Front lines in the climate debate

Posted: November 8, 2010 by tallbloke in climate

I had a look in the suggestion box this morning and found this from Dave Smith:

Michael Mann now says there is “an elaborate P.R. campaign” to discredit he and his mates. If I were to say similar, without showing any evidence of same, I’d be called a conspiracy theorist…

How true. I’ve been busy on two other blogs recently. Judith Curry’s ‘Climate Etc’, has been exploring IPCC Dogma, the war between AGW advocates and sceptics, and Ideologues. This latest thread looks at some of Mann’s pronouncements and examines the question of the etent to which it is science, and the extent to which it is ideology.

Needless to say, I couldn’t resist. 🙂

The other blog I’ve been firefighting on is Science of Doom. S.o.D. visited here a while ago and joined in the debate on the John Nicol thread. Prior to that, I’d had a discussion with S.o.D. regarding the (in)ability of back radiation to heat the ocean. A subject taken up at the S.o.D. blog since.

At some point, I’ll get some new posts up here, but at the moment, I’m out on campaign. 😉

  1. As the academia is organized it follows by necessity that there will be mutual grooming and self indulgement, a characteristic of apes´societies (as Desmond Morris tells us) as the human defects reinforced when there is not pursued individual development but corporative development and establishment, so the consequences would seem a conspiracy; thus not necessarily the best of academy is obtained as result but an “average”; thus science and knowledge will be obligatory “setteled”: the product of a social agreement, of mutual and social caressing. It has happened differently where to achieve a doctorate it was needed instead of a doubful “research”(as it can not be possible an infinite “menu” of themes of investigation) an examination, where the afterwards development was an individual achievement and a personal search and research following, if existent and present, the individual´s real interest in approaching knowledge and truth.

  2. Thus, the characters who appear on the scene, the “researchers” or “scientists”, are, in the best scenario an “average” or worst, as it has evidently happened, the basest of the human kind, the lowest expression of society, protected by the “corpus academicum”, individuals incapable of surviving outside of the academic environment: the most feeble specimens of the human breed.

  3. People who lack a well and correctly formed individuality, being conceited because of a wrong education received from their parents, usually seek the protection of the group, of a bigger body, of society, so they tend to be inclined to a political environment where they can be protected by “big daddy”=government and “big mommy”=society, they run away and fear the most free expressing individuals and individualities. Their eagerness to “return to the womb” it is so extreme a necessity, that they will do anything to reach such protection; that is the origin of fanaticism and it is obviously the cradle of “liberalism”, which thus becomes a contradiction in itself, as its members desperately seek not to be liberated but to remain protected from what they consider a hostile environment. So, everyone which does not show the same characteristics of them becomes an evil person or group, a menace to their security, and being such, they must be sent where they can make no harm on them,


    [Reply] Enough! we get the point! 🙂

  4. Zeke the Sneak says:

    tallbloke writes
    “Mann is no oceanographer. Longwave radiation doesn’t penetrate the ocean, and there is no mechanism by which a tiny amount of additional downwelling LW from the atmosphere is going to heat the bulk of the ocean to any significnt degree.

    Any increase in energy in the oceans is due to the sun being at a higher than average level of activity for most of the C20th. Solar shortwave energy penetrates tens of metres into the ocean.

    If you check the literature, there is a lack of any evidence for the warmer ocean being heated by the cooler atmosphere.”

    I was going to read the rest of the thread, but I get uncomfortable watching other people being made to eat so much CARPET. 😀

  5. Zeke the Sneak says:
    November 8, 2010 at 5:34 pm
    And…..they usually forget the rest of the spectrum. For example they do not count INDUCTION….and to just laugh, they forget, also, their personal contribution when they eat junk food, which turns into a pesky LWR which bother anyone who approaches them 🙂

  6. Tenuc says:

    “At some point, I’ll get some new posts up here, but at the moment, I’m out on campaign.”

    Go to it Rog – a dose of reality will do them good!

    Mann conjures up a mythical hockey stick by selecting proxies to suit his belief system. He then behaves like a small boy caught raiding the fridge when exposed. His science has no value and the obviously wrong hockey stick graph has converted many of my friends from believers in the cause to hard sceptics. Here’s hoping he continues the good work. 😉

    Regarding Planks law, I find it sad that climate scientists believe that a laboratory experiment can have any meaning in the real world. There are few black bodies and a dense atmosphere usually full of water vapour covering the top few feet above Earth. No surprise their numbers for the energy ‘budget’ do not add up – it’s a TRAVESTY…

  7. tallbloke says:

    Tenuc, their windows are so steamed up from leering at all of Manns climate porn they haven’t noticed it’s freezing outside. 🙂

  8. Joe Lalonde says:


    Being too knowledgable is a pitfall in itself.
    You end up crossing over current peoples limited knowledge base into their uncomfort zone of looking stupid.
    Your good with angles, then look at a different angle of approach to the people with power you want to approach. If you can find any background (politicians) such as business or law or what ever,then you know any word science will be a turn off. So, then try making your approach into your science to be more in line of business proprosition or some area that might make law interested into your research.
    Find that angle of interest that will make you stand out in their minds by planting a seed.
    It will take time but what you seek, you may get.

  9. Joe Lalonde says:


    Here again science missed the boat into why solar radiation can only penetrate so far. Planetary rotation at 1669.8 km/hr at the equator and the pitches of the planets axis.
    Most of this radiation is hitting on angles than actually head on. So, a great amount is deflected.

  10. Joe Lalonde says:
    November 9, 2010 at 11:47 am
    Don´t take me so seriously, I just love to be extremely sarcastic by choosing to press the most sensitive corns. That´s a characteristic of us, sagitarians 🙂

  11. However you´ll agree that this issue of climate change it has been warming up
    but not in celsius or kelvin degrees but in joke degrees, which makes no joke, as usual, to joke´s victims. 🙂

  12. Joe Lalonde says:


    That’s okay…Many corns to be played with.

    Many people do not see that this could be a double layer problem than just the sun.
    And I sure don’t mean CO2.

    No one except myself has investigated that our atmospheric pressure has built up. The salt changes in the oceans are an atmospheric event rather than a warming event.

  13. The devil is in the details….thus we should seek the general laws changing the details.
    If the Universe is Electrical, it works by the interplay of charges, then what, for example, happens when the Sun gets in a minimum?
    Beautiful Sun’s polar fields extrapolation, by M.Vukcevic, it is like Sun’s electrocardiogram:

    It is like the orchestra’s conductor marking the# rhythm, or rather like a big diapason provoking resonances all around.

  14. Joe Lalonde says:


    I have the ultimate laugh in the science arena.

    My background is just a simple carpenter. Not a lick of science except what I was taught in school and later had a great interest in. 🙂