ABC bias apes BBC

5 December, 2013 by

Leans to the Left

Always leans to the Left

The ABC is the taxpayer-funded, hermetically-sealed bubble of poisonous green/left ideology masquerading as an impartial media outlet, following closely in the footsteps of the UK’s BBC.

Just as Maurice Newman, former chairman of the ABC has railed against the corporation’s “groupthink“, former BBC news head, Roger Mosey, uses remarkably similar language in describing his own organisation:

“The BBC Trust speaks the language of diversity but in its edicts it promotes conformity, whether its about an agreed approach to the science of climate change, ‘correct’ terminology in the Middle East or the way a documentary about benefits [welfare] should be constructed,” he said.

He added: “On the BBC’s own admission, in recent years it did not, with the virtue of hindsight, give enough space to anti-immigration views or EU-withdrawalists; and, though, he may have exaggerated, the former director general Mark Thompson spoke of a ‘massive bias to the left’ in the BBC he joined more than 30 years ago.

“I share Mark’s view that there was more internal political diversity in recent times, but that isn’t enough unless it’s evident in a wider range of editorial views on air.” (source – h/t Bishop Hill)

We all know “ABC” is short for “anything but conservatives”, a motto which is adhered to strictly, without a single conservative presenter or editor of a mainstream current affairs show, and a string of lefties to present shows like Media Watch. Not only that, but other areas, like science, are stuffed with green/left activists, think Robyn Williams, Bernie Hobbs, “Doctor” Karl to name but three…

Defund Restructure the ABC now.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,

Nuccitelli brings out the Consensus Calculator

3 December, 2013 by

sks_calculator_crop

Already getting a lot of use…

I cannot believe how rapidly Dana Nuccitelli (he of Un-Sk Ps-Sc fame) has wheeled out the ACM Consensus Calculator to rubbish a study which rejects the ludicrous 97% figure that he and John Cook constantly bandy about.

When a survey reveals significantly less of a consensus than Un-Sk Ps-Sc would like, the CC is employed to make sure that it is “really” still 97%. The survey in question is this one by the American Meteorological Society, which shows that out of 1800 odd members who responded, only 52% believed that the cause of recent warming was “mostly human”. This will never do:

The misrepresentations of the study have claimed that it contradicts the 97 percent expert consensus on human-caused global warming. The prior studies that have found this high level of consensus were based specifically on climate experts – namely asking what those who do climate science research think, or what their peer-reviewed papers say about the causes of global warming.

The AMS on the other hand is not comprised primarily of climate experts. Some of its members do climate research, but only 13 percent of survey participants described climate as their field of expertise. Among those respondents with climate expertise who have published their climate research, this survey found that 93 percent agreed that humans have contributed significantly to global warming over the past 150 years (78 percent said it’s mostly human-caused, 10 percent said it’s equally caused by humans and natural processes, and 5 percent said the precise degree of human causation is unclear, but that humans have contributed). Just 2 percent of AMS climate experts said global warming is mostly natural, 1 percent said global warming isn’t happening, and the remaining 4 percent were unsure about global warming or human causation.

The authors also note that they asked about contributions to global warming over the past 150 years, whereas climate scientists are most confident that humans are the dominant cause of global warming over the past 50 years. Some survey participants sent emails implying that if the question had more narrowly focused on the past 50 years, even more respondents might have said that global warming is mostly human-caused.

Importantly, most AMS members are not climate researchers, nor is scientific research of any kind their primary occupation (for example, weather forecasters). Among those AMS members who haven’t recently published in the peer-reviewed literature, just 62 percent agreed that humans are causing global warming, with 37 percent saying humans are the main cause over the past 150 years.

Following it so far? Nuccitelli then repeats the study’s conclusions that any divergence from the “consensus” is more about “expertise” and “political ideology” than anything else (Lewandowsky anyone?). Judith Curry points out that the AMS has a history of plugging the alarmist line:

A year ago, the AMS issued a Statement on Climate Change, see my blog post on this.  Excerpts from their statement:

“It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide.

The ongoing warming will increase risks and stresses to human societies, economies, ecosystems, and wildlife through the 21st century and beyond, making it imperative that society respond to a changing climate.

Mitigation will reduce the amount of future climate change and the risk of impacts that are potentially large and dangerous.”

I was harshly critical of this statement, which was written by a group of volunteers and then approved by the AMS Council.

