Climate: investigation alarmism and irrresponsible science writing.

Jo Nova challenges the 13 “prominent scientists” who don’t want any investigation into the state of climate science.

Surveys show half of the Australian public are skeptical — unconvinced by their claims that coal will cause a climate crisis or that solar panels can stop the storms. Right now, if the climate is headed for a disaster, nothing is more important than convincing the public. Instead, the climate scientists keep repeating that the debate is over, “trust us”, and “don’t ask questions”. But the debate never happened, the public don’t trust them, and we have many many questions — and they are not going away.

In a Reuters poll, 57% of people said they don’t think UN Climate Scientists can speak with authority on climate. Some scientists keep repeating that there is a consensus, but that spin isn’t working. More of the same isn’t going to change that. It’s time for a real debate.

Alarmist advocacy from the editor of Science. Comment by Judith Curry.

But my main concern is this – the editorial was published in Science and written by McNutt who is the CHIEF EDITOR for Science. I have previously raised the concern about advocacy by professional societies (e.g. AGU, APS) in terms of their policy statements about climate change. My concern re introducing bias in Science is several orders of magnitude greater. Science, along with Nature, has far and away the highest impact factor of any scientific journals on the planet – Science matters. Like Nature, Science sends out for review only a small fraction of the submitted papers. Apart from the role the Chief Editor may have in selecting which papers go out for review or eventually get published, this essay sends a message to the other editors and reviewers that papers challenging the consensus are not to be published in Science. Not to mention giving favored status to papers by activist authors that sound the ‘alarm’ – pal review and all that. After all, ‘the time for debate has ended.’

And Don Aitkin.

Yes, she is plugging the line that Paris meeting in December is vitally important. Before I go on, note that there is no reference to anything written, in that long assertion. In my most recent essay I provided a well-referenced account of just how it is that in fact the world is improving, food supplies increasing, pollutants declining, greening almost everywhere. Here what you get from the Chief Editor of one of the world’s two main science journals (the other being Nature) is a flat statement to the contrary, with no attempt at any kind of argument. Why?

Dr McNutt is the journal’s Chief Editor, and editorials ought to be conveying the ‘position’ of the journal, which is what I take to be the case in this instance. If these were only Dr McNutt’s opinions, then a statement to that effect, familiar to us all, ought to have been added. There is no such statement. If Science does indeed assert that ‘the time for debate has ended’, then it seems, at least to me, that Science is letting down the science community. Surely the real test of a paper’s worth is its inherent quality, argument, evidence and presentation.

As it read it, Science will not consider any paper in climate science that does not support the orthodoxy. That does seem to be an extraordinary position for a leading journal to take.

Light relief. Nine Circles of Climate Scientists Hell.

The Nine Circles.

Seventh Circle: Non-Publication of Data

Phil Jones and colleagues at UEA CRU, and Michael Mann/UVa get star billing here for their determination to avoid FOI requests. Non-archiving of data counts too, but perhaps the most insidious example is the disappearing data from the Polar Urals enabling the perpetuation of the hockey stick sham. The story is well covered by Andrew Montford’s The Yamal Deception:

“… [Steve] McIntyre discovered that an update to the Polar Urals series had been collected in 1999. Through a contact he was able to obtain a copy of the revised series. Remarkably, in the update the eleventh century appeared to be much warmer than in the original – in fact it was higher even than the twentieth century. This must have been a severe blow to paleoclimatologists, a supposition that is borne out by what happened next, or rather what didn’t: the update to the Polar Urals was not published, it was not archived and it was almost never seen again.”

Eighth Circle: Partial Publication of Data

Michael Mann gets a nomination for this circle for telling the story but not the whole story in Nature. Of course Phil Jones and Keith Briffa are condemned here too by Phil Jones’ email:

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

Gergis et al, deserve a mention for prescreening of data (see subtitle “Screening Fallacy” here); selection of proxies in this manner constitutes partial publication – by only publishing the data that fits the presupposed relationship. Partial publication could also be construed from the paper’s subsequent withdrawal – it partly made it.

Ninth Circle: Inventing Data


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Climate: investigation alarmism and irrresponsible science writing.

  1. Leo G

    Dante tells us that those ninth circle data-twisters, the worst of the warmest, are themselves to be twisted and then frozen solid in ice.
    Poetic justice can warm the heart.

