Monday
Oct112010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill HSI hits big time
Oct 11, 2010 Climate: HSI The Hockey Stick Illusion seems to have hit the (comparatively) big time, spending most of yesterday between around the 5-600 mark on the Amazon chart in the USA. The root cause seems to have been Hal Lewis's resignation letter which was picked up by Instapundit, among others.
It's currently at number 532.
Update on Oct 11, 2010 by
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill
Now at 407!!
Update on Oct 11, 2010 by
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill
363!!
Update on Oct 11, 2010 by
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill
Number 14 in books "Movers and Shakers".
Reader Comments (106)
J Ferguson>
"We didn't like being a colony the first time."
Course ya did. We wanted rid of you lot from out coat-tails, so we persuaded you we wanted to keep you, and you did the rest. Just like in Ireland.
;)
Should you decide to plot the sales of HSI, it may well produce the first genuine hockeystick connected with the climate change debate. It will also be interesting to see if it has a medieval warm period.
Barry Woods: Try wattsup at sbcglobal.net
Oct 11, 2010 at 1:15 PM | Douglas J. Keenan :
I agree; it would be very useful to keep a running list of organisations/media people/"climate scientists"/politicians who talk about the evidence for AGW or CAGW.
The list would include the adjective describing the evidence. For example:
Fred Pearce: ample evidence
Royal Soceity: strong evidence
What does this mean:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/16053231/ref=pd_ts_b_nav
You are at 13 in Waterstones under Science Technical and Medical> The environment> Pollution and environmental threats. But since Booker is no 1 (paperback) and no 6 (hardback) I reckon you are 12. Bob Carter is at 11 and Plimer at 16 nestling comfortably between Stern and Monbiot!
Could see if Monbiot wants to do a joint booksigning session with you!
OT I'm afraid, but I couldn't resist posting this little gem from Christine Ottery, one of the Grauniad's new team of hard bitten enviro-hacks. From her personal blog ( http://christineottery.blogspot.com) / :-
As a nascent environment journalist, I’ve had a furrowed brow more then once over the past few months thinking about the responsibilities of the job at hand.
The main questions that preoccupy me are:
1. To what extent should climate change* journalism aim to motivate people to act on climate change? (*Where I write climate change you could sometimes easily substitute conservation, which might be an even more important than climate change.)
2. If you were to consider campaigning as essential to climate change journalism, what are the messages we should be sending out, anyway? And to whom?
3. How do we deal with sceptics?
How can the sceptic cause possibly survive this level of intellectual challenge?
The following comment taken from the thread "An Open Letter to Dr. Michael Mann" over at WUWT might serve to explain the soaring popularity of HSI in the US ...
"Ok, I’m finally going to break down and get the book “The Hockey Stick Illusion”–not that I can afford the time it will take to thoroughly digest it, but because of unintended consequences. Mann spouts off and books critical of him climb in the sales ratings. I can’t think of a better consequence." posted by RockyRoad on October 11, 2010 at 6:22 am.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/11/an-open-letter-to-dr-michael-mann/#more-26235
Consequences unseen by Mann, mayhap?
Here's wishing your outstanding book will climb even further up the scale!
I can honestly say that without your brilliant explanations of the finer points of the stats involved in the illusion and its uncovering, I wouldn't now understand and relish the debates about other statistical shenanigans on the relevant sites like CA.
Its by far the most valuable book on climate 'science'.
Congratulations on your success. It is a great book which I know has years of effort in it, but it's also good to know the message is getting out.
Congrats Bishop.
Ther is a downside of course, the law on unintended consequences will soon come into play, the book sales will be construted as being a pay off from Big Oil :0 or is that Big Paper !!!
Well done, congratulations!! I have read your important book, it is now on loan to a family member....
buy another one!!!
"For a while there, I was worried that they wouldn't attack me!"
@ Atomic Hairdryer re “I think your most 'controversial' statement was that the wrong policies will kill people”.
The only person who has told me that they disagree is Bob Watson—right after I made the statement.
In any case, I think it is clear that if the spending of ~$50 trillion is redirected, then economic development will be hindered, and when economic development is hindered, people in third-world countries die.
That is, however, partially counterbalanced: rich countries have agreed to give poor countries $30 billion per year to combat climate change, and agreed in principle to give $100 billion per year starting in 2020. The latter amount has been characterized by poor countries as “substantial but inadequate”. Even if you disagree with that characterization, though, the way that these things work in practice is that only little of the money actually gets through. E.g. a recent BBC report claims that only about $8 billion of the first $30 billion was actually transferred. It is reasonable to expect more such shenanigans.