So it’s little wonder that the authors of the study look for any extraneous reason to justify the lack of agreement with the supposed consensus.

And just in case you haven’t got the message, Nuccitelli concludes:

In any case, the 97 percent expert consensus on human-caused global warming is still a reality.

A figure which comes from a study of which he and Cook are the authors, naturally.

Source (h/t Real Science)

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,

Five Holiday Gifts for Skeptical Science readers

1 December, 2013 by

Skeptical Science has suggested some “gifts for skeptics” (i.e. proper skeptics, that is), so in the spirit of Christmas, here are ACM’s ideas for the warmist in your life:

The SkS Shredder

Inconvenient data? No problem with this shredder. Just watch the Medieval Warm Period disappear. Forget having to change your models to fit reality, simply change reality to fit your models! Nothing could be easier!

sks_shredder

Simples!

Escalator News

Skeptical Science loves escalators, so why not buy that special person a subscription to Elevator World?

Elevator_world

Fascinating reading!

“ELEVATOR WORLD is the premier publication for the international building transportation industry and has been publishing the latest news, newest innovations, imperative safety issues, current code requirements, events coverage and accessibility, legal and maintenance issues since January 1953.”

And don’t worry, it has plenty about escalators as well!

Print edition, just $125. Order here.

The Skeptical Science Consensus Calculator

Do you need to keep repeating the fake statistic that 97% of scientists agree with the consensus on global warming, when in reality the figure is barely half that? Well, now your troubles are over with the new Consensus Calculator. Specially designed, this clever device will ensure you only get the result you want, every time.

Easy peasy!

Easy peasy!

Karl Popper – The Logic of Scientific Discovery

Why not find out what real scientists do by reading on of the essential texts on the scientific method. A lot of this will come as a shock to Skeptical Science readers, so best read it sitting down. It’s even available on Kindle, so do yourselves a favour and work out the difference between science and propaganda.

Get ready for a roller coaster ride, folks!

A real page turner for warmists

And finally, to show that special person how much you care…

Yes, it’s the new I “heart” Lew mug. Lovingly crafted and designed, this gift will really send the right message…

lew_mug

Show him you love him…

Available from the ACM Cafepress shop here, a bargain at just $15.99.

Merry Christmas!

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , , , ,

Tasmanian turkeys vote for Christmas

26 November, 2013 by

Tassie's tied up in it…

Tassie’s tied up in it…

The Australian state of Tasmania is a wonderful example of what happens when you let the Greens get a grip on the levers of government. Unemployment spiralling upwards, and the economy spiralling downwards.

So what better way to make sure that Tassie disappears completely down the gurgler than to tie it up in yet more Green tape. That’ll fix it!

The Tasmanian Government has released a climate change strategy aimed at 100 percent renewable power usage by 2020.

The Climate Smart Tasmania plan includes energy reduction targets across government, land use, infrastructure, transport and waste systems.

The Climate Change Minister, Cassy O’Connor, says its the most comprehensive plan by any Australian Government to reduce carbon emissions as well as adapt to a changing climate.

The strategy sets a new interim 2020 target to reduce carbon emissions to 35 percent below 1990 levels.

Ms O’Connor says its about showing leadership on climate change.

“We now have in Australia a climate denialist Government that is taking us backwards on climate change” she said. [Thank f*ck for that – Ed]

“Tasmania here has extraordinary advantages with our Hydro power, with the carbon in our forests and we do need to show leadership; it’s also the economically sensible thing to do.” (source)

The Tasmanian climate change minister, Cassy O’Connor, must be smoking something pretty strong to write this with a straight face:

Climate change is the biggest challenge we have ever faced. After many decades of scientific evidence that the world is warming, governments and communities around the world are now taking action.

The Tasmanian Government, through this Strategy, has committed to take State-based action to address the climate issues affecting our State, to build on our low-carbon advantage and to ensure we meet our fair share of the global emissions reduction effort. While Tasmania’s emissions represent only 1.3 per cent of Australia’s national total, we still have higher per capita emissions than Germany, the United Kingdom, China, Brazil and India. We are also noticing the impacts of climate change, such as higher average temperatures and more intense extreme events such as bushfires.

Let’s just do the math here: 1.3% of 1.5% (Australia’s emissions as a percentage of the global total) is less than one fiftieth of one whole percent. But the government is prepared to sacrifice jobs, standards of living, the economy, to make an utterly pointless gesture?

