Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

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

Powered by Squarespace
« Wonky Science - Josh 95 | Main | PowerPoint postings »
Saturday
Apr302011

There is only the team

ThinkProgress looks at tornado damage in the USA and collates a series of comments on the issue from climate scientists. For some unaccountable reason, every single scientist they have spoken to appears to be a member of that small clique we know as the Hockey Team.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (26)

When looking at ANY climate disaster it is extremely irresponsible of any member of the hockey team not to infer AGW.....Travesty really.

Apr 30, 2011 at 7:33 AM | Unregistered Commenterspangled drongo

Irresponsible not to mention climate change...when bad things happen.

Apr 30, 2011 at 7:36 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

Climate change works in mysterious ways its wonders to perform.

Apr 30, 2011 at 7:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

Of course. Their aim is simply to 'win' -- to succeed in imposing their beliefs on the rest of us and forcing us to behave in the way they have decided is appropriate. And the end justifies the means.

Apr 30, 2011 at 7:48 AM | Unregistered CommenterRick Bradford

Perhaps nobody else will take their calls......

Apr 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

Roy Spencer has this to say:

Anyone who claims more tornadoes are caused by global warming is either misinformed, pandering, or delusional.

I wonder why ThinkProgress didn't contact him for a comment?

It's explained at http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/04/more-tornadoes-from-global-warming-thats-a-joke-right/#comments

Apr 30, 2011 at 8:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

How to get the answer you want.

Apr 30, 2011 at 10:38 AM | Unregistered CommenterJimmy Haigh

How typically unpleasant and opportunistic of them to use this tragedy to push their discredited theories. No more than one would expect from a blog with "progress" in its name, though, as it is a key buzzword for those subscribing to the whole panoply of oppressive statist ideologies.

Apr 30, 2011 at 10:40 AM | Unregistered CommenterDavid S

When the high priests of AGW try to link extreme weather events with the tiny amount of warming actually experienced, the creed seems most like a very primitive religion. How do the numpty-bashing Skeptical Scientists cope with this embarrassment?

Apr 30, 2011 at 10:42 AM | Unregistered CommenterNicholas Hallam

Nicholas Hallam
What we seem not to understand all that well on the genuinely sceptical side of the argument is that this is not an embarrassment but an opportunity. Since any adverse weather event can be portrayed as climate-related now that we've got away from this simplistic "global warming" thing and persuaded the great unwashed that climate is always stable except when it isn't (remember that wonderful graph that proved it?) we must make use of every chance we get. So a few hundred people got killed. They'd have died sooner or later anyway. What's important is that we use this to keep the pressure on.
As Martin Brumby said on the Sarah Muckherjee thread:

...every political party except UKIP and the BNP are 100% true believers, they have every Professional and Scientific Society in their grasp, Big Business, the Media, the Charities, Prince Chuckles, the whole thing ...
and still she can genuinely believe that the problem is that they haven't communicated it properly.
You can understand the logic: if that many people are true believers (sorry, True Believers) then if the sheeple still don't believe it must be because we are not putting it across properly because, after all, we know we are right and we know we are right because we say so.
I'm reminded of a verse from one of the psalms (freely translated); I am God; there is no other. By Myself I swear it". All very well if you're the Omnipotent Being; bit dicy as an argument if you're a fallible human being like the rest of us.
I don't need to repeat (yet again) that AGW has all the attributes of a cult virtually without exception. The only possible embarrassment for the members would be if someone on the Team (or hierarchy as regular churches call them) said this was not attributable to climate change.

Apr 30, 2011 at 11:44 AM | Unregistered CommenterSam the Skeptic

Has anybody tried putting some good news to the 'Team' and asking if it was caused by AGW?

Hey guys, maize production is up 30% - what do you think caused it?

or

Polar bear numbers are increasing rapidly - that'll be due to AGW right?

Apr 30, 2011 at 12:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterDougS

As Pielke Jr says with graphs showing the trends instead of boring opinionating "Weather is Not Climate Unless People Die" .

This wonk article claiming "iresponsibility" because there are no mainstream exploitation headlines of the dead bodies attaching ithem to climate explains everything that is wrong with the CAGW movement.

I [snip] hate people like that.

Apr 30, 2011 at 12:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

These, are the same people who < href="http://nigguraths.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=1449&action=edit">posted a hostile review of Roy Spencer's book on the day Alabama was hit by tornadoes, and then allowed comments like "thank God, Roy Spencer is alive".

