CSIRO: 97% Gloomy Religion

CSIRO boss defends shake-up, says politics of climate ‘more like religion than science’

Dr Marshall said he understood the concerns – from both abroad and his staff internally.

“I don’t blame our scientists for crying out – they’re passionate about what they do,” he said.

“When a scientist has spent 20 or 30 years working in a particular area, they love it, that’s what gets them out of bed in the morning – they’re not going to want to change.


Wait. What?

“they love it, that’s what gets them out of the bed in the morning”


What sort of person loves this?:

When the End of Human Civilization Is Your Day Job
Among many climate scientists, gloom has set in.

Things are worse than we think, but they can’t really talk about it.


Every Day.

Eternally Gloomy because their apocalypse fails to materialise.

Can’t talk about it.

Send money.

Worse Apocalypse. Ever.


CSIRO: Scientist dump 97%

Even Frasier would see the irony …

Scientists, whose job it is to predict the future, fail to predict their own future:

4 February, 2016:

The head of the CSIRO, Larry Marshall, said in a letter to staff on Thursday that the government’s science agency’s job had been “to prove climate change”.

“That question has been answered,” he told staff.

Continuing to do climate research would be akin to resting “on our laurels” and would be the “path to mediocrity”.

✈ ✈ ✈

Cue the 97% scientists who squawked  the mantra “the science is settled” now squeal “the science is not settled“:

Will Steffen, October 2013:

”We’d like to see a debate in this country that gets beyond these futile arguments about the science, which have been settled for decades in the scientific literature, and get on with the real debate about what is really the best way forward with dealing with the problem.

”So, yes, it is frustrating having to go back again and again and again and talk about what the science actually says.”

✈ ✈ ✈

Bonus Links

> CSIRO’s best solution:

November 13, 2011:  Carbon tax hit small: CSIRO

> Some History:

January 17, 2004: Global warming: a load of hot air?

The IPCC (and CSIRO) relied heavily on the Mann paper in coming to their global warming conclusions.




Flashback 2002: CO2 allegedly made the Harbin ice sculptures “sweaty”

Flashback 2002: CO2 allegedly made the Harbin ice sculptures “sweaty”.

Jan 8, 2008 

“Average annual temperatures in the city perched on the edge of Siberia hit 6.6 degrees Celsius (44 Fahrenheit) last year, the highest average since records began, and the ice sculptures are feeling the heat.

“In the beginning of December 2002, ice lanterns in Harbin melted right after they were sculpted. What came out of the work was sweaty ice sculptures,” Yin Xuemian, senior meteorologist at the Heilongjiang Observatory, told Reuters.

Problems got worse in 2006.”

✈ ✈ ✈
2016 & Not a word about Doomsday Global Warming this year:
PHOTOS: Harbin International Ice and Snow Festival expected to draw over 1,000,000 visitors.
✈ ✈ ✈   ✈ ✈ ✈

Global Warming: Murder in the name of

An editorial at investors.com is years too late:

Murder: An Acceptable Means For Fighting Global Warming?

Activists accused of blocking a rail line were acquitted last week of obstruction.
Jurors apparently felt their actions were justifiable because they were trying to save the climate.
How far will this be allowed to go?

Here is a news flash for the editor:

UK aid helps to fund forced sterilisation of India’s poor

“Court documents filed in India earlier this month claim that many victims have been left in pain, with little or no aftercare.
Across the country, there have been numerous reports of deaths and of pregnant women suffering miscarriages after being selected for sterilisation without being warned that they would lose their unborn babies.
Yet a working paper published by the UK’s Department for International Development in 2010 cited the need to fight climate change as one of the key reasons for pressing ahead with such programmes.
The document argued that reducing population numbers would cut greenhouse gases …”

* * *

Global Warming really means Snowball Warming

January 6, 2016:
Hillary Clinton Points to Snow in January as Proof of [Global Warming]

Hillary Clinton mustered her best Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.) impression during a grassroots event in Nevada on Wednesday afternoon when she pointed to snowfall in Nevada during the month of January as proof climate change is real.

The Democratic frontrunner mocked her Republican rivals for their reluctance to accept manmade climate change to be an absolute fact.

✈ ✈ ✈

24 January, 2016:
Snow blindness

To help make his case that people cannot be influencing the climate, Jim Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma, cited archaeology and scripture.

Then he produced a snowball, and said, “I ask the chair, do you know what this is?
It’s a snowball, just from outside here. It’s very, very cold out.”

Glorying in his idiocy, Mr Inhofe, who was chairman of an important environmental committee at the time, then tossed the snowball at his Republican colleague.

With Washington currently under two feet of snow, this episode is worth remembering for two reasons.

 First, because the ignorance, wilful or otherwise, many Republicans display on global warming is not dissipating.

The second reason why Mr Inhofe’s stunt is worth recalling is that, were it repeated today, it could, tentatively, be argued that the snowball was evidence of global warming.

✈ ✈ ✈

Like two bald men fighting over a comb …

January 22, 2016:

Twitter fight! Bernie and Hillary battle it out over who has the better climate plan

✈ ✈ ✈
97% Settled Science
IPCC, 2001: “Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms”
IPCC, 2007: “Global climate change is likely to be accompanied by an increase in the frequency and intensity of heat waves, as well as warmer summers and milder winters

(see Table 3-10).” (via brennerbrief)

Global Warming: who’s children’s children are the 97% “saving the planet” for?

When climate scientists/believers in 97% Doomsday Global Warming claim they are are “saving the planet” for “the children’s children”, who’s children’s children are they talking about?

