Antarctic ice mass balance change

    World glacier mass balance change

    Global sea ice area

    Holocene sea level change

    * * *

    And on he merrily goes, misrepresenting the *cause* of Antarctic sea ice extent increase and asserting that geothermal energy is driving WAIS mass balance loss, a view for which I can find no support at all. He also appears unaware that the Antarctic is not projected to experience polar amplification to the same extent as the Arctic. The Antarctic is, after all, thermally isolated by the Antarctic Circumpolar Current and has been for ~34Ma.

    It’s all crap, and Luke uncritically endorsed it.

  58. #59 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    And on he merrily goes, misrepresenting the *cause* of Antarctic sea ice extent increase and asserting that geothermal energy is driving WAIS mass balance loss, a view for which I can find no support at all. He also appears unaware that the Antarctic is not projected to experience polar amplification to the same extent as the Arctic. The Antarctic is, after all, thermally isolated by the Antarctic Circumpolar Current and has been for ~34Ma.

    It’s all crap, and Luke uncritically endorsed it.

  59. #60 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    ‘geothermal energy is driving WAIS mass balance loss, a view for which I can find no support at all.’

    Keeping in mind the Circumpolar Vortex, it does seem more likely that geothermal energy is responsible for the WAIS loss of mass balance and not AGW.

  60. #61 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    There is no hope for the drooling halfwits at Jo Nova.

    They are irredeemably lost in their ignorant fantasy-world and persistently refuse to engage with the facts.

  61. #62 Stu
    August 17, 2013

    Deltoidians don’t travel well and they wear girlie blouses, definitely not a flash mob.

    Gordy, your homophobia is duly noted.

  62. #63 chek
    August 17, 2013

    it does seem more likely

    No it doesn’t you blithering imbecile, for reasons already addressed and forgotten by your goldfish-class mind.

  63. #64 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Gordy

    Whatever happened to your response to #93 page 16?

    Gordy, please check the links Lionel A provides above. Do *not* sneer and sigh and look the other way. These sites provide useful information and they have not been sued by the persons and organisations described so we can be reasonably sure that the (referenced) info is sound. Do your background. Research. Check. Build up a confidence index and rate your sources within it. Act like a proper journalist.

    Then come back and tell us how impartial and unbiased the Idsos are.

    Those links Lionel A posted were:

    http://www.desmogblog.com/global-warming-denier-database

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_the_Study_of_Carbon_Dioxide_and_Global_Change

  64. #65 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Keeping in mind the Circumpolar Vortex, it does seem more likely that geothermal energy is responsible for the WAIS loss of mass balance and not AGW.

    I’ve got a feeling you haven’t got a clue about this, either.

    Please read this. Don’t comment further on this topic until you have. It will lead to a more productive conversation. My thanks in advance.

  65. #66 chek
    August 17, 2013

    Vince @ #61
    Good on you for at least making the attempt and having a go.

    I must admit, I used to drop in on the whacko blogs (you know who they are) and do the same myself, but a few years ago I found that far from the stupidity cheering me up it just depressed me. As in, what a waste of human life and potential, and why put yourself in the position of witnessing it?.

    And anyway, life’s too short to waste on wilful wasters well over the age of consent.

  66. #67 adelady
    August 17, 2013

    life’s too short to waste on wilful wasters well over the age of consent.

    Yup. I used to visit some of those sites – basically to point and laugh. But old jokes get stale, and I’ve not seen anything new for a year or so. Maybe losing the occasionally hilarious buffoonery of the likes of Monckton has blunted their edge or something.

    otoh, I’ve a feeling this might be a more or less becalmed period before the storm that the next IPCC report is likely to unleash. (I pity the pre-publication text editors – they know that a typo or two will make it into several thousand pages of reports. They must dread finding out that a number or a word here and there could turn out to be fodder for the gloating and breast-beating crowd.)

  67. #68 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    This is from your link…

    ‘The new IPCC reports on climate change had essentially sidestepped the issue of Antarctica’s potential contribution to sea level rise. The authors pointed out, rightly, that there was just too much uncertainty to make predictions.’

