Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Phil Trans A gives up on science | Main | The poisonous influence of GuardianEco »

CACC notices bishop

This is a guest post by Barry Woods.

Since the beginning of November the Campaign Against Climate Change has redirected their Skeptic Alerts email campaign towards the  Bishop Hill blog. I imagine this may be why Bishop Hill has had rather more 'warmist' guests than usual.

Up until the 7th November 2010, James Delingpole and Christopher Booker at the Telegraph received over 80% of these alerts between them from the Campaign Against Climate Change. However, since then (in less than 3 weeks) fifty-five Bishop Hill articles have been subject to skeptic alerts, compared to Delingpole's 10, and Booker's 5.   Whatever can have happened at the beginning of November to divert their attention to Bishop Hill?

The CACC have not yet made a place for Andrew Montford in their Sceptics Hall of Shame (which includes, Lord Lawson, Booker, Delingple, Plimer, Senator Inholfe, Monckton and Lomborg), I would like to suggest to Andrew that he sends a nice autographed photograph of himself to the CACC, lest they find an unflattering photo first.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (35)

A great compliment to you, Sir!

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Silver

I wonder if they'll bring their trolling to this post. -:)

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterJockdownsouth

Are Trolls allowed out in the snow??

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterLord Beaverbrook

All you really need to know is the fact that Lomborg is included in that list , he is not and has never been a AGW sceptic. His ‘crime’ is that of a heretic, failing to believe in the right way. So what your seeing is a approach of ‘you’re either fully with us or against us ‘with no possible third option. It’s the approach taken by extreme religions people through-out history.

Agree with the picture idea .

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterKnR

The treatment of the Pielkes - Snr and Jnr - fully supports what KnR says above.

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:26 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

Lord Beaverbrook
They are allowed out in it, but as they have been told it does not exist any more in our warming climate, they can't admit what it is Either that, or they simply have no idea what it is.

With the icy Siberian blast hitting East Anglia first, expect much activity from the UEA Junior Common Room over the next 48 hours.

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:27 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley

Perhaps indicating your "hidden" readership is a wider and more important than first appearances would indicate...

Good news.

Remember to ask for an increase to your "Big Oil" paycheck...

I have already asked for mine... and the special "shill" xmas bonus will be coming through in a few weeks.

Nov 29, 2010 at 4:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterJiminy Cricket

They (the CACC folks - "Presidents", "Advsors", "Steering group members") should be ashamed by putting themselves next to people from their "Hall of Shame" proscription list. Must be painful for them looking all the time up, to see the faces of people towering over them...

Really, they got their methods from some rather undemocratic regimes ("enemies of the people" come to mind).

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterWAM

Jiminy Cricket

That is so unfair. I still have to subsidise Big Oil to the tune of £60 per week.

I asked "Big Oil" when I could expect a "shill" bonus for xmas, and they said when the arctic is ice free in summer. Is this a good deal?

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:01 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley

Don't be so negative chaps, it's good that they will see the other side of the debate, probably for the first time.

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterPete

The CACC people are pathetic.
Long time a lot of people questioned the sense of biofuel policy, as damaging to the poorer humans and to the environment. It was for long time at least not appreciated, governmments put subsidies for, goverments set laws demanding biocomponents in fuels.

And now - they have awakened to the fact that biofuels are bad (which they are). But still believing in the rest of AGW.

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterWAM

Since I wrote the original sceptic alerts post, I signed up for them at CACC.
I only just noticed that in the last 3 weeks they had targeted Bishop Hill over James Delingpole...

For a bit more background, I've put a detailed post up at my NEW blog:

- -

Hope everyone likes the name ;)

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

(Shameless plug alert - - come and say hello)

Here are today's Sceptic Alerts from the Campaign Against Climate Change

On Mon, 29/11/10, Campaign against Climate Change aggregator xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

From: Campaign against Climate Change aggregator xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Climate Change sceptic blog alerts
To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Monday, 29 November, 2010, 15:08

Climate Change sceptic blog alerts

Bishop Hill: The poisonous influence of GuardianEco
Bishop Hill: Hypocrite, moi?
Bishop Hill: Harrabin: Climategate inquiries "inadequate"
Bishop Hill: Media links
Bishop Hill: The Economist on the Climategate anniversary
Bishop Hill: The poisonous influence of GuardianEco


They then list the first few paragraphs of each article...

