Bad hair day?
UPDATE: Jo Nova posts a timely reminder of her online debate with Glikson here.
Apart from the ubiquitous Will Steffen, the other “big name” at the ANU Climate Change Institute is (warmist, naturally) Andrew Glikson (see here for previous form).
Glikson, who is clearly annoyed that Steffen gets all the limelight, has decided to make a complete and utter twit of himself by writing a huffy letter to Richard Bean, the writer of the climate change play currently showing in Melbourne, The Heretic, in terms that can only be regarded by any normally balanced individual as deeply comic (my emphasis):
Dear Mr Richard Bean
As an Earth and paleo-climate scientist of some 45 years-long experience and more than 150 peer-reviewed publications, I suggest the show “The Heretic”, which I have not seen but about which I have read, can only lead to trivialization and further denial of what the scientific world regards as the greatest threat humanity and nature are facing.
I suggest the show plays into the hands of those who support the use of the thin terrestrial atmosphere (breathable thickness of less than 10 km) for further carbon emission on top of the 350 billion tons of carbon already emitted since the 18th century and >150 billion tons carbon released by land clearing, fires etc.. As shown in my enclosed paper, the pace of CO2 rise over the last 40 years, recently reaching >2 ppm CO2/year, has now exceeded any recorded for the last 65 million years, while the atmospheric level of 394 ppm CO2 is now near that of the warm Pliocene era some 3 million years-ago. Our empirical evidence is based on direct observations of the atmosphere-ocean-cryosphere system by the world’s climate monitoring bodies – including NOAA, NASA, NSIDC, Hadley-MET, Tyndale, Potsdam, CSIRO, BOM and other.
Opinion and “belief” are no substitute for evidence. Those who doubt the basic laws of nature and empirical data are always welcome to submit research to peer review journals where their papers will be treated the same as any other. In so far as their propositions are upheld, anyone who is able to demonstrate as if:
- The Earth’s climate is not warming, or
- The anthropogenic release of >500 billion tons of carbon since the 18th century is not the primary factor responsible for global warming
is bound to receive the highest accolades.
I wonder whether such a show, if concerned with denial of the holocaust of world war II, would have been conceived?
I suggest that, given the threat of anthropogenic global warming to the terrestrial climate and to marine ecosystems, a theatric show making mockery of the gravity of the climate issue for future generations can only be seriously mistaken.
Yours sincerely
Andrew Glikson
Earth and paleo-climate scientist
Australian National University
They really have no idea, do they? How utterly embarrassing for Glikson, ANU and Australia.
Thanks to Bishop Hill.
Australian Climate Madness 
Self important twits. I can not help but think we are in some script/pilot for a re make of “revnge of the nerds”. These idiots seem to think that if they keep the mantra going – telling a lie long enough it becomes the truth – that we will all roll over and let bob brown have his way with us. Lets just sacrifice the best economical conditions the resource sector has had since the gold rush on a mythical green altar while china india and everybody else increases carbon production exponentially. Complete F Wits.
So this idiot thinks that the ‘evidence’ based on speculative GIGO models of what might happen in the future has the same weight as historical evidence of what has happened in the past.
Andrew Glikson you are an Idiot.
We know exactly who sits on those ‘peer reviewed’ journals… As an academic myself, I can say that unless you support the gov. agenda, you will not get the big gov. funding dollars to do your research. So the only studies that see the light of day in those publications, are those the gov. chooses to fund. Wake up, Andrew Glikson, we know how the propaganda machine works. We’re not THAT gullible!
[REPLY – Very interesting to hear that first hand from an academic on the “inside” – thank you]
Gee, lighten up Glikson — it’s only a play!
It may only be a play but who goes to see plays? Most likely it will be urban city dwellers who are more likely to support the consensus view. It will eat away at one of the pillars of their support. The last thing you want is these “smart” supporters is to be led out of their echo chamber and find they’ve not been told the complete truth.
Comedy gold. You could also have emphasized the phrase
“which I have not seen but about which I have read”.
I guess this refers to the hysterical rant by Clive Hamilton, which also tries the holocaust argument. The activists are getting deperate.
E Blackadder (no relation of Mr Bean)
“which I have not seen but about which I have read”.
Was this about the play, or the ‘climate science’?
Glickson still willfully ignorant:
“the pace of CO2 rise over the last 40 years, recently reaching >2 ppm CO2/year, has now exceeded any recorded for the last 65 million years”
Cherry-picking “convenient” data points from historical CO2 measurements produced the 280 ppm baselie (no typo). Ignoring the peaks of direct measurements in excess of 400 ppm and the highs around 380 ppm around the 1950’s.
http://www.biomind.de/realCO2/
“Opinion and “belief” are no substitute for evidence.”
Yup. Computer models are nought but opinion. So why prognosticate based on opnion when the real-world data diverge dramatically from the “projections”, “scenarios”, etc?