  68. #69 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    Yeah – old jokes get stale, and after a while it just gets depressing.

    I had previously found everything I posted at Jo Nova’s got moderated out of existence, but they appear to be leaving things this weekend.

    Either way, it’s a waste of time – El Gordo here gives us a good indication of what’s going on on the cranks blogs to save us from having to visit them: endless recycling of nonsense.

    Incidentally, if anybody was wondering about Luke’s “wiped the floor” you will probably be unsurprised to hear that my pointing out a few solid facts is apparently trumped by, “geothermal activity melting Greenland” and “some glaciers are melting and some are gaining mass”, and “Antarctica is growing”.

    That’s the sort of fantasy world they live in.

  69. #70 el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    I rarely comment at Wattsy because they are too bright. Once upon a time Anthony threatened to ban me …..

  70. #71 Vince Whirlwind
    August 17, 2013

    el gordo
    August 17, 2013

    This is from your link…

    ‘The new IPCC reports on climate change had essentially sidestepped the issue of Antarctica’s potential contribution to sea level rise. The authors pointed out, rightly, that there was just too much uncertainty to make predictions.’

    Yeeees……and the implication of that is what, have a think about it…?

  71. #72 Turboblocke
    August 17, 2013

    Luke at #39 revealed that he is not fully conversant with the models (to put it mildly!): Prediction of GMT – wrong

    The models don’t make predictions, they make projections . If you don’t know why it’s significant, then you aren’t informed enough to discuss the merits of models.

  72. #73 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Gordy

    If a physical disability makes it impossible for you to scroll up, please say so. Otherwise I am mystified.

    #64

    And:

    #65

  73. #74 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Tested. The links work for me, so presumably will for you.

  74. #75 BBD
    August 17, 2013

    Vince

    Incidentally, if anybody was wondering about Luke’s “wiped the floor” you will probably be unsurprised to hear that my pointing out a few solid facts is apparently trumped by, “geothermal activity melting Greenland” and “some glaciers are melting and some are gaining mass”, and “Antarctica is growing”.

    I went way over the link limit at #58 – is there a comment showing there starting:

    I dutifully pottered over to the DK Corral to see the invincible (sorry) KuhnKat bring Vince up short.

  75. #76 chek
    August 17, 2013

    “geothermal activity melting Greenland”

    It did make me smile (momentarily), before I lost patience watching Gordon transplant that denier news factoid to WAIS today. Such care with the facts! (Ed Murrow – I know, …who?) must be spinning in his grave like a pulsar..

  76. #77 St. Cyr
    Australia
    August 17, 2013

    As a serial lurker here with no relevant scientific background (although possessing what are hopefully adequate critical faculties), I gotta say that nothing that has thus far been posted has convinced me that we should over-turn the now-hundreds of years old scientific position that increasing CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere will increase global temperature and affect climate.

    Nor has anything been said that contradicts the position that this will have a devastating impact on the kind of civilisation that humanity has developed over the past ten thousand years.

    For those who promulgate the views that these accepted positions are incorrect, you may want to rethink your strategy of relying on the kinds of repetitive, threadbare, scientifically and logically absurd arguments that have to date underpinned your posts.

    Either that, or I may start thinking that your point is not to convince through rational argument, but simply to attempt to browbeat, bully and bluster an inconvenient reality into submission. A process that, I fear, will have the usual results.

    Just sayin’.

  77. #78 chek
    August 18, 2013

    Well. we have Gordon thinking his mate Luke is far from being a car crash of ill-informed lunacy, and of course “Karen” who doesn’t comprehend the difference between heat and temperature. Oh, and the Scandinavian Troll Collective’s Olouse railing against ‘Greens’, except when they don’t do enough.

    Ic an only think they imagine consistency and knowing stuff just slows them down.

  78. #79 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    ‘have a think about it…?’

    They said at this stage its not possible to tell what’s going on… so they can’t make a prediction.

