The trillion dollar question

Right before our eyes we are being lied to by official institutions of the state, by large slabs of the media and by a majority of the scientists of the world publishing in this area. There was a theory: increases in atmospheric carbon would lead to a greenhouse effect which would warm the planet by a few degrees which would in turn lead to a series of climatic changes which would cause immense damage. The one piece of evidence was the correlation between higher concentrations of CO2 and rising temperatures. Now that the correlation has broken during the past 15 years, there ought to be a bit of mea culpa and a major re-evaluation of the science and the associated carbon abatement policies. Well you would think.

The Global Warming Policy Foundation, set up by Nigel Lawson, has published this quite interesting series of comments on the problems now being faced by the IPCC and the rest of the scientific community on this incredible gravy train of research grants and fellowships. Accurately titled as The IPCC’s Great Dilemma it highlights how they are going to keep this going for just a bit longer. Mostly just quotes but they are all of a piece with the first of them:

The IPCC’s dilemma is this. How can it expect the public to believe that recent warming is mostly manmade when the models on which it has based this claim have been shown to be fatally flawed?

The question comes down to what Groucho Marx once asked, “Who ya gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes.” This is not even the million dollar question, or the billion dollar question but the trillion dollar question. In fact, what comes after trillion because if we continue with this into the future that is the kind of impact this will have on global living standards even over the short time span of the next twenty years.

UPDATE: Link fixed.

SECOND UPDATE: A serious error corrected by Manalive. It’s not Groucho but Chico from Duck Soup:

Mrs. Teasdale: Your Excellency, I thought you’d left!
Chicolini: Oh no, I no leave.
Mrs. Teasdale: But I saw you with my own eyes!
Chicolini: Well, who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

75 Responses to The trillion dollar question

  1. Lysander

    Preaching to the converted Steve 🙂

    We need to proselytize before we have massive outbreaks of cognitive disonance!

  2. Indigo

    Oh my God! I’m in shock! At 11.02 today, ABC 24 admitted there had been no warming for 15 years! They had a couple of climate scientists say a) this was possible due to increase industrial pollution masking the sun or b) the warming is hiding in the ocean.

    But wait – there was more! A short interview with Andrew Montford (http://bishophill.squarespace.com/), an AGW non-believer, who basically said the science is NOT settled.

    Is this a first for the ABC? The wheels must be falling off the IPCC wagon. Oh the be a fly on the wall in Stockholm.

  3. Splatacrobat

    The IPCC are the Y2K bug fixers of the 21st century.

  4. tomix

    Given the stupendous amounts at stake, and the carcase pickin’ opportunities down the track, what are the chances of ever finding enough senators to repeal the legislation ?

  5. Bruce

    The Left are destroying themselves over this. People like Suzuki can jump up and down and screech but when they are challenged on the science they are laughably bad.

    There is abundant and increasing evidence that they are wrong, and that most warming last century was natural, but they cannot seem to take this in and detach themselves from the CAGW cult.

    But voters are not idiots. In Germany this week there was a substantial swing to the right. Here in Oz likewise. When voters see the Left lying, and imposing carbon ‘pricing’ for no good reason, enriching themselves and their cronies, they abandon the ALP, the SDP, the Greens and the Democrats.

    You would think that the Left would work this out, but no, they just keep on painting another number on the dial and twisting the screechiness up to 11 then 12 then 13.

  6. cuckoo

    Can’t wait to see how the newly-privatised ‘Climate Council’ pans out. Very nice of Perfesser Flannery to donate his time for free. And I liked Greg Hunt’s comment that this shows there was never a need for a taxpayer funded Climate Commission.

  7. ken n

    cuckoo – Flannery said he will work without payment “in the short term“.

  8. caveman

    IPCC meet Cleveland 351. Bwahahaha!

  9. H B Bear

    Before she became the $106bn woman, don’t forget that K D Wrong was the Minister for Global Warming.

    Surely K D couldn’t get it wrong?

  10. Rabz

    the warming is hiding in the ocean

    “The dog ate my homework” of catastrophist bollocks.

  11. Winny

    It seems that the link does not work.

  12. boy on a bike

    They won’t find the missing heat deep in the oceans. It’s in the same place as all my missing socks.

    Seriously though – saying it’s deep in the ocean – in a place where measurements have not been taken – is just ludicrous.

