Posted by: graemebird | November 28, 2006 is not Real Climate…. Field Workers are not Field Marshalls.

Its got to be a power trip with these clowns.

If we could just deflate the egos of the specialists and were able to get straight answers from them we would have a good understanding of this climate deal in weeks.

I have the policy of still tending to trust these tax-eating science-workers in their specific field of specialisation.

But this particular bunch of idiot-savants have gone further and they have set up a website for world spiritual and economic domination and they call this website REALCLIMATE.

None of these guys would be worthy to lick the souls of the feet of a real scientist. But I cannot doubt them on their individual specialties.

So for the time being I’ll bitch-slap them on their appalling logic.

Now one of them has decided that a very minor averaged-out cooling in the Stratosphere supports their CO2-is-the-main-driver IDIOCY

You will be wearily familiar with this. If it cools its global warming. If it warms… its global warming… And if it stays the same… Well thats global warming too and industrial-CO2 is to blame.

At this point I think I’ll just quote the Field-Worker (whose lost all perspective and thinks he’s a Field Marshall) and let you figure out how good the logic is.

“A timely perspective article in Science this week addresses the issues of upper atmosphere change. ‘Upper’ atmosphere here is the stratosphere up to the ionosphere (~20 to 300 km). Laštovička et al point out that cooling trends are exactly as predicted by increasing greenhouse gas trends, and that the increase in density that this implies is causing various ionspheric layers to ‘fall’. This was highlighted a few years back by Jarvis et al (1998) and in New Scientist in 1999 (and I apologise for stealing their headline!).

The changes in the figure are related to the cooling seen in the lower stratospheric MSU-4 records (UAH or RSS), but the changes there (~ 15-20 km) are predominantly due to ozone depletion. The higher up one goes, the more important the CO2 related cooling is. It’s interesting to note that significant solar forcing would have exactly the opposite effect (it would cause a warming) – yet another reason to doubt that solar forcing is a significant factor in recent decades.”

A tiny averaged out change in temperature of the Stratosphere. And its……. (industrial-C02-based) Global Warming?!!! (you idiots).

Do any of you guys out in LAITY-LAND doubt……. that HAD the Stratosphere WARMED AT ALL during that time then that would also have been due to …………….. Global Warming?… At least in the testimony of

Ambient CO2 levels have been rising since the industrial age for the most part. And particularly since the end of World War II.

So check out this chart of homogenised Stratospheric temperature changes… For a start they are tiny. Secondly the cooling bias only goes back to mid-1993. Thirdly the stats themselves go back scarcely further then that.


To BUY such an analysis with such lame evidence.

As I said: the ALLEGED cooling bias only goes back to mid-to-early 1993.

Thats not a whole lot earlier then when we had a phase-change in the North Atlantic Oscillation by the way.

Looking at the sloppiness of the inductive inferences of these guys might have to become an ongoing task for this blog.

Its a dirty job.

But somebody’s got to do it.


Gavin subsequently posted links which far more convincingly makes his case. Actually the site he linked is a very good site in its own right and a far better place to get information from then real-climate.



  1. Hello,

    I was looking around the net for some information about who is and who funds them, what their origin was, stuff like that. Seems everyone crawls up the ass of anyone that doesnt buy into man caused global disaster, I wanted to learn more about these ‘scientists’ that have this site and what their funding source is. You seemed to know something about them judging from your article here, what else can you share or what information sources can you direct me towards?



  2. Those guys are from all over the place.

    I just know they run a tendentious website and will not allow you to probe very far.

    But if you watch them long enough they just come across as mindless ideologues.
    They just don’t have the data to suggest that CO2 is that important in the time period we are talking about.

    In any case you ought to be able to find bios on all of them if you go to their site.

    They used to have pictures of each of them. There’ll be one guy in New Zealand and another in America and so forth.

    Michael Mann is infamous for that Hockey stick graph.

