I admit to being bored with the petty deniers and conspiracy theorists at WUWT. What's happening at the political level in the USA and Australia is much more fascinating in a grim way. Still, until I have a bit more time to focus on the blog, you'll have to make do with this mini-update about the goings on in deniersville - from Eric Worrall, Andy May, Willis Eschenbach and Ira Glickstein, PhD.
Eric Worrall is still in charge at WUWT. Anthony Watts handed over his blog some time ago and, despite making an occasional brief appearance and promising more, he hasn't delivered yet. Eric is complaining about Pope Francis and young priests learning about climate and nature (archived here). He thinks they should only care about souls and hell and heaven I guess and should forgo any urge to show charity or care for the world upon which the living live. He's also complaining about the sequel to “An Inconvenient Truth”, which is to be shown at Sundance, and distributed by Paramount later next year (archived here).
Wondering Willis Eschenbach has made a couple of appearances lately too (here and here). Nothing to write home about. He doesn't like the clean renewables revolution is one of his messages. I guess he's a dirty old coal man who wants to go back to living in the grimy smog-filled past. He also approves of witch hunts against climate scientists for doing responsible research. He's keen to "shoot the messenger", like most of his fellow climate science disinformers who want the world to burn.
Andy May has been working furiously to prove to himself and everyone else that the world is about to cool down (archived here). This time around he wrote about a paper he hasn't read, and in doing so resorts to misquotes and misrepresentations, and Judith Curry of all people, as well as some European deniers: Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Professor Fritz Vahrenholt, as translated by blogging disinformer, Pierre Gosselin. Andy's trick is to remove the secular trend and claim that all the warming is just a cycle. That trick's been tried before, by John McLean and co., you may recall. When pushed as to what's causing the secular trend (the long term rise in global temperature), Andy figures it's just another cycle.
Cycles on cycles giving rise to temperatures not seen before since civilisation began. Those are some cycles, aren't they!
Andy thinks it's about to cool down and, referring to the already defunct stadium wave, suggests "it will start getting colder around 2020 and it will be noticeable by 2030". How long has he been waiting for that to happen?
The latest is from Ira Glickstein, PhD (archived here), who, like most committed science deniers, still hasn't learnt the first thing about climate, despite writing several blog articles for Anthony Watts over the years.
His main point is that there cannot be different causes of the same effect. He noted that in the past, warming from other causes caused the oceans to release CO2 (which causes more warming, though Ira doesn't acknowledge that bit). He argues, fallaciously, that this means that increased atmospheric CO2 cannot cause warming now. He's wrong, of course, as are all greenhouse effect deniers. Just because a flood was caused by a burst water main last year, doesn't mean that a flood this year couldn't have been caused by the torrential rain his town had.
Ira's article, like one of Eric's, was written about An Inconvenient Truth. I'd say that deniers are getting upset that a follow up film is coming out. He decided to misrepresent the film, and wrote a strawman based on flawed arithmetic. Ira wrote:
Gore points out that CO2 levels 50 years in the future will approach 600 ppm, and asks:
“If this much on the cold side is a mile of ice over our heads, what would that much on the warmer side be?"
He knows that his audience will assume, incorrectly, that Temperatures will rise in proportion, by about 25⁰C (45⁰F).
Most of the audience of An Inconvenient Truth wouldn't be as dumb as Ira. Ira doesn't even mention the scientific expectation that each doubling of CO2 results in a rise in global surface temperature of between 1.5 ⁰C and 4.5 ⁰C with a best estimate around 3 ⁰C. 600 ppm is a bit more than double the pre-industrial CO2 levels. The temperature now is a bit over 1 ⁰C higher than it was before industrialisation. So the rise would be around another 2 ⁰C eventually, at 600 ppm. I've know idea where Ira got his notion of an additional 25 ⁰C. Pulled it out of his hat, I suppose.
I haven't seen the film so I can't verify what Ira wrote about it above. It strikes me that Ira was conflating CO2 and temperature. Mostly the notion is that an ice age will occur with a drop in surface temperature of 4 ⁰C or 5 ⁰C, and that one can therefore ponder what a rise of 4 ⁰C or 5 ⁰C would do to the world we live in. It would pose great difficulties from excessive heat just as there would be great difficulties from excessive cold.
If these chaps jumped off a cliff, they'd be saying to each other "we're going to stop falling down soon and fall back up to the top any second now."
Enough of that nonsense. AGU16 beckons and I expect most of you would rather find out the latest in science than read repeats of denier pseudo-science claptrap.
From the HotWhopper archives
- In Eric Worrall's logically fallacious opinion - aerosols and climate change - May 2016
- Eric Worrall celebrates misery, at WUWT - July 2016
- Persil-brains: with James Inhofe, Eric Worrall, Andy May and WUWT - July 2016
- Deniers against nature at WUWT with Andy May - September 2016
- Uncritical thinking about climate change, from Andy May and WUWT fans - October 2016
- Denier weirdness: It's not CO2, it's aeroplanes (sez Willis Eschenbach) - April 2013
- Wondering Willis Eschenbach's Thunderstorm at WUWT - October 2013
- On forcing and feedback with Willis Eschenbach - August 2015
- Where is the cooling, Ira Glickstein? It's a travesty... - October 2013
- Ira Glickstein's denialist stew: Mix a bit of physics with deception and stir with speculation at WUWT - January 2014
- More on the musings of Eric Worrall and Willis Eschenbach