FWIW: The Holocaust denial simile … officially via MIT
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/GLEP_a_00105
Thanks for the MIT link. I’m still trying to reach my jawbone on the floor….
Applying the same cry baby standard the ANU bed wetters use to define emails as death threats, Mr, 45 years- too long, letter to Mr Bean must be surely be considered a threat. The cast must be bricking themselves.
Glikson is regularly smacked down by Jo Nova. I recommend searching through her posts to see how incredibly clueless he is.
Lunatic fringe?
“2.The anthropogenic release of >500 billion tons of carbon since the 18th century is not the primary factor responsible for global warming
is bound to receive the highest accolades.”
You gotta love that bit. The CO2 claim lay with these warmistard scientists yet they insist that the other side prove the null hypothesis. Sort of reversing the onus or burden of proof in any given forum following a startling claim.
All the CO2 being released into the atmosphere by human activities came from the atmosphere in the first place. Much of the CO2 from fossil fuel burning comes from carbon which was sunk at a time in earth’s past when atmospheric CO2 was much higher and plant and animal life thrived.
Glikson may be good at doing calculations to add up how much carbon humans have put in the atmosphere, but he has bugger all ability to accurately calculate natural carbon emissions or natural carbon sinks.
Glikson has found only one ‘suspect’ for climate change and he’s trying to make the evidence fit without having enough knowledge of negative feedback mechanisms and/or many other climate drivers. People like Glikson should not be left alone to write such one dimensional scripts.
“In so far as their propositions are upheld, anyone who is able to demonstrate as if:
1.The Earth’s climate is not warming, or
2.The anthropogenic release of >500 billion tons of carbon since the 18th century is not the primary factor responsible for global warming,
is bound to receive the highest accolades.”
The arrogance is breathtaking. In response to 1 above, it hasn’t been for 15 years, and 2; the requirement is on those making the catastrophic claims to prove that CO2 IS the primary factor responsible for global warming, not on the sceptics to prove it ISN’T. But this seems to be the dribble coming out of many of the institutes relying on government funding and brainwashed to believe that their branch of research and their analysis trumps all else.
With that hairstyle, no wonder he thinks it’s warm!
Dr Glikson, where is the proof that “The anthropogenic release of >500 billion tons of carbon since the 18th century is the primary factor responsible for global warming”? Most of this carbon has long ago been absorbed back into the biosphere and the oceans. But more importantly, where is the mathematics that demonstrates carbon dioxide to be the one and the only culprit? So many other factors are involved. And don’t tell me about numerical climate models: we both know they’re garbage. Better scientists than yourself have pointed at other mechanisms and other causes and have offered far more convincing explanations based on better science. Have a look at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2012.03.002 for example, if you’re interested. Also, why not ponder on some eye-opening data you’ll find in http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.01.012.
Great questions!
I think his is the most creative comb-over hair style I have seen in a while.
Regrettably, he does not display the same imagination in his authorship, as his diatribes sound pathetically shrill and trite
Is that a possum on his head ? … better get it surgically removed !
Seriously, what an absolute idiot this bloke is. I’m so embarrassed for him and the ANU.
I’ve just read the play (I live in rural NSW) and it is terrific. Anyone in Melbourne should go and see it.
Hmmm, it is interesting that the writer brags 150 peer-reviewed publications, yet bases his whole commentary on about which I have read.
My interpretation of that wording would suggests that his commentary is based solely on third party reports, having not even read the play.
James Joyce used to use arm-swinging, fist-pounding, red-faced orations such as these and interject nonsense verbiage within, for a comedy effect.
I think Joyce would find this particular display of feigned indignity to be quite adequate, verbatim
get these parasites off the government payroll
[REPLY – Careful, they may think that’s a death threat /sarc]
Honest people like Bob Carter and Bill Kininmonth are either ignored or disparaged in the media, whereas creeps like the subject of the article and Tim Flannery are highly venerated by the ABC.
Thus the public have knowing how badly they are abused by the people they work to pay taxes to support
Said chump may start cooling the planet by canning that [snip] mop.
I think I will write an open letter to that well known green play write who wrote the club. Fancy portraying the mighty Collingwood Football Club like that disgraceful, but funny.
“The anthropogenic release of >500 billion tons of carbon since the 18th century is not the primary factor responsible for global warming” – what a misleading and typical piece of warmist non-science.
Most of this amount of CO2 (not “carbon” as this auto trumpet blower claims) has been utilized by life on this planet. What’s left amounts to an increase of 110ppm, or to use the parlance – bugger all.
There is no proof that all of this increase is due to human activities, and no proof that it impacts the climate to any measurable degree.
There is also a great deal of evidence to suggest that this tiny increase in a trace gas is good for life on the planet, and that much more good will come of it than bad. In addition, the claimed link between increased CO2 levels and warming seems to have been proven false due to the climate over the last decade.