  13. Leo G

    The IPCC’s dilemma is this. How can it expect the public to believe that recent warming is mostly manmade when the models on which it has based this claim have been shown to be fatally flawed?

    The models will be changed but the claims of an anthropogenic cause of climate change have always been tied to political expedients and need a political cure.
    The originator of the ideological linking of climate change with human activity was Joseph Fourier, one time scientific advisor to Napoleon, commissioned to help counter the scientific, industrial and economic dominance of Britain. Britain’s industrial revolution threatened first the French plan for a United States of Europe dominated by France and then the extension of a French colonial empire in the post-Napoleonic era.

  14. cuckoo

    The sooner they get probes into the deep ocean, the better. So they can find that – guess what? – the heat isn’t there either. Except that then they’ll be saying ‘It must have got into the earth’s mantle, where all the magma is, yeah, that’s it…the magma!!’

  15. Bill

    By Jove, I think you’ve got it Leo!

  16. Luke

    Yeah but you got to have loved how it enabled all those high-flying moral superiors to demand us pleb reduce our enjoyment of things that they enjoy in excess. And getting paid to do it.

    Saving the planet one first-class flight at a time!

  17. Gab

    The sooner they get probes into the deep ocean, the better.

    What? You mean they haven’t actually measured the temperature of deep oceans bu they’re saying the warmening is hiding there? Astonishing! That’s not science, that’s guesswork being passed off as evidence.

  18. cuckoo

    Yeah, and ManBearPig is living in my house. At first I was sure he was in the living room, but when I got there he had gone. So I looked in the kitchen, but by then he must have gone to the bathroom. But I know he’s there somewhere! He must be in the garage, as that’s the only place I haven’t looked yet.

  19. Rob MW

    So they reckon the heat is in the ocean but they can’t find it eh ?

    The must be blind……..hot water rises so it should float like a turd in a swimming pool………………ekkkkkk….. there it is over there, everybody out !!!!!!!

  20. dover_beach

    Even if the missing heat is in the deep oceans, it doesn’t matter, practically speaking; it will be as if it has escaped the atmosphere and returned to space. So, whether it is or isn’t there is bad news for CAGW.

  21. harrys on the boat

    ”The heat is still coming in, but it appears to have gone into the deep ocean and, frustratingly, we do not have the instruments to measure there,” said Professor Ted Shepherd of Reading University.

    Surely if hammys “worlds greatest treasurer” quote can make it as a Liberty Quote, then this gem should make it!

  22. Pyrmonter

    Slightly OT – hadn’t seen this, but following shortly on Ronald Coase, the author of one of the first ripostes to environmental hysteria has died:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/us/david-s-landes-historian-and-author-is-dead-at-89.html?smid=pl-share&_r=0.

    Whatever ones views on AGW (and, at least in IMHO, reasonable people can disagree), the more important issue are the postulated human responses. Landes’ work Prometheus Unbound was an early contribution to the view that capitalist economies are capable of remarkable flexibility in the face of adverse circumstances (even Carbon Taxes).

  23. Pyrmonter

    Oops – confusing Shelley with Landes. The Unbound Prometheus

  24. Rabz

    Before she became the $106bn woman, don’t forget that K D Wrong was the Minister for Global Warming.

    Wendy Pong will eventually be viewed by history in the same way as that mafioso buffoon, Al Grassby.

  25. PEB

    A theory that can’t successfully predict a simple scalar value – the mean temperature of the atmosphere at the earth’s surface. What an epic fail!

  26. cohenite

    AGW could not be more wrong; not only is there no missing heat [in the deep ocean, yeah right, along with Moby Dick and Big-foot], no temperature rise, in fact no evidence of increased energy in the atmosphere or oceans but the idea that the increase in CO2 levels [the only aspect of AGW which is correct] is due to humans is problematic.

    So, even if CO2 increase does cause the wretched things alarmists say it does the evidence suggests the increase is natural. But in fact it doesn’t; CO2 follows temperature, does not cause it.

  27. stackja

    Rabz
    #1012463, posted on September 24, 2013 at 1:01 pm
    Before she became the $106bn woman, don’t forget that K D Wrong was the Minister for Global Warming.
    Wendy Pong will eventually be viewed by history in the same way as that mafioso buffoon, Al Grassby.

