Shoulder to Shoulder with Anthony Watts

Posted: February 15, 2012 by tallbloke in Blog, flames, media, methodology, Philosophy, Politics, weather

Anthony Watts and I have had a tête-à-tête recently over Nikolov and Zeller’s ‘Unified Theory of Climate’ which hasn’t resolved that issue, but right now I stand shoulder to shoulder with him in the face of the criticism he is receiving over the assistance he has garnered from the Heartland institute for his NOAA station data web project.

Anthony Watts cares about data. He also cares that the public and scientists from all corners of the climate debate should have easy access to well presented data. With all its government funding, the NOAA hasn’t provided that. So Anthony, as if he isn’t busy enough, has taken on the job the NOAA has failed to do. But he has to find the funding to pay a programmer for a years work, and buy a high end server, and cover future bandwidth charges.

So he asked Heartland to help him find a source of funds. And they found a donor to cover half of what he needs. Now, some of Heartland’s documents have been leakeddishonestly obtained and information about the assistance they have given Anthony is in the public domain. Well, who are the sceptics to complain about that? 🙂
There are two articles in ‘the Guardian’, one by our old friend Leo Hickman, which starts in a particularly snidey way. Weasel words and twisty long sentences full of ambiguity are Leo’s stock-in-trade. Clarity and honest presentation of data are Anthony Watts’ hallmark.

I’ve dropped a donation from the Talkshop into Anthony’s Surface Stations Project tip jar to help get the funding a bit further towards the total required, and I hope anyone else here who values the work Anthony has  done over the years standing up for properly done scientific work will do the same. We have a lot more to thank him for than we have to  complain about.

Stand Tall with me Anthony, you’ve done nothing wrong and you’re getting stick about it. I know how that feels from recent experience. Onwards and upwards my friend, the high road lies above those clouds.

UPDATE 15-2-12 22:38GMT

Heartland have issued a press release saying there has been fakery going on. This could get interesting. More at The Air Vent

UPDATE 2 16-2-12 08:26GMT

The backpedalling has begun. See the updates to the Guardian articles in comments

Comments
  1. Politically I’m far from being aligned with either Heartland or, apparently, Anthony. But I am most certainly aligned with the over-arching purpose of Anthony’s efforts – to get good science to the fore.

    Now it may be that WUWT is becoming the proverbial big ship, too big to steer – something that perhaps seems somewhat in evidence with the recent Willis:N&Z kerfuffle – but I do know that, if the science makes sense, the maths adds up, the theory is sound and the truth is out…. Anthony will be there with fresh batteries for the megaphone. He’s never wanted anything but good science to thrive and the junk science to be “dispatched”, and I’ve always known this.

    As for Heartland funding 50% of Anthony’s project, as me ole mum used to say, “beggars can’t be choosers”. ‘Tis a noble effort, much to be admired and highly to be praised. As long as the funding source doesn’t steer the findings – something I know it won’t with Anthony, though I can’t say the same for many recipients of climate research funding – it doesn’t make me blink.

    We’re learning, incidentally, that at least one of the purportedly “liberated” Heartland documents – the one from which most quotes I’ve seen have been taken – is a pure fabrication and it has been suggested by Heartland that others may have been doctored as well. Our derisive little friend Mr Hickman may receive some blow-back for failing to perform any fact-checking before hitting the presses on this story. We wait.

  2. Hans says:

    Good luck!
    Data is important and much data has been ignored and is waiting to be rediscovered. There are many examples. I will just mention 1 “extreme” one.
    “The Koorin expedition” (July 1974) examined the “atmospheric boundary layer data over tropical savanah land” in Daly Waters, Australia. Every third hour for 30 days balloon and radar data was collected every 50-100 m from the surface to 3000 m above ground. I used half a year to put all these data into a computer. All types of data was gathered. Even IR radiation was measured. Nowhere, at any time, was any “backradiation” discovered exceeding about 100 W/m^2.
    The imaginary “Backradiation” had not been invented in 1974.

    This expedition follwed another one named “The Wangara expedition”. Both have been pushed into oblivion and both are very revealing about the reality in the lower troposphere. Noone in the establishment today advertise these extremly important efforts to gain knowledge in the realm of atmopheric science. It is quite a shame.