Congratulations Andrew
Well done! But I'm serious: you really should send a copy of HSI to Instapundit - it should be good for a second brief mention, at the minimum.
wouldn't anybody like to donate a few copies to the Pennstate University library ?
Foxgoose
Thanks for that link indeed. She was the blonde bimbo that Monbiot gave so much time to at the Guardian debate in London. She was his researcher? I dont want to know what Mangybot had her researching.
Judging by what she says on her wasteland of a blog, it can not have required an IQ of more than 50.
Dear Bish,
You do not even provide a link to the Amazon.com page for your book. Come on...:)
Bit off-topic, Bishop, but have you seen the latest Real Climate thread about the recent solar paper? You're mentioned by that lovable rogue, Gavin:
“I’m finding it very amusing how the contrarians are reacting to this paper – the most incoherent example is illustrated by the UK’s Daily Express story. First off the whole story is predicated not on the actual results, but on what the ’skeptics’ think of the results, and the quotes they use indicate without a shadow of a doubt that Monckton, an MEP (of unknown origin) and Montford do not have a clue.
The MEP (Godfrey Bloom) goes into a knee-jerk ‘the sun did it response’ without noting that the results of this study would completely contradict earlier associations of the medieval warming to increased solar activity. He even claims to be using logic! Monckton plays it safe saying there is a ‘close association’ between temperatures and the sun, without actually noting that the association is reversed in this study from anything he has previously insisted on. And Montford uses the absolutely lowest level generic response in the contrarian playbook “[insert any new paper here] implies the science isn’t settled” – as if that meant anything. (Note that no scientists would publish any papers if all questions were settled!).
One doesn’t expect much from the Express (or the contrarians), but this is embarrassing."
Why, it must warm the cockles of your heart.
Well I have to say that we gave luvy Gavin a large target to shoot at here.
In normal circumstances no poster on this blog would give 2 seconds to a report that a THREE YEAR warming period within a ten year period of no warming turned previous theories about the Sun upside down.
Foxgoose
Thanks for that link indeed. She was the blonde bimbo that Monbiot gave so much time to at the Guardian debate in London. She was his researcher? I dont want to know what Mangybot had her researching.
Judging by what she says on her wasteland of a blog, it can not have required an IQ of more than 50.
Oct 11, 2010 at 8:35 PM | Unregistered CommenterDung
Dung, don't want to muscle in too much on the Bish's well deserved book congrats - but I couldn't resist posting Christine's first foray into CIF blog warfare, on her piece about the posh young green ladies who "stormed" the Express building and got as far as.........the canteen!
christineottery
11 October 2010 2:33PM
@Frankone
I don't see how Climate Rush are anything to do with Gore. I think that's called a straw man.
@bananachips
It is interesting that you bring up the concept of conformity. I was thinking a lot about how brave it is to step out of what is expected of you by society, which is what I think Climate Rush did on that day last week. And I respect that, but only because it is a good cause.
The reason I know this is because a report that was released earlier this year critiquing the failings in science reporting on the whole - including on climate change. Read it here: http://interactive.bis.gov.uk/scienceandsociety/site/media/2010/01/21/comment-on-the-final-report/
As a result of this report, there is now a national co-ordinator for science training in the media as part of a programme funded by BIS to the tune of £77,000.
@nevermindthebollocks
Please bear in mind this is a blog, not a straight report. However, there are no factual inaccuracies.
Sadly, I think Christine may be feeling the heat - she twittered:-
# Getting a roasting here: http://bit.ly/cip4nv! Making me re-consider all of my privacy settings, blogs and websites - sharpish. about 2 hours ago
I think Christine's destined to become a blogostar.
Foxgoose
She is a perfect example of why Blondes have a bad rep ^.^
Dung
I may be mistaken, but is Gavin plagiarising? I thought contrarians was Mann's word.
Foxgoose
She is a perfect example of why Blondes have a bad rep ^.^
Oct 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterDung
Now now!
Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #332 in Books
Pharos
To be able to nail Gavin with that one would cause me to play "Lark Ascending" followed by "Jupiter"
(and I am a rock fan hehe)
Just to say well done Bishop - for your next book I think you ought to take on the IPCC - a continuation of the "corruption of science" theme.
Congratulations! Made my day, Hal Lewis, bless him, and HSI on the move!
Global Warming? TIMBER!!.........CRASH!!!! What a happy thought.
Dung
I've humped enough amps and PA's, trippped over enough leads and had my ears ringing enough times but you've still got me on that.
Pharos
Hmmm you sounded more intelligent than that? (thats what I always get hehe)
Dung
There is no greater evidence of superior intelligence than to be surprised at nothing.
Josh Billings
Anyway Dung. Calder's got the Hal Lewis resignation letter up now.
http://calderup.wordpress.com/2010/10/10/hal-lewis-quits-aps/
HSI is up to 345 on Amazon.com bestsellers right now. Good show Bishop. And deservedly so.
And just to underline it, Judith Curry writes today, in her open thread blog-
'...I read the Hockey Stick Illusion last May from cover to cover. I recommended that people read the book. I still recommend that people read the book....'
The top secret MET Office climatological prediction program* is indicating that as HSI sales increase, there will be a marked increase in Bob Ward style attacks.
Just in case any cause and effect aficionados are reading - this will be entirely coincidental.
*I managed to reverse engineer the MET Office code by comparing UK weather reports and forecasts. Interestingly, much of the logic involves calling rand() recursively until the output matches that required by the user.
The other great potential benefit from Professor Lewis' letter is that people might revisit the actual Climategate exchanges, not just the dismissive comments about them more recently in the press.
This could have enormous consequences because, as Professor Lewis says, no one could read them without being repulsed by the level of corruption exposed.
congrats bish -
re hal lewis - four days after the resignation letter appeared on WUWT, there is not a single mainstream media story on it. delingpole's BLOG does not qualify.
11 Oct: Guardian: Mark Sweney: Government’s £6m climate change ads cleared
Ofcom has cleared a controversial £6m government ad campaign on climate change, which featured images of the UK wracked by floods and drought, after more than 500 complaints that it was a form of political advertising that broke the broadcasting code…
The complainants to Ofcom argued that the TV ad, which featured a father telling his daughter a scary bedtime story based on the impact of climate change, broke broadcast rules banning political advertising.
According to the Communications Act, the government is allowed to run advertising of a public service nature, such as warnings about obesity or drink driving, but is not allowed to run political ads that aim to “influence public opinion on a matter of public controversy”.
However, the Communications Act does allow exceptions for advertisements which qualify as being of a “public service nature”, such as those promoting healthy eating, armed forces recruitment, tax self assessment and road safety.
Ofcom noted that there is “ongoing and polarised” debate on climate change but that there is a “broad level of consensus across the major political parties”….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/11/government-climate-change-ad
meanwhile, hundreds of "climate change" advocacy pieces fill the mainstream media today, as everyday:
with links:
11 Oct: BLOG: WaPo: Greg Sargent: The Morning Plum
GOPers against science: Ron Brownstein has been doing terrific work pointing out the astonishingly large range of climate change denial and skepticism among Republicans:
- Indeed, it is difficult to identify another major political party in any democracy as thoroughly dismissive of climate science as is the GOP here. Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, says that although other parties may contain pockets of climate skepticism, there is “no party-wide view like this anywhere in the world that I am aware of.” -
It’s reality, stupid: Steve Benen notes that it’s this lack of “commonly shared reality among Democratic and Republican policymakers” that is rendering bipartisan compromise impossible.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/the_morning_plum_108.html
11 Oct: USA Today: Doyle Rice: Billions and billions served: How population affects climate change
A new study out today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows how these changes in the world's population growth – along with aging and urbanization – could dramatically affect emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide over the next four decades.
The study found that a slowing of population growth – using one of the slower growth estimates from United Nations demographers – could contribute to significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions...
Although growth in urban populations could increase carbon emissions, an aging population would tend to lower those emissions, according to the study...
He hopes that findings from studies such as this one will be incorporated into future assessments by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
"If global population growth slows down, it is not going to solve the climate problem, but it can make a contribution, especially in the long term," says O'Neill
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2010/10/population-growth-urbanization-climate-change-carbon-emissions-global-warming-/1
Schneider, Ehrlich et al:
PNAS: Global demographic trends and future carbon emissions
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank K. Riahi for assistance in interpreting
the IIASA A2 and B2 scenario results, R. Sands for advice on alternative
energy-balance techniques, X. Ren for assistance in checking model results,
P. Belden, A. Hayes, W. Lutz, M. Oppenheimer, W. Sanderson, D. Spreng, and
E. Zagheni for helpful comments on this manuscript, and L. Goulder,
P. Ehrlich, S. Schneider, and D. Kennedy for guidance and support during
development of the original version of the PET model. Funding was provided
by the National Science Foundation, a European Young Investigator’s award
(to B.C.O.) and the Hewlett Foundation. Funding was provided for early
stages of the analysis by the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/09/30/1004581107.full.pdf+html
Pharos
As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand.