    Al was not as bad!

  28. Rabz

    Stackja – read up on Grassby, it’s not edifying.

  29. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    What makes it worse is that assorted gullible fuckwits berated sceptics like us for not believing ‘va soyance’, when all along none of the ‘scientists’ would have been a me to pass a first year econometrics course.

    Unbelievable.

  30. Borisgodunov

    Has scamberras green/unionist guvmint made the statue to the sleazy grasby yet? i suggest they make it out of old buts of marihuana,grown by grasbys maaaates in Griffith ! Dirty little alp crook in the classic NSW rooked alpway? grasby was e en a bit more disgusting thanthe crooked jooLIAR and kevin reinthe “employment advisor”!

  31. boy on a bike

    Actually, 1/3 of the the missing heat is in Area 51.

    Another third is in the Bermuda Triangle.

    The rest is warming the bedroom of the Loch Ness monster.

  32. boy on a bike

    It’s in the deep oceans alright – warming the city of Atlantis.

  33. Gab

    Actually, 1/3 of the the missing heat is in Area 51.

    Another third is in the Bermuda Triangle.

    The rest is warming the bedroom of the Loch Ness monster.

    Don’t be silly. There’s no such thing a the Bermuda Triangle. It’s Hollywood fiction.

  34. manalive

    O T comment.

    The question comes down to what Groucho Marx once asked, “Who ya gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes” …

    That brilliant rejoinder quoted is actually spoken by Chico in Duck Soup.
    Firefly (Groucho) has just left Mrs Teasdale’s boudoir and Chicollini (Chico) comes in disguised as Firefly while Mrs Teasdale’s back is turned:
    Mrs. Teasdale: Your Excellency, I thought you’d left!
    Chicolini: Oh no, I no leave.
    Mrs. Teasdale: But I saw you with my own eyes!
    Chicolini: Well, who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?

    I’m not sure who wrote it but that line had me in stitches as a kid, I still think it’s quite abstract and profound.

  35. Empire Strikes Back

    Don’t be silly. There’s no such thing a the Bermuda Triangle. It’s Hollywood fiction.

    I wouldn’t have picked you for a Bermuda Triangle denier Gab. What about the children?

  36. Splatacrobat

    Go easy guys. Most men are lucky to find a G spot let alone a hot spot somewhere in the ocean. When Gaia starts to moan they will know they are close.

  37. egg_

    no evidence of increased energy in the atmosphere or oceans

    One would think that Dark Warming/Energy(TM) would show its presence in some shape or form?

  38. incoherent rambler

    AGW is now a purely political argument

    It is no longer a matter of arguing the “science”. It is now a matter of convincing idiot politicians and bureaucrats that they have been deceived.

    Anyone who starts the conversation with “I believe …” is arguing politics, not science.

  39. Dan

    30k raised so far
    will pay for Flannery (only him) for 8 weeks
    LOL!!

    Maybe people could just read the executive summary at the front of the IPPC’s reports for nothing

  40. Pauly

    Thank you manalive.

    Chico’s greatest line should not be ascribed to his brother. Maybe there is a sanity clause after all.

  41. Cold-Hands

    Has scamberras green/unionist guvmint made the statue to the sleazy grasby yet?

    ‘Twas unveiled in 2007. Unfortunately, it’s indoors, so the pigeons cannot express society’s judgement on this statue of a criminal.

  42. G’Day Catters,

    The bulk of recent warming has been in the oceans. Contrary to some misconceptions here, that heat has been and is being measured.

    The supposed 15 year hiatus in global warming referred to by AGW skeptics is based on the fact that the land temperatures in the 1998 calendar year have not yet been surpassed. But the hottest 12 month period for the planet ever recorded for land temperatures was from June 2009 to May 2010.

    Of course, it is fallacious in any case to consider only air temperatures. We need to consider the total heat content of the land, atmosphere and oceans combined to see whether or not warming is continuing.

    It is.

  43. cohenite

    Oh goodie, a new dickhead to play with; barra links to fucking Sks, who in turn links to the paper co-authored by Trenberth which purports to have found, at last, Trenberth’s missing heat sitting under a sperm whale’s arse in the abysmal ocean.