    See: The koorin Expedition
    department of Science and the Environment
    Bureau of Meteorology
    Australian Government Publishing Service
    Canberra 1979
    ISBN 0 642 01484 1

    There are loads of relevant atmospheric information that has been suppressed during the last 30 years all around the world. Very much exist in Sweden which has excellent weather data since more than 300 years ago in many locations.

    Hans Jelbring

  3. Larry Ledwick (hotrod ) says:

    I for one certainly support Anthony in this and his other efforts to bring rational thought to the global warming debate.

    I suspect that the global warming crowd may regret creating this fire storm of publish first ask questions later. Many of their questions if turned around to apply to their own groups would reveal funding issues an order of magnitude greater and of far more questionable ethics.

    This may be a question of being careful what issues you open during a debate some will come back and bite you hard!

    Given the fact that public concern about global warming has been falling like a rock and many are beginning to wake up to the duplicitous nature of many of the groups involved this may only serve to peel back more of the curtains to reveal even more dirty laundry in the CAGW camps and their penchant for pathological misrepresentation of “facts”.

    Larry

  4. tallbloke says:

    Popcorn advisory: Post updated

  5. Vuk says:

    I really don’t bother who funds whom.
    If science work is done correctly it is for the benefit of the science and humanity as a whole, regardless who does or doesn’t like the result.
    If results are corrupted to the request of the funding source, truth would eventually be found out to the discredit and the shame of the parties concerned.

  6. James says:

    The truth will out. There is no need to pay for it, it only causes confusion.

    Having said that, if you must pay good money then Anthony Watts is a far far better recipient than Al Gore.

  7. Doug proctor says:

    Hansen explained that his money went to his grandkids. Cute: I’d like to be able to reduce my general expenditures for my kids from my salary, too. So he gets all that money because he now isn’t saving from his normal income ..

    Smoke and mirrors.

    Watts takes the money and …. acquires data. While still spending his own money on his research.

    Apples and oranges.

    It’s a war. And the warmists are losing. Probably lot more dirt than this to come: American poltics, anyway.

  8. Anthony Watts says:

    Thank you, sincerely. Despite our differences over pressure in the past, this pressure seems to be a uniting force. 😉

    The strangest thing is, had this outing incident not occurred, I would have placed a notice on the new website with all the data and imagery I plan to produce that stated clearly where the funding came from. This is the same way that scientific paper authors reveal their funding when the final product is published.

  9. TG McCoy says:

    This will have some good to come out of all this. I was involved in the old TANG conroversey
    over GW Bush’s experience on a blog back in 2004. This involved some historical data
    on the Texas Air National Guard’s use of the F-102.( A very marginal A/c) I was trolled and severely.But if you have the facts and the truth, Only the trolls will still believe, Thinking people will be on your side even if you disagree…
    Good on you, Anthony.
    Tallbloke too…

  10. gallopingcamel says:

    Desmogblog has no problem with billions of government money lavished on squishy climate science yet it has a cow when tiny sums are directed to Anthony Watts for a project that will make NOAA data more easily accessible to the general public.

    Naturally this camel will continue to support the public’s “Right to Know” what is done using tax payer dollars. I intend to undermine government secrecy in all matters relating to energy policy and that of course includes CAGW.

  11. steven mosher says:

    wonder if the coppers will show up at desmog

  12. Brian H says:

    The supposed Heartland leaks are so rife with warmista code and jargon its risible anyone can take them seriously. To warmistas they sound normal and plausible, of course, but to anyone else they’re just clumsy spoofs.

  13. Bob_FJ says:

    Roger,
    I found this comment by Steve McIntyre at Lucia’s, (in his customary alert analytical style), to be rather intriguing. Perhaps you could draw it to the attention of your Copper friends:

    Steve McIntyre (Comment #89815) February 15th, 4:31 pm
    If you look at the Document Properties of the various Heartland documents, the Confidential Memo has a date of Feb 13, 2012 whereas the other documents date from January. In addition, the agenda source (for example) refers to a p: drive and an origin in a *.wpd document, while the Confidential Memo does not have these features.