Josh Billings
^.^
Pat
It is sort of lost, that Shonali Pachauri, is one of the co-authors on the population-climate paper you mention above...
yes shub, should have included the authors. as u know/guessed, shonali is rajendra's daughter...
EU Referendum: Pachauri: money laundering?
Shonali is, in fact, Rjaendra's youngest (of two) daughter...
As for the elder daughter, she is Rashmi Pachauri – and often calls herself Rashmi Pachauri-Rajan. She, like her mother, Dr Saroj Pachauri, works on population issues, the latter being regional director, South and East Asia Regional Office, Population Council, working out of New Delhi...
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/01/keeping-it-in-family.html
speaking of dad:
12 Oct: Times of India: Busan meet to decide Pachauri's fate as IPCC head
India will push for R K Pachauri to continue as the chairman of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) while it debates the fifth assessment report at the IPCC meeting in Busan, South Korea thatstarted on Monday. New Delhi will also press for the immediate implementation of all the other reforms that the InterAcademy Council review has sought.
Though the Council had recommended that the "the term of the IPCC Chair should be limited to the timeframe of one assessment", and Pachauri has already headed one such assessment report, which was released in 2007, the Indian government plans to back the director of The Energy Research Institute (TERI) at the meeting...
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/developmental-issues/Busan-meet-to-decide-Pachauris-fate-as-IPCC-head/articleshow/6731771.cms
11 Oct: Top UN official reaffirms leadership of global climate body
The head of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) today underlined the crucial leadership role in unlocking the complexities of climate change played by the panel tasked with preparing regular scientific reports on the issue.
The panel"s credibility came into question after revelations that the report contained some mistakes, including over the rate of Himalayan glacier melt.
"It has certainly had consequences in terms of public opinion and the public policy arena," UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said in a message to the 32nd plenary session of the IPCC, which kicked off today in Busan, Republic of Korea.
He urged the body to use the five-day event to re-assert its leadership and restore public confidence in the IPCC, which is set to issue its Fifth Assessment Report between 2013 and 2014.
"Indeed, a rigorous, credible and convincing [Report] " at least in terms of the global public " may in part rest on your decisions here in terms of this scientific body and the way it operates and communicates," Mr. Steiner noted.
He pledged UNEP"s assistance to help Member States implement recommendations made by the independent review...
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=41435&t=Top+UN+official+reaffirms+leadership+of+global+climate+body
A HSI amazon link is now up at WUWT
Alex Cull wrote:
Hear! Hear!
Donna Laframboise is working on this:
Decoding the Climate Bible
I just bought another! On to number one! Lord knows, you earned it.
I have already bought, read it and lent it around for others who lent it to others and is now lost. Might buy another copy just to keep on the bookshelf as in time it will perhaps become a major publication (if not already). Well done Mr. Montford!
Dear Andrew Montford,
We are the Chinese professionals who contacted you in early September. Here is link for the full set of scanned images of the policy-influential review article in China. Check it if you are interested.
http://rapidshare.com/files/424428017/Hocky_Stick_Auditing_Review_from_Peking_University_China.rar
LianJ
[BH adds: Is there a translation available?]
I followed that guardian blog post... and it was very instructive...
Climate rush at the Daily Express
The Guardian has to be very careful here...
In a totalitarian state any organisation stepping out of line would have "students sitting in the foyer" protesting, here they may be middle aged ladies with too much time and money on their hands, but there is little difference.
Ms. Ottery clearly thinks the Guardian has the upper moral hand on the issue of AGW. What would she think if suddenly we organised school children to do a sit-down protest at Guardian towers over the 10:10 video?
In a free society the way to change the views of a paper (or remove it from circulation) is not to buy the thing, or give any weight to its coverage.
The propaganda tactics of the CAGW crowd is building as much the energy behind it falling away. I think it is going to get worse. The comments on the blog are full of the "the ends justify the means"...
A HSI amazon link is now up at WUWT
Oct 12, 2010 at 3:27 AM | Chuck
My one person lobbying Watts campaign worked...
It only took about 12 comments and emails in three articles for the Mods to notice.
Having that link permanently on Watts up, will help a lot.
How many hits a month does Watts Up get now?
Well doen Barry. Persistence pays.