.

Monday, September 30, 2013

WUWT tabloid science

Sou | 6:33 PM Go to the first of 4 comments. Add a comment

Anthony Watts' followers at WUWT reject climate science in favour of tabloid "science".  Perennially puzzled Bob Tisdale writes (archived here):
I figured today would be a good day to post this, with David Rose’s article in the “Sunday Mail” 
Instead of looking to the IPCC for a compilation of climate science, fake skeptics go to the erudite scientific journal the Mail Online to fossick among headlines about someone's ponytail, someone else's camel toe and someone (I think it's a person) called Honey Boo Boo (click image to enlarge):


Source: MailOnline

So today, in honour of tabloid science at WUWT, HotWhopper will report in tabloid style!

Now where is that sciency article by Judith Curry's latest pin-up boy, David Rose, I wonder?  Found it! It's archived here.  Let's see what David Rose has dreamt up this time.


Jilted celebrity Arctic Ice now on the Rebound!


Here's something.  Daily Fail reports that jilted celebrity Arctic Ice, whose ratings in the last few years had gone into a nosedive, is on the rebound. David Rose reports to his devoted illiterati audience:
While 2013 remains the sixth lowest Arctic sea ice year since 1979, forthcoming research suggests the long-term melting trend is partly cyclical, and may have begun a reversal.

"This is beyond me" admits star-struck Judith Curry to her new-found idol


In other breaking news, David Rose quotes his latest tabloid darling, star-struck Judith Curry, writing:
However, not only does the report deny the importance of the pause, it makes a firm, short-term forecast that it is about to end – claiming that the period 2016-2035 will, on average, be 0.3-0.7C hotter than 1986-2005.
That, said Prof Judith Curry, head of climate science at the Georgia Institute of Technology, is a high-risk strategy: ‘The IPCC has thrown down the gauntlet.’
Should the pause continue, she said, ‘they are toast’.  
She was critical about the report’s statement that confidence humans had caused most of the warming of the 20th Century had increased from 90 per cent in the last IPCC report in 2007 to 95 per cent.
‘How they can justify this is beyond me.’
Pop star and illiterati heart-throb Judith Curry admitted to reporter David Rose "...this is beyond me". 

After some digging this reporter has discovered the "toast" Judith talks about are the world's leading climate scientists, who have been hilariously talking as if the world is going to get toasted.  However, anyone who reads the world's most viewed climate website will know that by 2020 the world will be in the depths of an ice age.  What "the toast" don't realise, which readers of Daily Fail have known for some time, is that the warming since the Little Ice Age was caused by a magical bounce, aka off with the pixies.


Daily Fail reports: Scientific experts are implausible and hilariously incoherent


There is more skulduggery as Professor Richard (deep throat) Lindzen solemnly declares "hilarious incoherence".  While business analyst Bjorn Lomborg, who has the best interest of the Daily Fail's illiterati at heart, pronounces the world's top scientific experts as being "implausible".  The Daily Fail's resident climate scientist and heart-throb David Rose agrees, pointing out that "1997 was not a hot year".  

To demonstrate just how cold it was in 1997, HotWhopper has dug up this animated chart of global surface temperatures showing just how freezing cold it was in 1997 compared to now and all the boiling hot years before 1997:

Data Source: NASA

If the freezing cold of 1997 doesn't prove to you that global warming is a giant hoax then I don't know what will convince you.  

Footnote and warning: This reporter has been informed by reliably unreliable sources that anyone who still isn't convinced of the giant hoax is at serious risk of having their membership of the illustrious organisation, the Scientific Illiterati, cancelled.

Click here for more sciency-sounding (sort of) confabulations from Daily Fail's pet Professor, Judith Curry.

4 comments:

john byatt said...

dam, you cannot fool the climate sceptics party

look they say there is supposed to be 97% consensus, yet here in their own document it only says 95% certainty,

what happened to the other 2% ???

the blog is run by a supposed accountant

Sou said...

"Consensus" sounds very much like "certainty" - that is, they both start with a "c".

I suppose they are referring to this statement:

This evidence for human influence has grown since AR4. It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.

Where "extremely likely" is defined as meaning 95–100% probability, which starts with a "p" and so does "percentage".

So easy for the poor "skeptics" (spelt with a "k") to get confused (which starts with a "c") :D

George Montgomery said...

Here's two 'headlines' containing words starting with "c" that the skeptics can identify with.
In the style of Marie Antoinette: "Let Them Eat Coal!"
From the Tony Abbott school of politics: "We Can Turn Back the Cold!"

Alan C said...

It is an understandable mistake. I often confuse WUWT with WTF - they both begin with a W :D