  14. Aussie says:

    @ steven mosher, after reading the updated information, I would suggest that the coppers need to show up at the home of desmog to find out how he got those documents!!

  15. Bob_FJ says:

    According to JoNova here:

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/02/logic-gate-the-smog-blog-exposes-irrational-rage-innumeracy-and-heartlands-efficient-success/#comments

    The annual funding for Heartland Institute is relatively trivial at 6.4 million US $, but with remarkable success compared with the midstream WWF at 700 million. See her table. Some even larger numbers there for other CAGW causes.

  16. Markus Fitzhenry says:

    The believers became unsound, now with knowledge so profound
    Members of the Institute gathered round, and it got passed around

    De blogsmog said that fog, and decried on their blog
    Now we all know, how much they kowtow

    The high priests are in tears, in the eyes of their peers
    No more their research, such blasphemy against the church.

  17. colliemum says:

    Well, if the watermelons are so agitated about the source of funding for e.g. Anthony’s project – which is in fact about data collection, and not about screwing more money out of taxpayers’ pockets! – then I hope they go on to show how they are funded.

    There was the extraordinary story of the EU funding the ‘renewables’ lobby at Brussels, which distribute funding to Greenpeace projects, which then end up as grey papers in the IPCC reports, which then get used by the EU renewable lobbyists and the renewable groups in the various countries (who, incidentally, also get funded by the EU) – to tell government that bird shredders are the only way forward, for which we then pay extra …

    No more taxes to fund any climate research!

  18. Bob_FJ says:

    I buy the Melbourne Age newspaper only on Thursdays for its excellent radio and TV broadcasting guide, otherwise, I don’t really like Oz newspapers. Today, there was an article on the front page that I couldn’t miss, by Ben Cubby (Who?) headlined:

    Scientist accepts ‘cash for climate’

    It carried no attributions, and I’ve not checked if it is plagiarized, but whatever, I intend to follow it to see if there will be any updates or corrections that ought follow.

    OH, BLOW ME~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Strike me down with a feather:

    I did a Google on the exact phrase (“Scientist accepts ‘cash for climate”’) to find the Age website reference, and behold two surprises:

    1) There are dozens of replications of that exact phrase around the web, so I guess someone has been copying something from somewhere, without accreditation, at least that is so in the case of the front page article in the AGE!
    2) Ben Cubby updated his article a short while ago on the Age website in the light of information from Heartland etc. Shouldn’t these guys check with those involved in the allegations before publishing?

    So, tomorrow I’ll buy the Age to see if it appears in print, but I betcha it won’t be on page 1 as in the original unauthenticated very sloppy report.

  19. tallbloke says:

    Bob_FJ says:
    February 16, 2012 at 5:47 am

    Roger,
    I found this comment by Steve McIntyre at Lucia’s, (in his customary alert analytical style), to be rather intriguing. Perhaps you could draw it to the attention of your Copper friends:

    Steve McIntyre (Comment #89815) February 15th, 4:31 pm
    If you look at the Document Properties of the various Heartland documents, the Confidential Memo has a date of Feb 13, 2012 whereas the other documents date from January. In addition, the agenda source (for example) refers to a p: drive and an origin in a *.wpd document, while the Confidential Memo does not have these features.

    There will be a few journos at major newspapers with carpet burns on their knees this morning. 🙂

    Richard Black (the Guardian)
    (UPDATE 2145GMT – Heartland has posted a release on its website saying one of the documents is a fake. Elements of the remainder of this post have been re-worked accordingly.)

    Leo Hickman (the Guardian)
    UPDATE: 8.47pm The Heartland Institute has now issued a statement claiming one of the documents – “2012 Climate Strategy” – is “fake”.

    Heartland says in its press release statement:

    The individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents. We believe their actions constitute civil and possibly criminal offenses for which we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation. We ask them in particular to immediately remove these documents and all statements about them from the blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.

  20. tallbloke says:

    Anthony Watts says:
    February 16, 2012 at 3:33 am

    Thank you, sincerely. Despite our differences over pressure in the past, this pressure seems to be a uniting force.