If you don’t believe it (which I didn’t at first), you can read about the miles and miles of Green tape here (PDF – 2.8MB).

Climate Madness.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,

Skeptical Science bombs again…

26 November, 2013 by

Dumb and offensive

Dumb and offensive

The morons at Un-Skeptical Pseudo-Science have developed a “widget” for blogs, which purports to show the energy accumulated by “global warming” since 1998 in terms of the new Un-Sk Ps-Sc unit of energy, the  “Hiroshima bomb” (Hb).

In a desperate attempt to scare people, who generally will not have any idea of the huge amounts of energy involved in  atmospheric heat transfers, the widget claims 4 Hbs-1 accumulating in the atmosphere due to AGW, and gives a running total. Quick, panic!

Well, not so fast, because the Sun, our life giving star, obliterates Earth with no less than one thousand Hbs-1. So the horribly scary 4 per second now seems rather tame, doesn’t it?

Apart from the callous and thoughtless tarnishing the memory of the thousands who died at Hiroshima, it just goes to show how low the headbangers at Un-Sk Ps-Sc will sink to peddle their tawdry brand of alarmism.

More here at WUWT (which provides the calculations).

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: ,

Letter to the Governor General

24 November, 2013 by

What would be the most inappropriate topic of a speech by the Governor General of Australia, the representative of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II? Oh yes, that’s it, a republic. As the ABC reports:

Ms Bryce spoke out in favour of gay marriage during her Boyer Lecture address last night, stating she hoped Australia might become a nation where “people are free to love and marry whom they choose”.

She then added: “And where perhaps, my friends, one day, one young girl or boy may even grow up to be our nation’s first head of state.”

So incensed was I that the GG had waded feet first into sensitive political issues (from which side, I wonder? Oh, yes, the Left, of course), that I sent the following letter:

I am astonished and disappointed, but not surprised, at your highly inappropriate comments on deeply political matters, both on the question of an Australian republic and the issue of same-sex marriage.

That a representative of the Queen should advocate for a republic is beyond my comprehension, whilst expressing a position on same-sex marriage, a matter which is highly political and contentious, is entirely inappropriate for a person occupying the role of Governor General. Your position is yet further compromised by your relationship by marriage to Opposition Leader, Bill Shorten.

Such statements are not unexpected, given your previous history of engaging in political debate, for example with regard to your encouraging of costly and ineffective action on climate change, including at a renewable energy conference in January 2009, where you said:

“We must act swiftly, act smartly, and act together…”

The only course of action open to you is to resign with immediate effect. If you wish to engage in political matters, you should seek election to Parliament.

No sooner had I pressed the “send” button, that I discovered that Tony Abbott had issued a piss-weak response and left it to David Elliott to spell out the truth. I hope this isn’t a sign that TA will be a LINO (Liberal in name only).

And no comment on Kelly O’Dwyer’s awful flannel on Lateline. Geez.

Filed Under: Climate

Britain to be hit by “entirely typical weather”

22 November, 2013 by

Extremely average

Extremely average

The Daily Mash:

TEMPERATURES in the UK are going to fall sharply over the coming weeks because that is what happens at this time of year, it has been claimed.

Meteorologists believe that winter, a spell of short, cold days commonly defined as a season, will be more or less exactly what you would expect.

Professor Henry Brubaker of the Institute for Studies said: “Household fuel costs will rise considerably as families try to increase the temperature of their homes.

“People on the verge of death may die.

“Ice and snow will create icy, snowy conditions.

“Your car will refuse to start.

“Because it’s winter.”

Speaking of extreme weather, how long will it take for the headbangers at Skeptical Science to label Richard Muller a filthy denier for this:

It is wise to be cautious about the panic that sets in when a storm kills a large number of people. People search for reasons to believe the storms are worse than in the past, even if the numbers contradict them. Victims naturally wish to explain why loved ones died and they look for a villain — and they can find one in global warming.

But global warming does not obviously lead to increased or more violent tornadoes. It is possible, for instance, that the increased energy brought by the higher temperatures of global warming is less significant than global warming’s reduction in the north-south temperature difference (the poles warm more than the Equator). The latter could reduce the kind of hot-cold weather fronts that generate severe storms. The current climate models are simply unable to make a clear prediction, and reduced tornadoes from global warming are just as plausible as increased ones.

