No post yet, but see Nick Stokes’ article
http://moyhu.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/noaa-says-july-hottest-month-ever.html
Comment on Week in review – science edition by curryja
↧
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Don Monfort
Good job, kenny. However, that’s a surprisingly high percentage of your comments. How did that slip through your stringent moderation? Speaking of slipping through, I am concerned about willy. Is he OK? Seriously. His absence is pleasant, but only if it’s voluntary.
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Jim D
Brandon, you may be right as I can’t read their minds, but they referred to phrases from a particular commenter at Tamino’s who was in the habit of also using Aunt Judy. They called the comments misogynous when they could have just called them ad homs. Tamino viewed them as harsh, but more as ad homs and not misogynous at all. These different interpretations probably come from the different way they saw the name used by the commenter.
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by genghiscunn
Tony, you are imbued with the inherent decentness and courtesy of the Brit. Perhaps, re Mann, a bit more than I am. Although I do try to see that those with failings are the first to suffer from them. Faustino
(Don’t mention the cricket, Mr Fawlty!)
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by Editor of the Fabius Maximus website
About the many warnings about the methane apocalypse -- Here's a question for the readers here (quoting from my post).
Where are the climate scientists? Where are rebuttals <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/" rel="nofollow">at RealClimate</a>? by the <a href="http://www.climaterapidresponse.org/" rel="nofollow">Climate Science Rapid Response Team</a>? At the websites above that feature climate science?
They're aggressive when skeptics challenge the IPCC's conclusions but tend to go MIA when activists declare the IPCC "too conservative" and declare the end is nigh.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by harkin1
Thanks much J!
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by Jeff Norman
Where I live in Toronto the average unadulterated temperature (measured at the Greater Toronto Airport urban heat island) for July 2015 was 21.5 C, the hottest July since 2013. It was 0.3 C warmer than the 30 year average which in turn is 0.1 C warmer than the average July temperatures for the entire record 1938 to 2015. The warmest July was in 2011 at 24.4 C which beat out 1955 by 0.2 C. (For some reason the “Alt0176” functionality will not work for inserting the degrees signal)
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by Jeff Norman
Regarding the Nature item: “Reduced carbon emission estimates from fossil fuel combustion and cement production in China”.
I am not surprised the actual Chinese CO2 emissions are smaller than the forecasts. Back in the early 1990s I was developing protocols for forecasting and reporting CO2 emissions from a coal burning utility. I had a very brief encounter with some people from the IPCC because they were trying to do the same thing on a global basis. The encounter ended when I suggested their process was very simplistic and likely lead to over estimating emissions.
I am also not surprised the estimated Chinese emissions are higher than the reported emissions. I expect China (and other countries) to game this as much as possible. One might wonder who is doing the oversight… oh it’s the U.N.
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Brandon S? (@Corpus_no_Logos)
Jim D:
Brandon, you may be right as I can’t read their minds, but they referred to phrases from a particular commenter at Tamino’s who was in the habit of also using Aunt Judy. They called the comments misogynous when they could have just called them ad homs.
If they thought the phrase was a sexual slur, why didn’t they just say so? Why would they make vague comments that could maybe, possibly indicate what they were saying rather than just saying it? And did they just decide to never talk about it more clearly, anywhere? Did they decide, “Nah, this isn’t something we should tell anyone about”?
I suppose there are possible answers to all those questions, but the reality is plenty of people read all those comments in the year and more since they were made. None of them said a word about this strange notion before Mark Steyn did. And even there, all Steyn did is do a search for the phrase “Aunt Judy,” find it brings up smut and run off with his mouth.
If Michael Mann did something like this, every skeptic on this site would laugh at him. Watts Up With This would write a post mocking him for it and continue to make jokes referencing it for the next five years. But Steyn does it, and somehow, people just accept it as true because…
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by JCH
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by Editor of the Fabius Maximus website
JCH,
Yes, I cited that RealClimate article in my post. It was 3 1/2 years ago during the Russian sinkhole hysteria. And since?
Steve McIntyre’s articles look like The Principia compared to the scores of articles about the methane doom — and appear in mass market websites. Yet they decided that methane gets one rebuttal and McIntyre (and other well-reasoned skeptics) get many.
The logic of that is …?
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Don Monfort
More brandoon logic:
“If they thought the phrase was a sexual slur, why didn’t they just say so?”