    You know how the political climate operates Anthony:
    The highest temperatures are always where the warmies are densest…De heat and De-smog are where they gravitate to. 😉

  21. tallbloke says:

    from a comment on WUWT:

    “What is being pointed out is that the document uses facts to inject a false story. For example, that Heartland “coordinates” with Anthony Watts. Or that Heartland directors sit around discussing how to prevent teachers from “teaching science” or how to “work” the climate story. These are bogus claims and Heartland has said that this unique scanned copy is a fraud. Why would the criminal print this one document (they were received by email), then scan it? Maybe to remove embedded data tracking edits? Perhaps? The other documents, which contain nothing scandalous, are all presented in original electronic form, but this one document, presenting Heartland as a bunch of Neanderthals, is scanned. And Heartland states it is a fraud.”

    You’d have thought certain seasoned journalists might have reached the same conclusion if they’d been duly diligent. Or are they blinded by prejudice…

    I think I’ll write a long overdue article about the dubious quality of climate journalism. Particularly that coming from members of the ‘Society of Environmental Journalists’.

  22. Tenuc says:

    “Shoulder to Shoulder with Anthony Watts”, well said Rog! We must never forget the massive impact that WUWT has had regarding spreading the word on the IPCC climate scam.

    I can’t see what all the fuss is about with the link to Heartland, which is just a sceptical advocacy group, as are the more massive pro-CAGW groups like Greenpeace, Sierra Club, and NRDC.

    Here’s a summary of Heartlands 2011 of the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). report – “Climate “Change Reconsidered – whats not to like… 🙂

    Executive summary:
    “We find evidence that the models over-estimate the amount of warming that occurred during the twentieth century and fail to incorporate chemical and biological processes that may be as important as the physical processes employed in the models.”

    “More CO2 promotes more plant growth both on land and throughout the surface waters of the world’s oceans, and this vast assemblage of plant life has the ability to affect Earth’s climate in several ways, almost all of them tending to counteract the heating effects of CO2’s thermal radiative forcing.”

    “The latest research on paleoclimatology and recent temperatures [finds] new evidence that the Medieval Warm Period of approximately 1,000 years ago, when there was about 28 percent less CO2 in the atmosphere than there is currently, was both global and warmer than today’s world.”

    “New research finds less melting of ice in the Arctic, Antarctic, and on mountaintops than previously feared, no sign of acceleration of sea-level rise in recent decades, no trend over the past 50 years in changes to the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (MOC), and no changes in precipitation patterns or river flows that could be attributed to rising CO2 levels.”

    “Amphibians, birds, butterflies, other insects, lizards, mammals, and even worms benefit from global warming and its myriad ecological effects.”

    “Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations, by increasing crop yields, will play a major role in averting hunger and ecological destruction in the future.”

    “The latest research suggests corals and other forms of aquatic life have effective adaptive responses to climate change enabling them to flourish despite or even because of climate change.”

    “Global warming is more likely to improve rather than harm human health because rising temperatures lead to a greater reduction in winter deaths than the increase they cause in summer deaths.”

    “Even in worst-case scenarios, mankind will be much better off in the year 2100 than it is today, and therefore able to adapt to whatever challenges climate change presents.”

  23. Wayne Job says:

    Previous false hoods and propaganda when shown the light of day tend to undermine the general thrust of what they are trying to impose on the populous.

    These propagandists after twenty years of flim flamming the media are being caught in the headlights of the glare of the freedom of expression on the internet.

    Exposed almost instantly by a panel of experts in all fields of human endeavour.

    Those cornered by their deceptions are acting rashly as is the case of all cornered animals. They do get nasty, the nastier they get the faster the internet community exposes them, it just gets better.

  24. Michael Hart says:

    “I think I’ll write a long overdue article about the dubious quality of climate journalism. Particularly that coming from members of the ‘Society of Environmental Journalists’.”

    -It must really suck to be the new Science Editor at the BBC right now. 🙂

  25. Pete H says:

    Doug proctor says:
    February 16, 2012 at 12:45 am
    “Smoke and mirrors.

    Watts takes the money and …. acquires data. While still spending his own money on his research.”