One thing is clear, however: The number of severe tornadoes has gone down. That is not a scientific hypothesis, but a scientific conclusion based on observation. Regardless of the limitations of climate theory, we can take some comfort in that fact. (source)

Throw another heretic on the barbecue.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,

Typhoon Haiyan: ABC’s hysteria vs realists’ calm

14 November, 2013 by

Yeb Sano: feeling a bit peckish by now, I imagine…

Yeb Sano: feeling a bit peckish by now, I imagine…

On the one hand, we have their ABC, breathlessly parroting the mindless hysteria of the UN in its hermetically sealed über-Gruppendenken bubble, like this:

The United Nations meteorological agency has found the effects of climate change are making the impact of severe storms like Typhoon Haiyan worse.

The World Meteorological Organisation’s Michel Jarraud says Australia’s record-breaking summer helped push average global temperatures higher this year, and rising sea levels worsened the situation in the Philippines.

“The impact of this cyclone was definitely significantly more than what it would have been 100 years ago because of the simple mechanical fact that the sea level is higher,” Mr Jarraud said.

“Storm surges have a much more devastating effect than they would have had decades ago.” (source)

and slathering the opinion pages with weepy articles like this:

Sano announced that he will be taking part in a solidarity hunger strike for those “who are now struggling for food back home”, and will continue to fast until the international gathering shows “real ambition on climate action”. The Assembly — with high-level political representations from around the world — met Sano’s speech with a standing ovation.

Abbott’s speech took place in Canberra just 36 hours later. On Wednesday morning our new Prime Minister stood before the freshly sworn-in Parliament and tabled a set of bills designed to repeal the carbon price and — perhaps even more significantly — remove Australia’s limit on carbon pollution.

And the best bit:

Tony Abbott’s voice was steady with resolve; Sano’s voice, on the other hand, shook with the raw emotion of a man witnessing the terrible price climate change is exacting on his country. (source)

Geez, pass the sick bag.

On the other hand, however, we have rational thought, careful analysis and calm reflection from Benny Peiser:

Climate activists claim that tropical cyclone activity, including the frequency and intensity of typhoons, has increased as the global temperature has gone up. Yet empirical observations published in scientific journals show that despite the moderate warming during the 20th century, the number of tropical cyclones making landfall in the Philippines did not increase and has remained unchanged for more than 100 years.

Hours before the typhoon hit the Philippines, authorities moved nearly 1 million people to evacuation centres. Many of these structures collapsed when the tropical storm hit coastal towns and villages, killing thousands. Much of the initial destruction that killed so many was caused by winds blowing at 235 kilometres per hour — and occasionally at speeds of up to 275 kph/h. But it didn’t have to be that way.

A superstorm of similar magnitude, Cyclone Yasi, hit Queensland, Australia, in February 2011. The cyclone hit Queensland with an eye of 100 km in diameter and wind speeds of up to 285 km/h. Yet local disaster management committees had initiated their plans long in advance. Evacuation, including of hospitals, was completed more than four hours before the cyclone struck. Because Australia is an advanced nation that can afford to implement highly effective disaster warning systems, not a single person died as a direct result of this destructive cyclone.

…

As a result of economic development and technological advancement, the world is getting increasingly better at coping with and adapting to the effects of extreme weather events. As Goklany concludes: ‘Currently many advocate spending trillions of dollars to reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gases, in part to forestall hypothetical future increases in mortality from global warming induced increases in extreme weather events.  Spending even a fraction of such sums on the numerous higher priority health and safety problems plaguing humanity would provide greater returns for human well-being.’ (source)

Which demonstrates even more clearly that wasting those trillions of dollars on pointless GHG reductions will simply make developing countries poorer and less able to adapt. Climate Madness, once again.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , , ,

Typhoon Haiyan in perspective

13 November, 2013 by

Typhoon Haiyan

Typhoon Haiyan

It goes without saying that Typhoon Haiyan is a terrible tragedy for the Philippines. But the hyperventilating that has followed, concerning the alleged “link” to climate change, has been frenzied and emotive.

We have all come to expect the climate change alarmists and green media to link any extreme weather event to AGW, despite the fact that such events happened in the past, when the planet had apparently “safe” levels of CO2.