  79. #80 Stu
    August 18, 2013

    Obvious and stupid lie, Gordo. Please keep in mind that other people are actually capable of reading a sentence and comprehending it.

  80. #81 chek
    August 18, 2013

    “Oh, and the Scandinavian Troll Collective’s Olouse railing against ‘Greens’, except and even more when they don’t do enough”

    Correcting that. Teh stupidity and contradictions just get to be too much.

  81. #82 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    St Cyr the contrarians serve a useful purpose, but obviously neither side of the debate can claim victory at the moment.

    World temperatures have stabilised, so the pressure on politicians is becoming intense. In Australia the political debate is leading to a victory for common sense.

  82. #83 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    So Stu what is your interpretation of that sentence?

  83. #84 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    Gordy, how you can ask someone else about reading comprehension *without* responding to #73 is puzzling, to say the least.

  84. #85 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    And for the nth time, physics doesn’t vote.

    Please *try* to separate your politics from your odyssey into science.

    Try, Gordy.

  85. #86 chek
    August 18, 2013

    World temperatures have stabilised, so the pressure on politicians is becoming intense. In Australia the political debate is leading to a victory for common sense.

    Gordon, all that you think you ‘know’ is based on denier misrepresentation and disinformation. That’s been demonstrated time after time, and Australians aren’t all cranks and loons..

    The common sense of survival will win, but it’s not the one you’re expecting.

  86. #87 St. Cyr
    August 18, 2013

    El gordo @ 82
    The real debate, as you know, is what to do about the increasingly evident effects of AGW, not on whether it is happening, nor whether it is caused by something other than anthropogenically released CO2.

    Global surface temperature has not stabilised, but its rate of increase has slowed as the deep oceans take up additional heat. Total global temperature therefore continues to rise as scientists would predict from the increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.

    As to your predictions of a victory for common sense in the upcoming Australian election, history is fairly littered with examples of 180 degree shifts in “common sense” when reality hits home. That’s because most people are not insane, and will (eventually, and sometimes painfully) change their minds to accommodate the bleedin’ obvious.

  87. #88 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    ‘Total global temperature therefore continues to rise as scientists would predict from the increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.’

    Observation suggests otherwise.

  88. #89 chek
    August 18, 2013

    Observation of what, exactly, Gordon?

  89. #90 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    Gordy

    You have had time to read the links at #64 and #65. Please respond.

  90. #91 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    Observation suggests otherwise.

    And stop the stupid shit.

  91. #92 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    ‘Observation of what, exactly, Gordon?’

    CO2 continues to rise at a phenomenal rate, while temperatures remain subdued.

  92. #93 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    OHC again?

    As Luke and Karen have pointed out, your missing heat is a fiction.

  93. #94 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    I did mention “stupid shit” above, Gordy.

    And

    #64

    #65

    ?

  94. #95 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    As Luke and Karen have pointed out, your missing heat is a fiction.

    Luke and Karen did not substantiate their claims. They did burble and bleaarrrrrrghedenuydenudengetitfuckingright*deny*atlast!thereyougoboy!youcanifyoutrybutuuurrrrggghh!. Yarp!

    Or something along those lines anyway.

  95. #96 el gordo
    August 18, 2013

    I was convinced, after reading their comments, that we needn’t worry about the OHC.

  96. #97 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    Well you are a plonker then. Can’t be helped; should not be paraded in public.

  97. #98 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    #64

    #65

    Come on, Gordy.

    Play the game!

    ;-)

  98. #99 FrankD
    August 18, 2013

    St CYr #77:

    “I gotta say that nothing that has thus far been posted has convinced me that…”

    What now? Mr Failure-to-Engage’s choice to use an avatar of him pwning his webcam did not convince you? Shocked, I tells ya.

    BTW, I was glancing at UrbanDictionary last night and was amused by the aptness of the first example here.

  99. #100 BBD
    August 18, 2013

    St Cyr

    What do you think Gordy will do next?

Current ye@r *