    Doug, perfect,

    I said as much over at Bishops! The last couple of weeks has seen the warmists on the front foot with false “reasoning” and the latest is close to laughable,

    Its all about CAGW, the cause or not, end of.

    A case of “watch the pea” and stick with arguments on the science. its a win, win advantage!

  26. Aussie says:

    I just left a message over at WUWT but not sure that it will get through moderation. This is because I concentrated upon the fact that the documents were released by what I consider to be a faked person: “Heartland Insider”.

    What I am thinking about is that the person knows of the existence of a few sites such as White House Insider by Ulsterman. There is an alternate written by a really mean-spirited person known as “And Another thing” who writes mean spirited things about Sarah Palin and Ulsterman in particular.

    What stood out to me, after thinking about the content, happens to be the guff about the school science project. It is meant to slime a very good man, a professor no less by the name of Dr. Wojiak (sp)… but worse than that… it is a dead giveaway that the document is a fake. This is because that stuff comes across as something that has been written by the globull warming clowns (trolls) when they are on the attack showing that they know nothing about the views of libertarians and mixing up libertarians and those who are fundamentalist Christians (these are mutually exclusive), indicating that the author of the fake document is someone who regularly goes around sliming individuals.

    The other thing that got me thinking was the claim that somehoe the Heartland Institute was dishonest etc, because of a report that pointed up the fallacies of the position regarding the causation of second-hand smoke and lung cancer. After a quick look I have to agree with what they wrote, not because I am dismissing the impact of second-hand smoke, but due to the fact that the whole issue seems to follow the same playbook as that of CAGW. There is a consensus… blah blah… when in fact the research was quite wanting and then they came up with possible exaggerated claims regarding cancer deaths. Disclosure: I believe that second hand smoke does have an impact on people with asthma and respiratory illness.

  27. James says:

    Having had 24 hours to consider this I am a little disappointed in what Anthony Watts has done. I thought him made of better stuff. Whiter than white and all that.

  28. James says:
    February 16, 2012 at 11:02 pm

    Explain please.

  29. James says:

    James says:
    February 16, 2012 at 11:02 pm

    Explain please.

    I think he should have been upfront right from the start. There is no room for grey areas in this political/ financial battle. I had always believed that Anthony had no external funding other than supporter donations.

    But please do not get me wrong. Anthony Watts is in my opinion a modern day hero.

  30. Larry Ledwick (hotrod ) says:

    I think we should be clear, the project he was trying to get funding for has not even been done yet!.

    He was in the initial planning stages and trying to line up the resources to do a “future project”. There was nothing to report because nothing had happened yet other than some preliminary efforts to arrange for the necessary resources.

    The customary method is that once the project is funded, approved and under way, there might be an announcement that it has started and what its goals are with a comment or two about major contributors but it had not even reached that point of development. Even then final credits for the people that allowed it to happen are normally given when the project (in this case a web site) goes live and is ready for public access.

    Nobody in the private sector announces funding plans to the general pubic while they are in the planning and development stages of a project, and still trying to get firm commitments for the resources necessary to accomplish the task at hand.

  31. Bob_FJ says:

    tallbloke @ February 16, 8:10 am
    Roger,
    You quoted from Heartland’s release:

    The individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents. We believe their actions constitute civil and possibly criminal offenses for which we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation. We ask them in particular to immediately remove these documents and all statements about them from the blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.

    I think there might be a bit of catching up to do there!!!!!

    Further to mine at 6:57 am, where I discussed a related page 1 article in the Melbourne Age, I did a Google (.com.au = Oz) boolean search for the exact phrase for the headline: “Scientist accepts ‘cash for climate’”. At that time the number of hits was I recall in surprise; 326, and the Age website provided a corrective update in line with the Heartland release. I looked again at Google Oz a short while ago, and the number of hits was 7,560. (7.56 K for the exact same headline, including it seems every major newspaper in Oz)

    So, I bought the Age today to see if there was a correction in print. NOPE; but there were four letters to the editor that were rather rude about Bob Carter receiving money from Heartland. It was teeth grinding stuff, including references to the last decade being the hottest on record, and tobacco-lung cancer. One was from a learned associate professor of philosophy. (a fifth letter was more rational)

    What is that old wartime saying about unpleasant brown smelly stuff sticking exceptionally well to an army blanket?