  2. Bruce of Newcastle

    Actually the first and most important circle of climate hell is inserting luvvies into any job which has political impact. An example from last week is the very same Ms McNutty.

    Learned societies and Stalinism

    Marcia McNutt, the editor of Science magazine and the author of a recent, moderately bonkers editorial about climate change (discussed by Judith Curry here) has been nominated to be the next head of the US National Academy of Science.

    OK, so “learned society led by politically active environmentalist” is not news, but what about this.

    Under Academy’s bylaws, other candidates could be nominated by NAS members, but that has never happened. McNutt’s name will be presented to the full membership for formal ratification on December 15, the Council said.

    Yes, that’s right. The NAS uses the electoral system pioneered by Stalin and popularised by the Kim family and the Royal Society: one member, one vote, one candidate.

    Take over all the boss positions and enforce the propaganda line. Its little Stalinists all the way up and down the climate hierarchy.

    The only salvation is that CAGW isn’t consistent with the data and even with heroic falsification they won’t be able to hide the cooling as it arrives over the next decade. Which won’t stop them attempting a totalitarian takeover. Fortunately at least it will stop them succeeding.

  3. H B Bear

    The Green-Left Weekly Radio Hour (Early edition) formerly known as AM keeps up the publicity machine ahead of the next Paris talkfest with enviro-cub reporter Jake Sturmer doing some on-air reads for the usual culprits as evidence of a “grass roots” campaign on their political arm,

    JAKE STURMER: A range of environmental organisations and charities are launching a campaign to force Labor to ditch what they say is its small target approach on climate change.

    Oxfam, The Wilderness Society, Solar Citizens and GetUp are on board.

    Sam McLean is GetUp’s national director:


  4. Max

    I wonder how many cases of Childhood depression / anxiety and mental illness can be attributed to all of this “Climate change” crap being pushed unrelentingly in every single subject in schools for the last 30 years.

  5. Ant

    To repeat an earlier post, perfectly applicable here:

    “You are hitting these people with logic and reason. They are not predisposed to react to logic and reason. Many of them are ideologues. The rest are racketeers who are in it for the cash.”

    The latter mostly applies to the pretend scientist frauds who know that clambering onto the Global Warming Racket bandwagon is a sure fire way to the ‘big time’.

  6. Fred Lenin

    The penalty for spreading this Lying Crap should be a Mandatory 20 years in a Strict Regime Work Camp ,not to be eligible for parole for 19 years 11 months and 21 days . With additional time added for infringing Strict Rules that would shut the Stupid Lying Muppets up . Include Lying politicians and union officials in that with the same penalties . That might clean things up a bit .

  7. geoffm

    We know without any argument that our world has not warmed at all for 18 years, and that surely is enough to cause the “warmists” to simply keep their mouths shut on this subject.
    It is also a fact that the Antarctic has gotten colder.
    There surely is no need for anything more.

  8. Nicholas (Self-Sovereignty) Gray

    It is an inconvenient truth that we aren’t going through much climate change. Should we sue Flannery or Hansen to get back the cost of the unfinished Desalination plant?

  9. jumpnmcar

    “New Zealand may not have warmed at all in the past 100 years, according to a peer-reviewed paper published in the international science journal, Environmental Modeling & Assessment. “

  10. Lem

    Honestly, I think right at the moment in Australia, “climate change” (sic) is considered to be a first world 1% problem.

    Well, it is a problem for those who invested heavily in the narrative, because the bottom is falling out of the market.

    Most people I know are more worried about jobs and domestic security, as they rightly should.

  11. LOVO

    Gee it sure was hot last summer. Hotter than the summer before, which was hotter than the summer before, which was hotter than the summer before…..etc. I reckons thems evil scientists must be up to something….mm!!
    Anyhoo I better go check on me Methane Hydrate plume before thems Polar Vortices changes ‘spill’ over……again.
    MM, and I better check on how many weather records were broken today. It sure is hard keeping up with the regularity of the record breaking weather phenomena, ay!!

  12. Bruce of Newcastle

    Gee it sure was hot last summer. Hotter than the summer before, which was hotter than the summer before, which was hotter than the summer before

    No it wasn’t. Been cooling since the turn of the millennium. You just haven’t noticed. The link is to the actual real global temperature data measured by satellite.

  13. Fred Lenin

    Dont matter about the satelite information Bruce , satelites dont have Degree in Gerbil Worming ,( BGW hons . ) and are not living on ” scientific” grants from Temporary Employees of the Taxpayer ( politicians ) ,who only exist due to green preferences . ( God Curse Preferential Voting ).