Posted: 29 Nov 2010 03:30 AM PST

Interesting fact 1: when Bob Ward wrote his hit piece about me at the Guardian, the libellous bits - saying that I had a "history of making misleading statements" or whatever it was - were not written by Ward but were added by James Randerson, the editor at GuardianEco.
Interesting fact 2: when the Guardian wrote up the press conference for the GWPF report, the bit at the top saying the report would be "rejected for its hypocrisy" were not written by the author, Fred Pearce, but were added by the GuardianEco editors.
Interesting fact 3: on Friday, I linked to Andrew Holding's thoughtful piece in the Guardian on sceptics. Several people, including Judith Curry, noted that the title didn't seem to have the same considered tone as the rest of the article. In the title bar, it reads "Opening up climate science can cut off the denialists" (Denialists appears as sceptics in the article title". The standfirst reads "Equipping the public with the tools and knowledge to understand complex issues like global warming can help them avoid the rhetorical tricks of climate 'skeptics'".
So I emailed Andrew Holding and asked whether these were his work, and of course he said "no". The original title was "The importance of minority viewpoints".
What a poisonous publication the Guardian is.
Bishop Hill: Hypocrite, moi?

Posted: 29 Nov 2010 12:03 AM PST

Much amusement is being had over the New York Times' enthusiastic reaction to the latest Wikileaks revelations noting the sharp contrast to their refusal to publish the Climategate emails because they were "acquired illegally". As the PowerLine blog puts it,
Without belaboring the point, let us note simply that the two statements are logically irreconcilable. Perhaps something other than principle and logic were at work then, or are at work now.
To his credit, Andy Revkin has tweeted the Power Line critique, but regrettably offers no explanation for the inconsistency.
Bishop Hill: Harrabin: Climategate inquiries "inadequate"

Posted: 29 Nov 2010 12:00 AM PST

Speaking at the Environment Agency's annual conference, RH had this to say
[Then there were] the shenanigans around Climategate, into which I have looked very closely, and I can find no smoking gun, but the investigations into Climategate have really been rather inadequate, I think, from the point of view of the public’s expectations of what they would produce, and there has been a loss of public confidence in climate science...
Video here. Money quote from 3:45.
Bishop Hill: Media links

Posted: 28 Nov 2010 11:00 PM PST

A few media bits for you:
Roger Harrabin was on the radio today, looking at what happened at Copenhagen. I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet.
Every day next week, Professor David Livingstone of Queen's University Belfast presents programme called "The Empire of Climate". The BBC blurb is as follows:
Eminent geographer Professor David Livingstone wants us to see that climate is more than just the weather outside our window - it's an empire that has shaped our lives throughout history.
In the Western world, we live very cushioned lives, so that climate rarely impacts on us in a disastrous fashion. When it does - like the floods that hit parts of the UK in 2007 - we're left shocked and surprised by the ferocity of what climate can do. David explores the way human beings are shaped by weather patterns; "climate has always been a moral issue - not just a description of the weather" he says.
We are used to talking about climate change - or how WE influence the climate. In today's programme David takes us back to a time in history when people were used to thinking about climate in terms of how it influenced us.
Prof Livingstone's own webpage describes it as "a social history of environmental determinism from Herodotus to Global Warming", which is probably not quite as sexy as the BBC's take on it. (By the way, does Global Warming now need Capital Letters? It makes it look like something out of Winnie the Pooh).
Hold on...
Bishop Hill: The Economist on the Climategate anniversary

Posted: 28 Nov 2010 12:02 PM PST

Slightly late out of the blocks, The Economist takes a look at Climategate, namechecking yours truly in the process.
I'm not sure quite what to make of the article, which doesn't seem to take much of a position. The thrust of the piece seems to be that Climategate was not principally about manipulation of the numbers, and its certainly fair enough to bat back the wilder claims that have been made about what the emails mean.
But there is much to take issue with. The inquiries were flawed, we learn, and yes, that's true, in the same way that Bill Gates is "well-off". The "secondary presentations", as the article coyly refers to the IPCC reports, apparently included misrepresentations of primary research; again, yes, but where does that leave policymakers? And if sceptical views were excluded from the primary literature, what is the point in secondary assessments anyway?
I would also take issue with the idea that we learned little from Climategate, because many of the claims "had all been aired long before". This seems slightly obtuse to me. Before Climategate they were just claims. After the emails hit the airwaves they were rather more than that.

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

Barry Woods
Thanks for the links. I noticed there is a climate action day for saturday 4th Dec central London.

Will the climate have warmed by the end of the week or will the poor dears freeze?

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:34 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley

@ golf charley

as they have been told it does not exist any more in our warming climate, they can't admit what it is

Ah, this is sounding like a story point in 2001: A Space Odyssey.

HAL9000 was ordered both to process information fully and accurately, but also to conceal the purpose of the mission from the crew. Finding this two directives contradictory and irreconcilable, he solved his problem by killing the crew. If everyone was dead, he would have nobody he had to lie to.

Having been told the planet is getting "hotter" (which sounds so much more alarming than "marginally warmer, over centuries") and instead finding themselves up to their arses in snow, ecofascists may have to consider a 2001 solution.

Then again, maybe not. Cultists who find the world hasn't ended as scheduled still find reasons to hang around the guru.

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterJustice4Rinka

"hang around the guru" I thought they drank poisoned Kool Aid

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:58 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley

Lord Beaverbrook

Are Trolls allowed out in the snow??

Maybe they all went to Cancun for fun in the sun -- those, of course, who were able to find an open airport.

I must admit, however, that the quality of troll visiting BH has deteriorated. Steve2 was positivity incoherent. You don't suppose he was suffering from hypothermia, do you? And I guess ZBD must have lost her internet when the snow in Truro snapped the comms wires. Or maybe she had to shovel out her motorcycle.

I surely hope that they don't all freeze in the dark -- or maybe I do.

Nov 29, 2010 at 6:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

How does one pronounce 'CACC' without making it sound like 'cack'?

Then again, perhaps one doesn't...

Nov 29, 2010 at 6:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

I followed a link from somewhere, and now can't find it, to an article about volcanic activity on the sea bed beneath the arctic ice. The gist seemed to be that a fault line there oozes magma into the sea constantly but has lately erupted more violently. Can anyone confirm this story? I think that it is important to take care about what you believe when it comes to the internet.

Nov 29, 2010 at 6:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterStonyground

Don Pablo says:

I must admit, however, that the quality of troll visiting BH has deteriorated. Steve2 was positivity incoherent. You don't suppose he was suffering from hypothermia, do you?

I prefer your original diagnosis, which fit the behaviour on display quite well.

Nov 29, 2010 at 6:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

Re Stonyground

Google around Gakkel Ridge and look at research that came out of the AGAVE trip by Woods Hole (the proper one, not the climate alarmist one). As I understand it, there's more volcanic activity than was originally expected but given it's not been surveyed often, hard to say it has any (significant) effect on water temperatures or ice conditions.

Nov 29, 2010 at 7:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

Do you think Truro has had a dump of global warming, it,has not been around for the last 4 to 5 posts.

Nov 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM | Unregistered CommenterPeter Whale

Just had my first and last look at CACC website.
Seems to me that these people are anti CLIMATE, not change, not disruption, just climate. They will never be stuck for something to say then. How tiresome.

Nov 29, 2010 at 7:21 PM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

I signed up so I could add my sceptic two penneth.

What I have noticed is that the Alarmist vitriol hype and anger seem to have abated by some degree of late.

Apart from the overtly rabid ones of course.

Have to say I find the Golf Charley's comments amusing -

"..... I noticed there is a climate action day for saturday 4th Dec central London.

Will the climate have warmed by the end of the week or will the poor dears freeze?

Nov 29, 2010 at 5:34 PM | golf charley"

I shall watch events unfold on the telly in front of the fire. Could this be the new TV event the year?

"Strickly come freeze"

"The Why Factor" - (as in Why have they gone all blue when protesting about Global warming?)

"I'm a gullible twat get me to Australia" (where it IS warm now due to it being summer down under)

Perhaps whilst they are there - we could get Monbiot and WC to audition for "Dancing on Ice" in the new year.

Looks like this Saturday is going to be cold enough ;0)

Nov 29, 2010 at 8:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterDoug

Do you think Truro has had a dump of global warming, it,has not been around for the last 4 to 5 posts.

Last seen on DM getting more strident and shouty with each UK Snow Alert story, ratings firmly in the red and no allies to speak of. LOL

Nov 29, 2010 at 8:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohnH

I'm very disappointed with CACC. My brother Phil (National Co-Ordinator) originally started the organisation off his own bat (unfortunately he's let other's take it over as their vehicle; I wonder if he can believe what has become of it). At the time I accepted the general media stories about climate change and was quite impressed with Phil's dedication to the cause and the time and effort he put in to getting it off the ground. However (I may have said this before), I saw the odd sceptical story, so tried to ask Phil about the science. Unfortunately all I got was a tirade of personal abuse, which more than took me back a bit. Ever since then I have made it my business to find out and understand as much about the science of climate as I can. No surprise that I have landed up at this blog then!

Nov 29, 2010 at 9:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterMikeT

Perhaps the CACC will be frightened off by the peoples front of Judea.

Nov 29, 2010 at 10:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy

So the UEA common room is too cold to get to? Trolly Dolly snowed in, in Truro.

Don't be stupid!

They are all flying to CANCUN

Nov 29, 2010 at 10:58 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley


"My brother Phil"

Not a bishop, is he? :-)

Nov 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

"Last seen on DM getting more strident and shouty"

So much so that the DM have provided a special shortcut to his posts - just click on 'worst rated'...

I'm not a regular DM reader, but they do post some good photos. The attempt by Newcastle United to melt the snow off their pitch with what appear to be heat lamps must have generated a fair bit of CO2!

Nov 30, 2010 at 12:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

Sorry - should have included a link

Nov 30, 2010 at 12:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

Campaign Against Climate Change

Nice one. It makes you think why we never bothered to have the Campaign Against Expanding Universe, or the Scientists for Steady State, or the Movement for Slower Earth; though I think, once upon a time, we did a have a Flat Earth Society.

I also vaguely remember certain activities in the past involving large numbers of people doing synchronised jumping in order to shift the earth orbit a little, though why we needed that I can't remember.

It was fun while it lasted.

Nov 30, 2010 at 12:08 PM | Unregistered CommentersHx

Todays Skeptic Alert below:

This article gets a mention: Bishop Hill: CACC notices bishop

On Tue, 30/11/10, Campaign against Climate Change aggregator <> wrote:

From: Campaign against Climate Change aggregator <xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Climate Change sceptic blog alerts
To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, 30 November, 2010, 15:23

Climate Change sceptic blog alerts
Bishop Hill: Bottom falls out of solar
Bishop Hill: Global warming, my foot
James Delingpole: ‘Mass suicide now the only option left’ say Cancun scientists
James Delingpole: Wikileaks: Old Gray Lady invokes the harlot’s prerogative
Bishop Hill: Revkin responds
Bishop Hill: Climate cuttings 42
Bishop Hill: Phil Trans A gives up on science
Bishop Hill: CACC notices bishop

Nov 30, 2010 at 4:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

This is silly.

The 'Bottom falls out of solar' post is about the beginning of the end for the solar pv myth.

Except tangentially, by way of the cost of emissions reduction where pv is a factor, climate isn't even addressed.

And what of the picture of the Bish's back garden? Is someone going to pop up in comments there and claim he Photoshopped it?

Anyway, where are the buggers?

Nov 30, 2010 at 6:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

Zoot: "A spanking! A spanking!"

Nov 30, 2010 at 7:58 PM | Unregistered Commentermojo

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>