    Trenberth’s paper is:

    Distinctive climate signals in reanalysis of global ocean heat content. By Magdalena A. Balmaseda, Kevin E. Trenberth and Erland Kallen. Published in Geophysical Research Letters, 2013.

    Some salient facts:

    1 Sea surface temperatures are falling.

    2 Ocean heat content [OHC] to 700 meters is flat.

    3 So how can heat from the atmosphere bypass the surface and upper part of the ocean and heat the fucking ocean bottom? Trenberth says:

    “Sensitivity experiments illustrate that surface wind variability is largely responsible for the changing ocean heat vertical distribution.”

    So has wind variability increased? No.

    The other point to be made is that AGW heating involves extra CO2 in the atmosphere ‘trapping’ outgoing LW radiation and via isotropy sending 1/2 of that radiation back to Earth. That is the mechanism of AGW heating. The problem is that downward re-radiated LW radiation cannot penetrate the ocean surface; it cannot therefore be responsible for any increase in OHC. Only solar radiation cannot penetrate the ocean surface.

    This is basic physics; yet we still have ratbags taking notice of Sks and other ideological driven sources arguing that humans are driving the climate. These bastards couldn’t drive a billy-cart but when you think the sun shines out of your arse the skies the limit I suppose.

  44. cohenite

    Oh goodie, a new dickhead to play with; barra links to fucking Sks, who in turn links to the paper co-authored by Trenberth which purports to have found, at last, Trenberth’s missing heat sitting under a sperm whale’s arse in the abysmal ocean.

    Trenberth’s paper is:

    Distinctive climate signals in reanalysis of global ocean heat content. By Magdalena A. Balmaseda, Kevin E. Trenberth and Erland Kallen. Published in Geophysical Research Letters, 2013.

    Some salient facts:

    1 Sea surface temperatures are falling.

    2 Ocean heat content [OHC] to 700 meters is flat.

    3 So how can heat from the atmosphere bypass the surface and upper part of the ocean and heat the fucking ocean bottom? Trenberth says:

    “Sensitivity experiments illustrate that surface wind variability is largely responsible for the changing ocean heat vertical distribution.”

    So has wind variability increased? No.

    The other point to be made is that AGW heating involves extra CO2 in the atmosphere ‘trapping’ outgoing LW radiation and via isotropy sending 1/2 of that radiation back to Earth. That is the mechanism of AGW heating. The problem is that downward re-radiated LW radiation cannot penetrate the ocean surface; it cannot therefore be responsible for any increase in OHC. Only solar radiation cannot penetrate the ocean surface.

    This is basic physics; yet we still have ratbags taking notice of Sks and other ideological driven sources arguing that humans are driving the climate. These bastards couldn’t drive a billy-cart but when you think the sun shines out of your arse the skies the limit I suppose.

  45. cohenite

    I’ll try again without the links since my reply to the Sks refugee is in moderation.

    Oh goodie, a new dickhead to play with; barra links to fucking Sks, who in turn links to the paper co-authored by Trenberth which purports to have found, at last, Trenberth’s missing heat sitting under a sperm whale’s arse in the abysmal ocean.

    Trenberth’s paper is:

    Distinctive climate signals in reanalysis of global ocean heat content. By Magdalena A. Balmaseda, Kevin E. Trenberth and Erland Kallen. Published in Geophysical Research Letters, 2013.

    Some salient facts:

    1 Sea surface temperatures are falling.

    2 Ocean heat content [OHC] to 700 meters is flat.

    3 So how can heat from the atmosphere bypass the surface and upper part of the ocean and heat the fucking ocean bottom? Trenberth says:

    “Sensitivity experiments illustrate that surface wind variability is largely responsible for the changing ocean heat vertical distribution.”

    So has wind variability increased? No.

    The other point to be made is that AGW heating involves extra CO2 in the atmosphere ‘trapping’ outgoing LW radiation and via isotropy sending 1/2 of that radiation back to Earth. That is the mechanism of AGW heating. The problem is that downward re-radiated LW radiation cannot penetrate the ocean surface; it cannot therefore be responsible for any increase in OHC. Only solar radiation cannot penetrate the ocean surface.

    This is basic physics; yet we still have ratbags taking notice of Sks and other ideological driven sources arguing that humans are driving the climate. These bastards couldn’t drive a billy-cart but when you think the sun shines out of your arse the skies the limit I suppose.

  46. james

    Hi Baraholka!

    Aw you quoted skeptical science!

    How cute.

  47. cohenite

    My comments in reply to barra are all in moderation; is swearing now banned at Catallaxy?

  48. Catfeesh?

    How are you measuring those deep oceans again, baraholka?

  49. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B

    Some lovely theories there, Bara. A bit far-fetched, though. Not much evidence presented either.

    As ever with warmies.

  50. JC

    Bara

    How eggactly did the warm water get to the deep ocean? Here was thinking that warm air/water has a rising tendency. Furthermore there’s no real record that surface temp has warmed enough to get to the deep ocean, you fucking clown.

    And one more thing, the temp has to get from the atmosphere to the ocean. How did it get to the ocean when there’s been no noticeable rise in atmospheric temps over the past 17 odd years.

    STFU Bara.

  51. Viva

    When Gaia starts to moan they will know they are close

    .

    LOL – Gold.

  52. cohenite

    Apologies for the multiple posts. I initially thought it was the number of links, then the type of links, then the cussing and then the bourbon.

  53. .

    How eggactly did the warm water get to the deep ocean? Here was thinking that warm air/water has a rising tendency. Furthermore there’s no real record that surface temp has warmed enough to get to the deep ocean, you fucking clown.

    Has this ever been measured or tested?

    If the measurements say otherwise, the whole thing is bollocks, and clearly earth can radiate energy somewhat like a black body.

  54. JC

    How eggactly did the warm water get to the deep ocean?

    The linked article I gave you before provided some starter clues: Pacific Decadal Oscillation and La Nina. Look for the paragraph which begins So what’s causing this transfer of heat to the deeper ocean layers? To which can also be added Thermohaline Circulation (Hint: THERMOhaline CIRCULATION)

    Quite simply heat does not travel directly downwards in oceans in the one-dimensional manner you imagine.

  55. Rousie

    Barra – so you’re saying it’s a different kind of hot?

  56. .

    Oh bullshit. Who says the ocean data hasn’t been maipulated like the hockey stick or an IPCC forecast?

    Pacific Decadal Oscillation and La Nina

    Yeah bullshit. Da warming caused the last drought.

    We had a worse drought in the 1890s and it was hotter in the 1940s.

    Of course, you don’t have ocean temp measurements like now as you would have in the 1890s or 1940s, but you are sure your theory is true and correct. You’ve also proven those measurements were causally because of warming due to CO2 production.

    So why did the oceans only take up extra heat since 1998?

    Keep spinning the bullshit.

  57. brc

    Even if the extremely-far-fetched ocean heat theory is correct – it makes not a zot of difference as far as humans go.

    All of the catastrophic-AGW models talk about a positive feedback model of increased water vapour causing extra warming.

    If the heat is going to the bottom of the ocean – no extra water vapour, no extra heat, no positive feedback, no problem.

    Put away the windmills, because there is no longer an issue.

    You’d think these guys would be happy about that- the sperm whales might notice a minuscule difference, but for the rest of the inhabitants it makes no difference at all.

    There is no ‘C’ in ‘CAGW’. So show a bit of enthusiasm!

  58. cohenite

    The linked article I gave you before provided some starter clues: Pacific Decadal Oscillation and La Nina. Look for the paragraph which begins So what’s causing this transfer of heat to the deeper ocean layers? To which can also be added Thermohaline Circulation (Hint: THERMOhaline CIRCULATION)

    The thermohaline circulation is a product of temperature differences not a cause. The PDO and La Nina are the same thing and is a primary mechanism for distributing energy.

    Hint: Dumb.

  59. Gab

    I saw what you did there. Rousie 🙂

  60. Rousie

    Good times Gab. Good times.

  61. face ache

    Whatever happened to that El Nino and La Nina couple. They were lovely and seemed to explain all sorts of stuff about the climate. They went on a holiday and the nutters took over. Come back please La and El.

  62. These 30 day and 90 day averages show the situation is weakly La Nina.
    Some graphs here – show that from early 2012 the SOI has been in that zone between +10 & -10.
    “Undecided”.

  63. jupes

    Thanks for all the above cohenite.

    They certainly have a strange moderation policy here, even if it is used infrequently.

  64. Leo G

    I see we have been visited by a barker for the Skeptical Science circus.
    This time the lecturer from clown alley is telling us that the net effect of the thermohaline circulation is the transfer of heat from the atmosphere to the deep oceans, and not the poleward transfer of heat generally believed by those ‘outside the tent’.
    The clown should tell us what process creates the heated more saline waters that do some of the ‘heat sinking’ in the thermohaline circulation. Hint: it has to do with sunshine.
    The net effect of the thermohaline circulation is heat loss from the oceans, not heat transfer the other way.

  65. iamok

    I was thinking about the “how does warmer stuff stay lower rather than float to the top?” question, and it’s simple really. If the warmer lower stuff is still cooler than the stuff above it then it will stay below. So I am OK with that now and I can feel satisfied.

    What I can’t accept though is the clear ManBearPig crap (as noted above) that it’s here but we can’t see it, but let’s ramp up the problem anyway. This is bordering on medieval hysteria type hype, which of course is the aim of the whole exercise. Maybe REM had it right all those years ago – and this is the new religion.

    We will now have to shift from Global Warming, to Climate Change to what? Deep Water Throbosis? Good god this really is kid’s stuff isn’t it? And to think my highly qualified scientist relative worries himself to almost to death over this has me befuddled. Maybe he’s right – but no I think not, he has lived inside the gravy train bubble for far too long I’m afraid.

  66. Robert O.

    It is inane not to believe in climate change; it does and always has, and I note that Messrs. Albanese, Hunt, Shorten and Ms. Mine do too. The problem is they can believe they can prevent it somehow by demonising that very important element to life, carbon. I am amazed as to the lack of basic scientific knowledge of these people. They appear to have never heard about photosynthesis which allows the synthesis of carbohydrate in plants from carbon dioxide and provides us with oxygen to breathe; that all animals depend on this photo-chemical reaction since they cannot synthesise carbohydrate which provides the energy for life.
    The fact that there is no correlation between levels of carbon dioxide, a minor component of the atmosphere, 0.04%, and global temperatures for the past 15+years means that any carbon tax,or whatever, will achieve nought.

    Since levels of carbon dioxide have been increasing why not look at the fact that animal populations have increased and all animals exhale carbon dioxide; it’s a good hypothesis.

  67. Popular Front

    The ‘Global Warming’ is hiding in the ocean? That is the most preposterous theory yet offered in this farce.
    The only reason the oceans are warm at swimming/surfing level is because of good ol’ Mother Sun. The deeper you go the colder it gets. Do these Warming howler monkeys actually think the average punter is going to beleive them?

  68. incoherent rambler

    Cohenite points out some of the basics. However, this is playing the warmist game.
    Global warming/cooling is irrelevant unless you can a) prove that humans are responsible for the change (via CO2) and b) show that this has a deleterious impact.

    Yes, it has been shown that the Urban Heat Island has local impact (which has got nothing to do with CO2 and many warmists deny it exists). As thing stand, neither a) nor b) has empirical evidence to back up the theory. The lack of empirical evidence is why distraught rent seekers go looking for heat at the bottom of the ocean (and in the closet, the laundry, damn, it must be somewhere).

    At best, taxes on energy are based on an unproven theory. At worst, energy taxes are based on a scientific scam.

    The demonization of atmospheric CO2 is scientific bollocks.

  69. Cohenite,

    Ocean heat content [OHC] to 700 meters is flat.

    It’s not.

    Your assertion is based on the linked Nova piece which itself uses
    Bob Tisdale: Is Ocean Heat Content Data All Its Stacked Up To Be as its primary source.

    Tisdale’s OHC stuff is a crock. He cherry picked the data in a particularly shameless manner then falsified the Climate Model predictions. Tamino’s demolition of Tisdale is here

    I’ll get back to your other points later

  70. .

    Tamino?

    He doesn’t even understand time series analysis. What a hoax.

    Sceptics hide the decline but warmies refuse to acknowledge the urban heat island effect?

    What a sick joke.

  71. Gab

    It’s like all the old arguments that have been squashed are being regurgitated here by an old warmerist frozen in time. Give up, the war was over some time ago.

  72. Rip van Baraholka is a sacrificial rearguard. He will never be forgotten for his sacrifice to help safeguard the gravy train billions of the AGW movement.
    But we will point and snigger, and roll our eyes…

Comments are closed.