  32. Aussie says:

    James what you are stating is in my view absolute mushroom fodder. Anthony Watts has explained all of this in detail.

    He approached Heartland Institute for help to get a donor for a new project. His intention was to give details when the new site is up and running.

    Anthony Watts has done nothing wrong…. you are using weasel words in an effort to smear Anthony Watts.

  33. Aussie says:

    Bob,

    interesting but anyone who thinks the last decade was the hottest on record is believing fairy stories.

    You obviously live in Melbourne, and I grew up in Melbourne, and I have a memory of the summers of my childhood.

    1959 was hotter than 2009. To be very precise here, in 1959 my family was involved in a near fatal accident on Phillip Island. We were taken to the Alfred hospital, where I and another sister were released and sent home in a taxi after picking up our grandmother who lived nearby. My other sister was close to death in a coma. This happened on January 19, and during the 2 weeks that my sister was in a coma it was extremely hot, with the temperature reaching more than 110F. My mother recalls that the hospital had many fans running on my sister to keep her cool. My sister survived!!

    The hottest day on record has not been broken. This was a record at Oodnadatta in 1960.

    I recall the Melbourne summers of the 1960s as being very hot, and I recall that we had a drought which led to severe water restrictions, including the use of buckets to water the garden. I clearly remember the days we went to the beach and the nights where we lined the TV up at the front door and sat on the patio to watch it!! On top of that I can recall the days that we were sent home from school because of the heat!! Then there were the bushfires, some of which were not quite as tragic as the 2009 one, but they were still tragic with the loss of lives, in particular they were in the Dandenongs, Mt. Martha and Mt. Macedon, as well as the Lara brushfire that crossed the Geelong Road.

    These wankers who claim that the last decade was the hottest on record are in fact lying or at least playing with the statistics to reach that outcome, because it is simply not true!!

  34. Aussie says:

    With regards to the tobacco lung cancer claims, it would seem that unless the people were addressing the issue of second hand smoke and an unlikely link to cancer which was the subject of Heartland research then once again these people are liars.

    The issue taken up by the Heartland Institute was the fact that junk science had been applied with regard to the claimed links between tobacco smoke and lung cancer. In fact the EPA and the FDA were claiming that 5000 had died from lung cancer as a result of second hand smoke, but it turns out that this was not strictly true. It was a bit like the claims about those without health insurance in the USA. The population for the study was extremely small and the results were extrapolated and exaggerated. This was also another case of “the science is settled” which in my view is simply not acceptable.

    Disclosure: I am a non-smoker. I do get affected by second-hand smoke in that it has caused me to have health problems including breathing problems in the past.

  35. Bob_FJ says:

    Aussie @ February 17, 5:10 am
    Hi Aussie,
    I emigrated to Oz on 13 April 1969, to take a job in Geelong, (nearby west of Melbourne), shortly after the many tragic grass-fire deaths on the Geelong arterial road, along which I was conveyed. There was prominent evidence in the fire damage particularly to roadside sugar-gum-trees.

    For about a week after my arrival, I felt I had been inserted into hell, and the minimum o/night temperatures I recall were around 96 F. (in APRIL!)

    But of course this is just regional stuff, which does not relate to the meaningless concept of “Global Average Temperature”

  36. Bob_FJ says:

    Aussie @ February 17, 5:15 am

    With regards to the tobacco lung cancer claims, it would seem that unless the people were addressing the issue of second hand smoke and an unlikely link to cancer which was the subject of Heartland research then once again these people are liars…

    Well yes, I think it is bizarre to claim that second-hand very much diluted inhaled smoke WILL CAUSE cancer!

    On the other hand, this very diluted tobacco smoke can arguably have detrimental other effects on people with sensitivities to it. A classic example is in people with asthmatical conditions or allergies, but that does not = cancer!

    Some sceptical scientists have been accused of claiming that tobacco smoking does NOT cause cancer, but this is pure hyperbole!

  37. James says:

    Aussie. I do not use weasel words as far as I know. Anthony Watts is a bastion against the AGW scam. But when you profess to be a guardian of the truth then it is vitally important to declare where ALL your guardian funds are coming from and where you are looking for future funds.

    To be whiter than whiite then you must be whiter than white. He made a mistake, it is not a fatal one and I believe by learning from it his case will be ever stronger. I could not give two hoots that the Heartland document was forged, that is to be expected when massive amounts of lucre are involved.

  38. James, AFAICT Anthony did not even make a mistake. I’d like to know what you thought he did. On his own thread he explains things and if you haven’t looked, then do so. It might resolve your perception.

  39. Bob_FJ says:

    James @ February 17, 11:53 pm

    Pray why do you expect Anthony to declare his funding for a proposed project before such necessary funding has been finalized!?!?!?!?

  40. Chris M says:

    This is what it is all about, tragically:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_rome

    It’s not the least surprising that with a missionary zeal to save humanity from itself, a deluded Gaia-worshipping greenie or leftist with an agenda would think it’s perfectly alright to steal and fabricate to further the cause.

    This has been political all the way through, and can only have a political solution. Climate alarmism is merely a means to an end. What is needed is for people to elect politicians who are prepared to say no more BS, no more making ordinary people feel guilty about their modern lifestyles.

    The bungling ineptness of the faked document could ultimately be a positive if it opens the eyes of a few more politicians to what is really going on.

  41. tallbloke says:

    Josh of http://cartoonsbyjosh.com has an amusing take on all the hooha.

  42. tallbloke says:

    And another from Josh:

  43. Aussie says:

    @BobFL,

    I very clearly remember the Lara grass fire in 1969. It was very tragic with several people dying because the fire jumped the highway. The Geelong road is of course the major road between Geelong and Melbourne. At the time we were staying in Queenscliff at the caravan park.

    What I do not recall is 96F at night in the middle of April. Usually by April the days and nights have cooled significantly. Also it is usual that by ANZAC day there is often a very sudden change in the weather… last year the change was a lot sooner than ANZAC day, especially here in Canberra.

    In 1969 I was still in school, probably at form 4 level, and I do recall that when school started in late January it used to be very hot. At that time I was attending a school in Windsor, which was about an hour train trip from home. I do recall that I used to take my swim things to school, and that I would then walk to the Prahran swimming pool where I would practice for the school swimming carnival before walking to the next railway station at South Yarra and catching the train home. There were plenty of days where I was sticking to this routine. As I recall there was a rule that if the temperature reached close to 100F then we were let out of school early. This is probably why the change which came around 1970 was so very dramatic…. it was the first summer which I remember as being wetter and cooler.

    Since you were an immigrant suddenly facing our summers, and I grew up with those temperatures you could say that I have always been used to them… even though I do not like them.

    I agree with your statement about second-hand smoke. I use anecdotal evidence because I was significantly affected but I did not have asthma, I just could not breathe!! Actually the worst of it was the headaches and the sinusitus that followed that kind of exposure to the second-hand smoke.

  44. Duster says:

    @James

    Anthony Watts has never claimed to be “whiter than white;” that was you thinking like a true believer. He is making a stand against crap data, denial of access to data, and generally poor behaviour in climate science. He moderates his blog to try and keep things civil so that a discussion can actually be conducted. He wants to start a new site that will allow easy access to data that US citizens pay for, but have noe simple access to and asked for less than half the amount asserted in the memo forged by Peter Glieck. That new site will require programming, a server, domain services and all the normal stuff any website needs, as well as some specialized programming to offer the data services he envisions. That ain’t free Jackson. It costs money, and unlike the WWF or some of the GOs and NGOs that are pushing the AGW agenda and have access to immense amounts of tax money, he’s just one person with a business.

    In fact as Jo Nova and others have pointed out the disparity between the HI and the AGW side of the aisle is immense. Big Oil money, government money, donor money is used to support AGW agendas – and yes that IS Big Oil there. They spend a great deal buying good will that is far more valuable to them than the off chance that AGW could be dethroned as a public agenda. Afterall, consider what it does for their bottom line. There is surcharge for all that tax money they collect and pay to various governments.

    In contrast HI has a budget of less than a 100th of the WWF alone.