Chip Knappenburger and Patrick Michaels put some much needed perspective on Haiyan:

Nowadays, in the aftermath of every weather-related disaster, proponents of restricting fossil fuel use in the name of halting climate change are quick to place the blame for the tragedy on human-caused climate change (i.e., industrialized nations like the U.S.). The calls to “do something” amplify.

This is happening right now in Warsaw, at the latest (19th) in a long string of U.N.-organized Climate Change Conferences aimed at getting countries to agree to some sort of action aimed at mitigating climate change.

On the conference’s opening day, an envoy form the Philippines, Yeb Sano, gave an emotional address to the delegates in which he vowed to stop eating until something was accomplished.

“I will now commence a voluntary fasting for the climate. This means I will voluntarily refrain from eating food during this (conference) until a meaningful outcome is in sight.” 

Adding,

“We can fix this. We can stop this madness. Right now, right here.”

Sano got a tear-filled standing ovation.

While the outpouring of sympathy was certainly deserved, an outpouring of action on climate change is certainly not. A story from the Associated Presscovering the events at the conference summed up the science on anthropogenic climate change and tropical cyclones pretty accurately:

Scientists say single weather events cannot conclusively be linked to global warming. Also, the link between man-made warming and hurricane activity is unclear, though rising sea levels are expected to make low-lying nations more vulnerable to storm surges.

In other words, limitations, even strict ones, on anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases—the very thing that Sano seeks—will have no detectable (at least based on our current scientific understanding) impact on the characteristics of future tropical cyclones, such as Haiyan, or Sandy, or Katrina, or any other infamous storm. And as for sea level rise, projections are far more lurid than observations.

The hard numbers (from Ryan Maue’s excellent compilation) show that global tropical cyclone activity for the last 40+ years—during the time of decent observations and the time with the greatest potential human impact from greenhouse gas emissions—while showing decadal ups and downs, show little overall change. In fact, global cyclone activity has been below average for the past 5 years.

The science on tropical cyclones is complicated and ultimately unclear in terms of the influence of greenhouse gas emissions, but is quite clear when it comes to the influence of demographics and wealth vs. climate change—the former grossly dominates the latter when it comes to future tropical cyclone disasters. So, no matter what this year’s U.N. climate confab does (forecast:  nothing significant), it will not result in any meaningful changes to damages from future tropical cyclones.

Category 5 storms like Haiyan, Andrew, and Camille will always pose a threat to coastal communities (and beyond) in tropical cyclone-prone areas of the globe. The best defense against them is resilient infrastructure and preparedness—characteristics surely better achieved through a free-market, than global governance. But no matter what actions are taken, more Category 5 monster storms are coming. When they arrive, the news ought to focus on where they hit, not that they hit.

Source.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: ,

Australia to UN: no more “socialism masquerading as environmentalism”

11 November, 2013 by

What the UN does best…

What the UN does best…

Watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside. Environmental propaganda being used to implement another ideology is as old as the hills. So it’s about time the UN’s “climate aid” was called out for what it was. And no more syphoning of Aussie taxpayer dollars to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the UN:

FEDERAL cabinet has ruled that Australia will not sign up to any new contributions, taxes or charges at this week’s global summit on climate change, in a significant toughening of its stance as it plans to move within days to repeal the carbon tax.

Cabinet ministers have decided to reject any measures of “socialism masquerading as environmentalism” after meeting last week to consider a submission on the position the government would take to the Warsaw conference.

A further document was produced after the meeting that outlines the government’s position.

The Australian has seen part of the document and it declares that, while Australia will remain “a good international citizen” and remains “committed to achieving the 5 per cent reduction” by 2020 of the 2000 levels of emissions, it will not sign up to any new agreement that involves spending money or levying taxes.

This rules out Australia playing any role in a wealth transfer from rich countries to developing nations to pay them to decrease their carbon emissions.

The decision hardens the nation’s approach to the UN’s negotiations amid a renewed push from less-developed countries this week for $100 billion a year in finance to deal with climate change.

Cabinet decided that Australia would consider joining a new scheme after 2015, but only if all the major global economies did likewise.

Senior ministers believe there is absolutely no chance of that happening.

The Abbott government has explicitly decided that it will not agree to any payments or accept any liabilities as part of any carbon agreement.

The government’s document also says that Australia “will not support any measures which are socialism masquerading as environmentalism”. (source)

Tell it like it is.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,
«Previous Page
Next Page»