Thursday
Oct152015
by 
Josh
Josh "Should we celebrate CO2?" - Cartoon notes by Josh
Oct 15, 2015 GWPF Josh Patrick Moore
;)
Click image for larger version
Here are last night's cartoon notes from a superb GWPF Annual Lecture by Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace. You can read the lecture here.
The answer is, unequivocally, yes!
Reader Comments (49)
The lecture should be compulsory reading for all politicians and members of the Greenblob.
And well done Josh. I don't know how you manage to get so many excellent sketches done.
What has poor old Moore been smoking ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFGU6qvkmTI
Lighten up, Russell. Anyone would think you wanted the world to self-combust.
Well I find it hugely uplifting to find that a guy with a PHD in Ecology and who once ran Greenpeace gives a speech which almost exactly matches my own beliefs. It is a feel good day today.
I really wish I could have been there to meet up with Latimer Alder and Josh again but my deafness and other problems make it almost impossible.
A sobering reminder that the last Patrick Moore worth listening to died in 2012.
As Moore said in his lecture "ad homs need not apply".
Russell, if you have nothing better to say, why not keep quiet? It's reassuring that you can't do better....
Russell
I pulled up Peter Sinclair on his own blog and asked him what motivates a human being to produce a large catalogue of disingenuous, sneering videos. Observing his involvement in environmental projects, but not science I wondered if he had an interest in 'deep ecology' like Monbiot, Lynas, Hansen and so on. He ran for the hills (so to speak), said we were going to get on great. LOL !
Monbiot and deep ecology http://goo.gl/LH73d5
Russell, there may be some vacancies coming up at George Mason University, where your abilities will be appreciated. Your retirement from Harvard must have been a much celebrated occasion.
While I only met Patrick Moore once (not Dr PM, but THE Patrick Moore, for whom no titles or accolades can really be sufficient), so cannot claim the knowledge of him that a friend could, I would moot that he is well outside the league of Russell, and would most likely be fully supportive of the views and opinions of many on this site, not least the good Bish, himself – and Josh, of course.
Good to meet up with Josh again, and later watch him sketching away throughout that amazing dissertation from a man who really knows his stuff.
Surprised he hasn't included a cartoon of our next Prime minister's brother - Piers Corbyn was on combative form after the talk, but ever loyal to brother Jezza.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when those two get together !
Russel
I suggest you spend a few yeas studying geology, paleontology and paleoclimatology.You might unlearn some of the nonsense you presently espouse.
I'd like to see this being exposed in ALL schools, colleges, universities and any other 'seats of learning'...
Patrick Moore is not a sceptic
He is not a denier
He is just RIGHT.
He asks what Rhoda asked some years ago on BH. Rhoda got no answers and we shall see if anyone now claims to have the proof that CO2 causes warming ^.^
Quite the most remarkable and inspiring article I have read in 15 years of being a "climate change denier". Wish I had been there. History in the making?
This is the quote that resonates most with me:
You lot are not going to win the climate wars by making the Graun look good :
Having a cartoonist write closed captions for a serial PR hack like Moore the Less cannot diminish the ablity of Economist readers to recognize cant when they hear it, and carttons when they see them.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/oct/15/propaganda-trumps-journalism-in-conservative-media-climate-reporting?CMP=share_btn_tw
If Arsrussell is a troll...why are y'all donating sustenance??
PW
Plea to the Bish. Please, please, please don't snip the trolls on this occasion! Ad homs from Russell and ZDB are just so telling. The only response they have to a well written and well researched speech is to play the man and not the ball.
If that's the best the enviromentalists can do, well they have clearly lost the plot. And the argument.
Good stuff, but it's a pity he starts with (talking about lack of "proof" of CO2 causing warming) "If there were such a proof through testing and replication it would have been written down for all to see."
It will be obvious to anyone with the slightest wit that you can't do "testing and replication" given only a single world. Anyone therefore not already convinced that the alarmist case is overstated will start out somewhat dubious about the rest of his case, even assuming they read on. And I'm sure that "Skeptical Science" types will be quick to label this as BS.
What I'd hope for would be something I could point my (well meaning but warmist inclined) parents to and say "read this - its by the man who founded Greenpeace and what he says might change what you think".
Preaching to the choir doesn't get you converts.
Patrick Moores speech clearly indicates a man with genuine concerns for the planet and it's occupants. It is sad to read about the infiltration and takeover of Greenpeace by a bunch of people who just wanted to ban things, and block anything that did not meet their ideals.
The spiteful tactics they created, are now getting repetitively boring, and increasingly desperate as Paris draws nearer. It is great to have blogs like this where curious individuals can draw their own conclusions, having reviewed the threads and associated comments.