Because they would have gotten condemned for it, you simpleton. Webby was right about you.
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by JCH
It comes up in the comments once in awhile. I don’t pay much attention to it.
↧
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Jim D
Brandon, I’ll give you that they stopped at assuming it was misogynous, and Steyn felt compelled to take it to the next level in a very explicit and public way. Steyn certainly has a way of contributing his own mental processing to the public discussion, in this case blaming Tamino who was seemingly just caught in the crossfire.
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by Editor of the Fabius Maximus website
JCH,
“I don’t pay much attention to it.”
Can you give us the same assurance about the hundreds of thousands reading Mother Jones, Salon, AlterNet, TruthOut, and the dozens of other websites featuring these articles about the methane doom?
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by mosomoso
The art fakes of Chiang Dai-chien from the 1950s can now be worth more than the ancient originals. The Chinese, whom I like and admire, are really good at faking stuff, okay? And if fakery is good enough or useful enough, there is little shame in it for them. I’d say faking carbon reporting to the Western busybodies would be both good and useful.
And someone somewhere has to be making all that stuff we like, right? At least China, unlike Australia, modernises its coal power because, unlike Australia, it doesn’t like wasting Australian coal. Aussies like to depend utterly on coal while wasting, ridiculing and condemning it, rather like a rich drunken lord who whacks his serfs around.
Best keep emissions reductions and trading as an unwholesome western fetish, like twerking – lest everybody stop making stuff. Let’s not send China our intellectual opium.
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Don Monfort
You had it right there for a while yimmy, but brandoon’s faulty arguments got you to back off. Sexual objectification of women is misogynous, yimmy. Sexual slurs against women is misogyny. That is what Steyn is talking about. It’s not on another level. It’s misogyny. Look it up. Do a search for “Aunt Judy”. Do a search with Aunt and other female names.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
Speaking of China and the UN ... it seems that someone, somewhere embedded deep in the heart of at least one arm, elbow, hand, finger or whatever of the UN has decided that it's time to <a href="https://hro001.wordpress.com/2015/08/19/unep-recycling-pachauri-already/" title="UNEP recycling Pachauri … already?!" rel="nofollow">begin recycling</a> the oh-so-noble (not) former chair of the IPCC.
None other than the little railroad engineer that could, Rajendra K. Pachauri - notwithstanding the still outstanding charges against him - has received a Delhi court's blessing to leave the country in order to ...wait for it ...
<blockquote>deliver a lecture on a report of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) at the International Ecosystem Management Partnership (IEMP) in China from August 22-28.
Afterwards, he said, he was also scheduled to attend a meeting in Tokyo.</blockquote>
This must be a top secret meeting of the IEMP, as a search of their website for details turns up zip, nada, zilch. Then again, accuracy has never been one of the little railroad engineer's strong points, has it?!
But even on the off-chance that such gatherings are, in fact, scheduled to take place you'd think that the UNEP/IPCC powers-that-be could have found <em>someone</em> without such a cloud hanging over him to deliver this "report"!
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by JCH
It’s a short record. Bring in Thomas Keith to review it and make a judgement. Camille Paglia would probably have none of it.
↧
Comment on Industry funding: witch hunts by Brandon S? (@Corpus_no_Logos)
Jim D:
Brandon, I’ll give you that they stopped at assuming it was misogynous…
If they knew it was meant as a sexualized remark like Mark Steyn suggests, they wouldn’t need to assume it was misogynous :P
and Steyn felt compelled to take it to the next level in a very explicit and public way. Steyn certainly has a way of contributing his own mental processing to the public discussion, in this case blaming Tamino who was seemingly just caught in the crossfire.
I think if he hadn’t chosen Tamino of all people to target with this, it wouldn’t have seemed so silly to me. Tamino is probably the person I’d least expect to use a sexualized label in that way in the climate blogosphere, just because his position on feminism in general is so extreme. I have no problem believing he’d say sexist things by somehow convincing himself they weren’t sexist, but knowingly trying to make sexual remarks about Judith? No way, no how.
I’d sooner expect to see Steve McIntyre doing it. That should tell you something. McIntyre is the only reason I ever even started following any of this, and I’d wager most of what I know I couldn’t have learned without his efforts. And I’d still sooner expect to see him do it than Tamino, a person I don’t respect at all.
That’s how strong a character trait this is in Tamino.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