  14. Fred Lenin

    PS that Lovo is certifiable ! Wotta Wanker!

  15. .

    #1733646, posted on July 9, 2015 at 6:13 pm
    Gee it sure was hot last summer. Hotter than the summer before, which was hotter than the summer before, which was hotter than the summer before…..etc. I reckons thems evil scientists must be up to something….mm!!

    No it wasn’t.

  16. jumpnmcar

    Is LOVO an acronym ?

  17. Boambee John

    H B Bear
    #1733294, posted on July 9, 2015 at 11:27 am
    The Green-Left Weekly Radio Hour (Early edition) formerly known as AM keeps up the publicity machine ahead of the next Paris talkfest with enviro-cub reporter Jake Sturmer doing some on-air reads for the usual culprits as evidence of a “grass roots” campaign on their political arm,


    Should we call him “Der Stuermer”? (Pardon my German, probably misspelt.)

  18. Austin Mangosteen

    The 8 stages of a scam comparing cholesterol with AGW/Climate Change

    The cholesterol scam bears a strong relationship to the anthropogenic global warming scam.
    1) it is propagated by scientists on a non-scientific mission.

  19. JC

    There’s no cholesterol scam Austin. Don’t be taken in by unscientific crap because it supports your hypothesis on gerbil warming.

  20. James Hargrave

    Parkville TAFE is ‘Waging war on Australia’s nastiest parasite’ (won’t have far to look, then).

    Especially as elsewhere, its latest 5-year plan (guns before butter?; lebensraum) offers this muck:
    ‘The strategy is focused on sustainability: environmental, social, organisational and financial. We will develop a sustainability charter which sets out our commitment to social and environmental sustainability [WHAT?] and will inform our teaching, our research and our operations [MUST HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY A LINGUIST]. We will also seek to ensure the sustainability of our institutional performance and reputation through strategic investment in research and teaching.’

    In their tobacco-free campus, perhaps they are smoking something else? But the feel-good poppycock just keeps spewing out of the corporate orifice.

  21. Damienski

    Parkville TAFE is ‘Waging war on Australia’s nastiest parasite’ (won’t have far to look, then).

    Tanya Plibersek?

  22. MAGB

    Victoria’s climate review is now open – submit early and submit often

  23. .

    I think there is a cholesterol scam, JC. I’m not saying high cholesterol isn’t a problem, but…

    No cholesterol: no Vitamin D, hormones or cell walls.

    Most people with “high cholesterol” are as fat as a pregnant cow.

  24. Austin Mangosteen

    Dot is correct JC. Cholesterol is essential for the body. As for:

    Don’t be taken in by unscientific crap because it supports your hypothesis on gerbil warming.

    That which is axiomatic has no need for obfuscatory sophistry requiring a hypothesis to inveigle the gullible by means of hieroglyphic nonsense masquerading as science.

    There is no AGW crisis and there never will be. The second law of thermodynamics instructs us as to the reason that AGW is a false hypothesis. Living thirty years should also do the trick; if not, read some history books about climate change over the last two millennia.

    Just because people have a poor diet full of sugars but insufficient vitamins, minerals and fats, has little to do with the need for cholesterol and much to do with the cholesterol scam. Back in the days when people who survived infancy and lived into their 80s and 90s, because they ate more healthy foods and no junk food, high cholesterol was not an issue.

    Thinking requires cholesterol–cholesterol synthesized by the body, if need be. But then cholesterol is also required for bile, which aids in the digestion and absorption of fats.

    Although it needs to be noted, misadventure in an individuals thinking tends towards warped mindsets that have a habit of causing those unable to cogitate matters thoroughly to spurt bile from the mouth. Without the need to resort to a hypothesis, the fact that those who spurt bile are more common on the wrong side of politics than the right side is self-evident…. Now, why would that be?… A person just might need a hypothesis to find out…. However, that would be like going to the trouble of developing an unnecessary hypothesis as to why there is no anthropic global warming. So why bother. The axiom about the lack of global warming speaks for itself; as does the putrid bitterness of those captive to the wrong side of politics. When something ain’t broke, why try to fix it. Just in case you have not got the point and you need something more pictorial to resolve any dilemmas you might have, maybe Zeg can help here.

Comments are closed.