Having previously accepted the global warming message, based on trust in people described as experts, it is reassuring to note Patrick Moores scientific background, in dismissing climate science's unfounded predictions of doom and gloom.
Russell (12:59 PM), seriously, what is a “climate denier”?
QED
So... what is a "climate denier"? As no facts have been presented, who is running away?
It was the oil industry that invented the word 'denier' and corporate journalists who used it on their behalf.
Opposing Views on Global Warming: The Corporate Climate Coup by Prof. David F. Noble - York University, Toronto, Canada
The second -“positive”- campaign, which emerged a decade later, in the wake of Kyoto and at the height of the anti-globalization movement, sought to get out ahead of the environmental issue by affirming it only to hijack it and turn it to corporate advantage. Modelled on a century of corporate liberal cooptation of popular reform movements and regulatory regimes, it aimed to appropriate the issue in order to moderate its political implications, thereby rendering it compatible with corporate economic, geopolitical, and ideological interests. The corporate climate campaign thus emphasized the primacy of “market-based” solutions while insisting upon uniformity and predictability in mandated rules and regulations.
At the same time it hyped the global climate issue into an obsession, a totalistic preoccupation with which to divert attention from the radical challenges of the global-justice movement. In the wake of this campaign, any and all opponents of the “deniers” have been identified – and, most importantly, have wittingly or unwittingly identified themselves – with the corporate climate crusaders.
http://alturl.com/2oafi (Google scholar doc file)
Patrick Moore has timed his lectures so well, to help people from all walks of life, consider the facts about the weather, rather than the failed predictions of falsified science, aimed at people easily impressed by fairy stories.
It is so good, I just reread his notes again, coupled with Josh's excellent accompanying cartoons.
Palaeoclimate Buff
Why don't you start reading the palaeoclimate literature? If you find anything wrong with what I've authored , do submit your objection to the editors.
vvussell, is there something special about your articles on paleoclimate, that makes them more reliable and worth the effort, than your writings on this and other threads?
Troll comments and follow-ups snipped as usual.
@Dung
Yep it was a good evening...you would have enjoyed it with yr interest in interglacials.
And was I deluded, or did I see Ed Davey (remember him - the Lib Dem windmillian who took over while Huhne was in nick?) lurking on the corner of Birdcage Walk and The Westminster Arms afterwards? What a coincidence.....
Russel
I have an honours degree in Paleontology and an M.Sc in paleoclimatology and I think you are the one that needs to read some paleoclimate literature.( Without any preconceptions!)
Quite frankly Russell your link to the Grauniad article is pretty funny really. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
And a link which actually has "97 per cent consensus" in the path name and similarly repeats the phrase as a subtitle on the web page itself should never be taken seriously. I will continue to simply laugh and ignore all those environmentalists who foolishly trot out such a weak, non scientific and utterly debunked argument. Quite pathetic really, as I said in the snipped comment, you are really running out of credible arguments.
When a long term campaigner, formally trained person like Moore, who actually cares about the environment, turns away from the bullshit it really should start to dawn on you that its all over. It may not be the end yet, but its certainly the beginning of the end. And when the temperature plateau stretches out to 20 years and more it will be the final nail in the coffin. Joe public are not stupid and ordinary people already regard climate change as bollocks. They just haven't become fully aware of just how much its cost them, but when they do they are going to be pretty pissed off.
In 2006 I had a bet with a vehement supporter of agw (who is canadian and thought connolly (with an "e") was a hero!). I said that by 2020 the argument would be over. I am pretty confident I am going to win that bet. And it won't be long after that you will see windmills being decommissioned and some sanity return to energy policy.
The sad thing is that this whole charade is going to set real environmental campaigning back a generation. Its a question of trust. No-one is going to take end of the world predictions seriously again. Its also going to be a short term funding disaster for academics, although that may result in research focus returning to more worthy areas of greater benefit to society.
Still, keep up with the propaganda. Makes me chuckle to watch the pathetic drivel continue to be trotted out in desperation. Still, I like a good laugh.
I recently came across the Youtube video of Moore's 2014 talk to the Heartland Institute, so it is good to see that the GWPF inviting Patrick over here. The two are very similar, so it useful to watch the HI talk for the accompanying slides. .
If you have not seen Mark Steyn's more recent talk to the HI, it is also highly recommended and highly entertaining - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEBeF_Rz1MU.
Thinkingscientist.
Totally agree with everything you say in you rebuttal of the nonsense Russell writes apart from one thing.
I'm not a scientist and although I have a reasonable layman's understanding of so called global warming I don't think the whole whole thing is total bollocks.
My understanding is that it's cyclic and had been throughout history, I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Romans could grow grapes near Carlisle and that at one time during the medieval period you could hold fairs and markets on the frozen Thames.
What I do think is utter total bollocks is the claim by alarmists that any of this is catastrophic or likely to be.
I must confess I am also thoroughly enjoying Mark Steyn giving that charlatan Mann a good kicking.
thinkingscientist
I fear the history of the human race is against you on that one! Apart from that I'm with you all they way.Oct 16, 2015 at 9:56 AM | Unregistered CommenterStu
You make a key point. I've yet to see anyone here, or anywhere else, suggest that global temperature hasn't changed over time, sometimes warming, sometimes cooling. But take the C out of CAGW, and GW, irrespective of the A contribution, is essentially of no consequence, it just requires adaptation over the decades to whatever the local change happens to be. As humankind has managed to do since we evolved. That C is the most expensive single letter there's ever been; which, given how little truly scientific evidence there is for it, should trouble any rational person.
Stu, you could add examples such as what was permanent snow melting on very high alpine passes, and underneath are revealed Roman and Bronze age artefacts. How did they get there, unless during those periods the passes were also snow/ice free and passable? Svensmark and Calder's book The Chilling Stars cites some good examples of this, and is a good read generally.
Mike Jackson - fair comment, you are probably right! I really meant no-one will take their predictions seriously (meaning environmentalists), at least for a generation.
Josh unfortunately Hydro Electric Dams as used as a weapon by Turkey starving the Kurdish state of fresh water.
Damming the Euphrates and Tigress upstream and not reduce rainfall has obviously contributed to the conflict in Syria and the rise of ISIS.
Palaeoclimate Buff:
I was referring to your evidently not having read my publications in Nature, Antiquity , Eos, Naturwissenschaften and elesewhere.
Russell,
When you stop linking (and publicly dissociate yourself from) the "97% consensus" Guardian/Sierra club nonsense, maybe we might take you seriously. Until then, well I like a good laugh as much as the next person!
Thinkingscientist needs a new handle, and Josh some new cliches-- like Moore, he's been recycling from the last year:
http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2014/08/this-septic-isle.html
Russell,
All your ad hominem attacks demonstrate is your total inability to make an argument based on facts. If you are so sure of your cause why not argue it.
Links to articles in the Guardian are not an argument they are just that a link to a newspaper quoting discredited propaganda.
Perhaps you would care to engage with thinkingscientist about why Roman and Bronze age artefacts are being discovered in the high Alpine Passes instead of childish name calling. You could even tell me how the Romans where able to grow grapes in Carlisle or why the Thames froze in medieval times.
@Russell: You have spent the last couple of days either posting childish ad-homs or promoting your self-aggrandizement. Please, if you haven't got anything constructive to say, just go back to your own little play-pen.
Russell,
Regarding my last paragraph, I'm sorry if these are, "Inconvenient Truths," but they did happen, unlike in the fantasy film of the same name by Al Gore.
You know the guy that made billions lying about the effects of climate change.
Is Stu in denial about both the variability of Alpine glacial growth and recession, and the long march of contemporary British vineyards past Hadrian's Wall and north into Scotland?
Utzi managed to get buried by a glacier on the Italian border two millennia before those artefacts of what is fondly styled "the Roman Warm Period"
As to the great wines of Carlisle, drink not deep of what Mark Steyn has been dishing out:
http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/06/mark-steyn-and-grapes-of-wrath.html
On close examination it militates for The Medieval Cooler Than Now Period.
Oct 16, 2015 at 10:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterStu
Russell,
Regarding my last paragraph, I'm sorry if these are, "Inconvenient Truths," but they did happen, unlike in the fantasy film of the same name by Al Gore.
You know the guy that made billions lying about the effects of climate change.
Stu, is this the Al Gore you mean?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB117651575053769900
Here's the text if you don't subscribe to the WSJ:
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Trees_and_Global_Warming.pdf
Correction: The WSJ article text appears at :
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/SAVING_TREES.pdf
Russell,
Construct an argument and provide some evidential support. Otherwise you are just hand waving. Pathetic links to 97 % consensus in the Guardian just don't cut it. Raise your game and people will engage, otherwise expect to be treated with contempt.
Thinkingscientist seems to have morphed into Notreadingscientists
Vide supra : 3:10
Russel
The great parliamentarian Edmund Burke pointed out that there is only one great intellectual choice in life - whether to conform ones thinking to reality or to conform reality to ones thinking.
Clearly you have chosen the latter.