1. The Science:

How family planning could be part of the answer to climate change

You’ve changed your lightbulbs, you recycle, you’ve retrofitted your house, cycle when you can, and drive an electric car when you can’t.

You’re doing your bit to reduce your carbon emissions and prevent dangerous climate change.
But if you have two children, your legacy of carbon emissions could be 40-times higher than those you saved through lifestyle changes.

In fact, under dangerous climate change scenarios in 2050, nearly a third of carbon emissions can be avoided by slowing population growth.

✈ ✈ ✈
2. 97% Solutions in Practice:

UK aid helps to fund forced sterilisation of India’s poor

Tens of millions of pounds of UK aid money have been spent on a programme that has forcibly sterilised Indian women and men, the Observer has learned.

  Many have died as a result of botched operations, while others have been left bleeding and in agony.

 A number of pregnant women selected for sterilisation suffered miscarriages and lost their babies.

With officials and doctors paid a bonus for every operation, poor and little-educated men and women in rural areas are routinely rounded up and sterilised without having a chance to object.

 Activists say some are told they are going to health camps for operations that will improve their general wellbeing and only discover the truth after going under the knife.

Yet a working paper published by the UK’s Department for International Development in 2010 cited the need to fight climate change as one of the key reasons for pressing ahead with such programmes.

 The document argued that reducing population numbers would cut greenhouse gases, although it warned that there were “complex human rights and ethical issues” involved in forced population control.

✈ ✈ ✈  ✈ ✈ ✈  ✈ ✈ ✈  ✈ ✈ ✈
A Sick Joke?
Here we have 97% climate scientists lamenting the state of the planet they will leave to their children’s children in a catastrophic computer generated future only their depressing imaginations can conjure up.

0.00 seconds: In reality, the most profound impacts of climate change  [Global Warming], are going to be felt by later generations, by my daughter and her children.”

✈ ✈ ✈
No need to repost any more videos from “More Than Scientists; The People Behind Climate Science”. A visit to the site will avail you of many more who deny their own 97% science.
✈ ✈ ✈
✈ Who’s “children’s children” are the 97% saving the planet for?
Definitely not the poor and uneducated of India. ✈
Obama:  “The  science couldn’t be clearer – we owe it to our kids to do everything we can to combat climate change.”
Quite so, Obama endorses the killing of poor, uneducated Indians and their children so that his children’s children can survive his imaginary  climate apocalypse.

Global Warming: “Oceans control the planet’s temperature”

Does anyone remember the 97% Doomsday climate scientists saying this during the 1976-98 warming?: “Oceans control the planet’s temperature”

How we explained the greenhouse effect in 1988 (ABCtv)

Nope. No mention there.

 January 18, 2016, Chris Mooney WaPo:

 This is where 90 percent of global warming is going

Scientists have known for some time that when global warming occurs, the oceans will be the site of the most profound response.

   The reason is simply that they are able to retain vastly more heat than the atmosphere.

“We find that the heat uptake of the global oceans has doubled since about 1997, compared to what took place prior to that over the industrial era.

And that was a surprising result to us,” he added.

We tend to think of global warming as an overall upward trend in air temperature — but that’s simply the most immediate way in which we experience it.

* * *
August 27, 2014, Alex Morales, Bloomberg.com:

The surface air temperature is projected to rise under all scenarios examined by the IPCC.

* * *
Love the idea that we can’t use satellites to measure air temperature now but we know the heat content of the oceans for 1875:
““We find that the heat uptake of the global oceans has doubled since about 1997, compared to what took place prior to that over the industrial era.
* * *
  *  Global Warming Stops (NOAA)  *
* * *

Rapidly Warming Oceans Set to Release Heat into the Atmosphere
Scientific American, December 30, 2014

What scientists discovered in 2014 is that since the turn of the century, oceans have been absorbing more of global warming’s heat and energy than would normally be expected, helping to slow rates of warming on land.
What they will be talking about in 2015, and beyond, is when that trend might come to an end—likely following a routine shift in Pacific Ocean trade winds.

* * *

I have abysmal news: The deep oceans are not getting warmer.
So the question remains: If the deep oceans aren’t warming, where is all that extra heat going?
We … don’t really know, at least not yet. But it’s definitely going somewhere.

* * *

IPCC acknowledged 15-yr temp plateau in 2013

 Regardless, all global combined LSAT and SST data sets exhibit a statistically non-significant warming trend over 1998–2012 (0.042°C ± 0.093°C per decade (HadCRUT4); 0.037°C ± 0.085°C per decade (NCDC MLOST); 0.069°C ± 0.082°C per decade (GISS)).
An average of the trends from these three data sets yields an estimated change for the 1998–2012 period of 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade.
Trends of this short length are very sensitive to the precise period selection with trends calculated in the same manner for the 15-year periods starting in 1995, 1996, and 1997 being 0.13 [0.02 to 0.24], 0.14 [0.03 to 0.24] and 0.07 [–0.02 to 0.18] (all °C per decade), respectively.
chapter 2,  page 194
“In 2013, the U.N. panel of climate scientists said the pause in warming was due to factors including natural swings such as shifts in ocean heat, sun-dimming volcanic eruptions and a decline in solar output in an 11-year cycle.”
“The slowdown in warming is probably a combination of several different factors,” says Mann.
* * *

Lack of ocean heat puzzles Nasa

Scientists have noticed that while greenhouse gases have continued to mount in the first part of the 21st century, global average surface air temperatures have stopped rising along with them, said Nasa.
But latest data from satellite and direct ocean temperature measurements from 2005 to 2013 “found the ocean abyss below 1 995m has not warmed measurably,” Nasa said in a statement.
* * *
Well. That’s 97% settled.
 * * *