Michael Mann says that global warming is "present in every meteorological event". If it is present in everything, how can it cause any one particular thing then? What about "meteorological nonevents" then? Is global warming present in those too? How come we did not hear anything from GrandDaddy Trenberth 'attributing' the rash of pleasant weather that we finally had for a good bit, after the long cold in the northern hemishpere?

Apr 30, 2011 at 12:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterShub

The link from the post above: Realclimate Irony Fail

Apr 30, 2011 at 12:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterShub

Michael Mann says that global warming is "present in every meteorological event".
Further evidence of the quasi-religious character of the belief system that is AGW.
Read any Christian theologian (I can recommend a couple of easy ones) and you will be given an explanation of the presence of God "in" everything or the way in which He "manifests" himself (same thing).
The God Global Warming is obviously "present in" or "manifests itself through" every meteorological event, as it would that being the way it operates.
In fact the more I think about this quote the more blindingly obvious it becomes to me (as one who has studied a little theology) that a Religion is exactly what we are up against.

Apr 30, 2011 at 2:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterSam the Skeptic

Sam the Skeptic

"Global Warming is obviously "present in" or "manifests itself through" every meteorological event"

It seems that we are rapidly approaching the stage where it is seen to be present in every event full stop. In other words it is the biggest scam and conspiracy of all time.

The more thay realise that they are losing the arguement, the more desperate they get. Bring it on! Eventually even the numpties (politicians) will see it for the scam it is.

Apr 30, 2011 at 3:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterPFM

Eventually even the numpties (politicians) will see it for the scam it is.
Not as long as there's tax revenue to be got out of it.
Old Yorkshire saying: There's none so blind as them as will not see; and none so thick as them as wants to be.
It takes long enough to destroy a cult as it is. This one has at worst the blessing and at best the benign neglect of -- if I might be allowed to partaphrase Martin's quote above --
"...every political party except UKIP and the BNP ... every Professional and Scientific Society ..., Big Business, the Media, the Charities, Prince Chuckles, the whole thing ..."
There's nobody left but us chickens. And what would we know?

Apr 30, 2011 at 3:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterSam the Skeptic

There is confusion over correlation and causation.

Flatulence leads to global warming

Can Mann attribute his flatulence to global warming, absolve himself of responsibility, and blame Big Oil?

Apr 30, 2011 at 3:38 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charley

Judy's on it. I think the upside down null will be in for some turning over.
========

Apr 30, 2011 at 3:55 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Bish,

I have a full rebuttal to team nonsense here:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/29/the-folly-of-linking-tornado-outbreaks-to-climate-change/

Apr 30, 2011 at 4:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterAnthony Watts

As the hockey team's left-wing political ally, Rahm Emanuel (formerly Obama's chief of staff) said:

"Never let a crisis go to waste."

Use them to achieve political objectives that you couldn't get otherwise.

Apr 30, 2011 at 4:48 PM | Unregistered Commenterstan

Yep, I can see all those research grant forms quivering with excitement...

Apr 30, 2011 at 7:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterJabba the Cat

may I ask the folks to rise above the chatter-sphere...is it possible that the earth has entered an era of increased instability in the form of earthquakes, tornados etc...? I know that journalism tends to cluster...so one attack on a baby by a Rottweiler will tend to lead to hundreds of stories about attacks by rottweilers, and so on for earthquakes. but is there a chance that the Earth is becoming more seismically active? And do the climate models reflect it in a responsible way?

Apr 30, 2011 at 9:21 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

The Team is the Consensus of Scientists! Think Progress has just confirmed it! By the way, didn't they just spend most of last winter lecturing us that cold weather proves nothing about climate change? Of course, to cover their bets, toward the end of winter they switched to the claim that global warming caused the unusually cold winter. If permitted, holding a contradictory position is a good way to cover one's bets. Those sly dogs!

Apr 30, 2011 at 9:47 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheo Goodwin

?

Whether it's the "hockey team" or Dr Roy Spencer, they seem to be saying the same thing. I don't see what the fuss is about.

May 1, 2011 at 11:33 AM | Unregistered CommenterAndykn

The team are spiteful and dishonest beyond adequate desription. Where are the legions of honest and morally upright climate scientists speaking up about this?

May 1, 2011 at 11:46 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlexander K

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):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>