    They piss me off more then anyone with the exception of Tim Lambert. Since its the laity like myself that need to be able to get hold of good information from the specialists.

    But these tax-eaters do not present their data in such a way as to be user-friendly.

    I Would go to Art Robinson and the Oregon petition. Thats a pretty good summary of where the science is.

    Check out a guy called SOLANKI at the Max Plank institute. He’s reconstructed solar irradiance back hundreds of years and shows how it correlates pretty closely to average air temperature.

    There’s a guy called Bill Gray who predicts hurricanes and so forth.

    Actually not from the point of view of original science. But just as a good communicator of how the weather works…. You can pick up a few of Evelyn Garriss newsletters.

    But the thing is both sides aren’t doing that bang-up a job.

    I mean if I want to find something I just cannot find it.

    So for example if you see a graph showing average air temperature its really hard to find out whether that….. includes ocean air…. whether it includes Antarctica…… Whether it excludes heat islands (ie the growing cities).

    The alarmist-denialists are just miserly with their specialist knowledge and about how their data is put together.

    Someone who has had much the same problems as me getting to grips with this is a fellow called bumpy111 or something similiar at YouTube.

    I think he does a great job at showing the dishonest history of this movement. He gives you a great outline of just how shabby the science behind this has been. And they are really interesting little videos he publishers.

    But just look over my blog here and that will get you started. I’ve got quite a few links to do with global warming if you go back over the last six months.

    But bear in mind I’m no climate scientist. So I’m just trying to work through this in my own way having found that the self-appointed CONSENSUS had been corrupted and now is full of shit.

  3. check out William’s edit history on Wikipedia.

    Nothing but climate stuff. Also, if you look at what he is doing and what he is saying and what speech he is limiting there, it will realy piss you off more.

  4. Google “The Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008” to get an understanding of the reason for the relentless Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) propaganda pounding us day in and day out. Here’s a very telling extract:

    “CO2 Capture Credit. The bill provides a $10 credit per ton for the first 75 million
    metric tons of CO2 captured and transported from an industrial source for use in
    enhanced oil recovery and $20 credit per ton for CO2 captured and transported from
    an industrial source for permanent storage in a geologic formation. Qualifying
    facilities must capture at least 500,000 metric tons of CO2 per year. The credit applies
    to CO2 stored or used in the United States.”

    Hidden amongst the AGW BS is the plan to richly compensate oil companies for their use of carbon dioxide to enhance oil recovery in old wells around the planet. Rather than simply telling people that we are at the threshold of Peak Oil, the powers-that-be feel compelled to gin up a proxy (AGW) hoax which blames humans for adding to a “trace” atmospheric gas thus justifying unbounded political action and spending to counter the “environmental disaster”. This bill pays oil companies to pump CO2 out of one underground source site, transport it to an oil recovery site and pump it back in to facilitate oil recovery. AWG is a total and complete fabrication. The government has paid billions to have academics “create” AGW papers and computer simulations which 1) show warming is bad, instead of good, and 2) blame humans for producing an atmospheric trace gas (CO2), which happens to be essential for food crop and forest production. Welcome to “1984”.

  5. That sounds kind of right. The dual fuckup of paradigms. Failing to accept peak oil and buying into global warming.

    “Carbon Capture”. A two-worded proof that the stupid have become upwardly-mobile.

  6. Jimmy Wales was pandhandling for money just a little while ago. It can be a pretty useful resource but if Wales is unwilling to collar these little bitches like William Connelly and stop them wrecking the public information then no fucker ought to have given Wales a cent. It would probably be better just to get rid of Wiki. Rather then letting it become a centre for leftist perversion of knowledge.

  7. Hello webmaster
    I would like to share with you a link to your site
    write me here

  8. Hello mates, its impressive article on the topic of teachingand completely explained, keep it up all the time.

  9. Tremendous issues here. I am very happy to see your post.
    Thanks a lot and I am looking forward to contact you.
    Will you kindly drop me a mail?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: