Science deniers at WUWT excel at getting it wrong...

Today Anthony Watts posted an article on his anti-science blog WUWT about a couple of NASA videos.

First the videos.  These are in relation to a draft paper, National Climate Assessment, which is an assessment of how climate change will affect the USA. The text below the video on YouTube that shows temperature projections describes the videos as (in part):

These visualizations -- which highlight computer model projections from the draft National Climate Assessment -- show how average temperatures could change across the U.S. in the coming decades under two different carbon dioxide emissions scenarios.

Both scenarios project significant warming. A scenario with lower emissions, in which carbon dioxide reaches 550 parts per million by 2100, still projects average warming across the continental U.S. of 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit.

The next video shows projected precipitation in the USA under the same two scenarios.  The description on YouTube includes the following:

The climate of the southwestern U.S. could be a lot drier by 2100. The climate of the northeastern U.S. could be a lot wetter.

New visualizations of computer model projections show how precipitation patterns could change across the U.S. in the coming decades under two different carbon dioxide emissions scenarios. The two climate scenarios, based on "low" and "high" levels of carbon dioxide emissions, highlight results from the draft National Climate Assessment. 

Both scenarios project that dry regions get drier and regions that see more rain and snow would see that trend increase. The scenario with lower emissions, in which carbon dioxide reaches 550 parts per million by 2100, projects more subtle changes. The scenario with higher carbon dioxide emissions projects changes in average annual precipitation of 10 percent or more in some regions.

No-one ever claimed that WUWT isn't a stomping ground for crackpots of "all the experts are wrong" variety

Even though the WUWT article shows the description accompanying the first video, some deniers on WUWT still get confused between global changes and changes in the USA.  Here are some examples of denialism at work on WUWT:

Kevin Lohse thinks the world is about to get colder:

July 29, 2013 at 12:09 am  That’s one hell of a hardware rounding error. As the balance of probability points to a cooling period through most of the 21st C , someone is expecting warming Armageddon in the last 20 years

Lance Wallace thinks the USA is the entire world:

July 29, 2013 at 12:16 am  Anthony, you might mention in the headline that the 8 degrees is Fahrenheit.  Interesting that the low estimate for 2100 (550 ppm) is in fact exactly a doubling of pre-industrial CO2, so the predicted warming of 4.5 F reveals their estimate of climate sensitivity: 2.5 C. That’s if the predicted warming includes the warming of about 0.7-0.8 C already observed–if they are saying the warming starts from now, they are using a higher sensitivity of about 3.2 C.

Alvin is a plain vanilla "climate science is a hoax" conspiracy theorist:

July 29, 2013 at 6:44 am  Corruption

Kev-in-Uk doesn't believe any of the climate science experts:

July 29, 2013 at 5:51 am  I think NASA’s credibility is at the same level of the UK’s Met Office – i.e. non-existent !  Seriously, how can an organisation famed for taking calculated risks re the space program and engineered design, modern science, etc, be so crass as to fall in line with climate science ‘trends’?
Is there no-one who works inside NASA with a backbone, and to be prepared to stand up for real science? (I gave up hoping for someone scientific within the Metoffice years ago!)

wws says:

July 29, 2013 at 5:33 am  And the descent, is complete. NASA, once a shining beacon of the most brilliant combination of science and engineering in the history of mankind, is now nothing more than a hotbed for pseudo-scientific quackery and political maneuvering. How sad to have seen this change occur, just in our own lifetimes.

I can't make head or tail of this comment from herkimer.  I think he's agreeing that summers are going to get a lot hotter in the USA but arguing that maybe winters and autumns are not.  Plus he throws in some conspiracy theorising and saying he knows more than the best scientists at NASA.  Pity he cannot write coherently:

July 29, 2013 at 5:25 am  “They chose 1970-1999 to calibrate their models” If one knows nothing about fall and winter( or purposely chooses to ignore them) and uses the rising summer temperature months to predict the future, you will erronously and most probably perdict only more warming summers. This kind of silly science coming from Nasa? This looks to me as a political move to support the President’s global warming agenda rather than a piece of new or sound science. The timing of this study release gives away its intented purpose.

michael hart notes humorously that it's all in the colour scheme:

July 29, 2013 at 4:53 am  lol  No wonder they can only predict temperatures going up all the time for the whole century-their color scale doesn’t allow them to plot anything less than zero! :)

rOLAND lEbEL wants the 49 decrepit climate science deniers who used to work at NASA to stand up and join the deniers at WUWT in protest:

July 29, 2013 at 4:26 am  I can’t believe that all scientists at NASA share the views of the upcoming report. What about those 50 or so people that wrote a letter of protest regarding Hansen and his catastrophic views of global temperatures? It’s time for them to stand up with more vigor regarding this garbage. After all, the reputation of all NASA is at stake!

Anthony Watts makes no pretense at "reasonable".  What with making a "sticky" out of 500 plus testimonies from about 300 born again freaks who found inner peace through science denial at WUWT.  Giving voice to the potty peer Monckton.  Letting Brandon Shollenberger show he can't read a simple science paper (or do arithmetic).

Most of Anthony's readers think that specialists at NASA, the UK Met Office, CSIRO and other leading research organisations "don't know nuffin'" or are part of the biggest scam in the history of the world (together with mother nature).

Lately his site has been no better than that of conspiracy theorist and gold bug "Jo Nova".  And it's been so boring the past few days.  Maybe if we ask nicely he'll bring back Ronald "it's insects" Voisin or daft Darko Butina - they were more fun!

The Depths of Delusion on WUWT as the Potty Peer gets Pottier

Anthony Watts is progressively sinking further into the depths of delusion.  Today he's chosen to do it with another article from the potty peer, Monckton.  He's practically turned over his blog, WUWT, to this fruitcake.

One example, today Monckton says of global warming: There has been none for at least 18 years.  

That's crazy talk.  Take a look for yourself.  This is from NASA:

This is the sea ice volume in the Arctic from PIOMAS.  How does he think ice melts?

This is the ocean heat content from NOAA - not exactly cooling is it:

And this is where we're heading if clowns like Monckton and Watts get their way - from Jos Hagelaars on Bart Verheggen's blog:

It gets even weirder

Gotta say that bloke Monckton is a very weird character of the unsavoury kind.  Almost everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie.  Anthony is going the same way.  A man is known by the company he keeps.  Next I expect young Anthony to declare he's a birther, has found a cure for AIDS and is a member of the House of Lords!

Anyway, Monckton rambles on with a lot of nonsense, virtually saying that unless every scientific paper declares a commitment to every scientific fact  ever known, then it denies all science.  He even says the scientific consensus on human-induced climate change is dropping, when in fact it's risen so high and is so mainstream that scientific papers assume AGW these days.  No need to be explicit.  Monckton is a right loon.

By last count Anthony has only 24 Dismissives at most who are dumb enough to fall for Monckton's nonsense, which is slow going by WUWT standards.  I expect the count to grow - there are a few more crazies in the world.  Still, maybe the tide is turning.

The Wrong Climate Stuff

Apparently a handful or so "clueless geriatric" engineers and astronauts from the Apollo days (not climate scientists) have got together and are publishing some anti-science propaganda about climate.  While they generally agree with the fact that humans are causing global warming, they want to delay action.  They are merchants of doubt and therefore climate science deniers.

(Putting this into perspective, if this survey is any guide, at least 300,000 or more who worked on the Apollo missions, including thousands of engineers, scientists and astronauts, accept and respect climate science.)

To save you reading their gumf, here's a summary:

Global warming is happening, by the way plants love CO2, and it's caused by burning fossil fuels but it might not be all bad and plants love CO2 and sea levels will rise but there's still time and it might be caused by us old fossils and whatever, but we shouldn't start to do anything about it yet because not 100% of everything is 100% known yet and because we're still alive and we don't like taxes and anyway plants love CO2.  Did we say plants love CO2? (mumble mumble.... where did I put my dentures?.... did someone remember to put in the bit about plants loving CO2?...I can say how I hate government now that it pays me a generous superannuation instead of a salary  ... mumble mumble)

Yeah, right! Plants might love CO2 but they don't like drought or extreme heat waves or floods or shifting seasons or wildfires or losing their bird and insect pollinators or shifting plant zones.  Plants can't walk away when conditions get too uncomfortable.  They can't move uphill when it gets too hot if they are already at the top of a mountain.

In support of their 'case' to delay responsible action, about the only people these retired engineers seem able to trot out are  Richard Lindzen (who has tried but failed to show low climate sensitivity) and Roger "not a climate scientist" Pielke Jr. who agrees that humans are causing global warming but is reluctant to do much about it mainly, as far as I can make out, for unfathomable ideological reasons of his own.

Thousands of climate scientists vs a dozen denying engineers

There's no mention of the fact that 97% of the thousands of climate scientists, and other scientists whose research work relates to climate, agree that humans are causing dangerous climate change by burning fossil fuels and other activities.  Or that if we don't start acting now, the consequences will be dire.

Me? I'll go with the 97%.  This is the Critical Decade.

Stick with the specialists

The astronauts are lucky the Apollo missions were managed by specialists in rocket science and space exploration.

Who are you going to call on to find out about climate science? We can thank our lucky stars that climate science is done by climate scientists, not retired engineers and rocket scientists who know nothing about climate.

You can read the answers to some of their questions here.

Dr James E Hansen: A Whopper of a Man - moving from great to greater

I've read a few articles about James Hansen since he announced his resignation from NASA. The ones that have had the most impact have been those touching on the personal.

Eli Rabett has written an article, saying quietly: Eli Appreciates Hansen.

A man of worth, who is shifting societies towards a clean future

Eli's post is well worth a read.  It includes a brief bio plus a couple of lovely anecdotes that help put the blogosphere  and we piddly bloggers in perspective.  (The blogosphere does not shape the world, it's people like James Hansen who shift societies.)

A man of science and courage

350.org has posted a photo tribute to Dr Hansen:

A climate maverick and best-known public figure in climate research

Justin Gillis has written a nuanced article in the New York Times.  He describes how Dr Hansen emerged into the public spotlight when "on a blistering June day in 1988 he was called before a Congressional committee and testified that human-induced global warming had begun."

The Gillis article also gives a thumbnail sketch of Hansen's life and career.

More about James E Hansen

For a biography, I suppose Wikipedia is a general source, but to appreciate the essence of the man, I think Eli's post and Justin Gillis' article are better.

For some of Hansen's writings, go to his personal website at Columbia University.  There is a heap of material to read there.  And if you haven't already done so, get a copy of his most well-known book:

from Amazon or Google or other source.

Thank you Dr Hansen

Thank you, Dr Hansen for your courage, science and ongoing efforts to help all of us shift to a cleaner world and give hope for a bright future to generations not yet born.

What makes fake skeptics tell such Whoppers?

A body of research is building to try to determine what it is that motivates some people to make stuff up, particularly about topics like climate science.

A lie is different to a mistake.  Mistakes can be corrected.  When people deliberately tell lies they generally have to dig deeper holes for themselves as aspects of the lie are revealed. (In a similar vein, later in this post I make reference to a paper that deals with attempts to construct fantasy conspiracy theories, and how the theories are altered as facts become too obvious or contradictory.)

For example, what drives someone to tell a whopper as blatantly false as this, referring to global surface temperatures and claiming they aren't rising :



Source: HotCopper.com S&M forum

Does he even know he is telling fibs or is he lying to himself as well as to everyone else?  It can't be called a simple mistake.  The youngster has to be aware that the science shows that global temperatures are rising.  Even though he has often boasted (on a science forum!) that he refuses to read science from scientific sources (eg Nature, CSIRO etc), he can't help but have seen one of the dozens of global temperature charts posted on HotCopper similar to this one from NASA (with my markings showing the temperatures of 100 years ago).

Incidentally the lad's promise to not post as much in the future may or may not be a lie.  It might be classed as a broken promise or might even be true.  He still seems to be posting an awful (sic) lot, but the posts are not worth counting (or reading, except for entertainment value.  They are of similar caliber to the above (and these).)

Stephan Lewandowsky and colleagues have been doing some related research, particularly on how some people have a tendency to lie to themselves; and how they find comfort and support in building on each other's lies - a group approach to fabricating Whoppers.  This paper on motivated reasoning drew considerable attention from fake skeptics, many of whom manufactured complex conspiracy theories in an attempt to reject the findings.  In doing so they helped prove them.  So much so that it spawned a follow-up paper (by Lewandowsky and different colleagues), which has just been accepted for publication.

There are some revealing comments on related articles on Shaping Tomorrow's World and elsewhere.  (Unfortunately many of the silliest responses to those articles were removed.)

The recent Lewandowsky paper proposes conspiracist ideation may go some way to explaining how people kid themselves and others and includes some interesting analyses, using the examples in the blogosphere to break down the processes involved in developing conspiracies.  It reveals how those conspiracies change shape (or not) when irrefutable contradictory evidence emerges.  The authors also include some provisos, such as:

Although there appears to be ample evidence to classify the response to LOG12 at least in part as conspiracist, one must guard against overextending this conclusion: There are other streams of science denial that are detectable in the response to LOG12. For example, the repeated re-analysis of data, involving the elimination of \inconvenient" subsets of data points based on fairly fluid criteria, has a long-standing history in other contentious arenas.

Fake skeptics often lack self awareness.  Ironically, a blogger called Watts last week posted an article about the Lewandowsky follow up paper on conspiracy ideation immediately after posting an article about the attempts by ATI to uncover what they believe to be a fantastic conspiracy (which they 'believe' will be uncovered in scientists' emails).

Watts is not quite as bad a conspiracist as Jo Nova and her partner David Evans, who subscribe to anti-semitic conspiracies involving gold and fiat money among other weird ideas.  Or the peer Monckton, who is a self-confessed 'birther' (and who has such 'batshit crazy' ideas that even the hard-boiled science denier, Andrew Bolt, distances himself).  However Watts continues to publish articles by the mad monk and supports Jo Nova.

Many people who reject climate science will try to tell you about the giant world-wide conspiracy that presumably began about 200 years ago.  According to them, scientists are perpetrating a 'hoax'.  This 'hoax' must involve not only thousands of scientists throughout the world, past and present, but engineers, manufacturers and all humankind who make use of or benefit from the knowledge that CO2 absorbs radiation of particular wavelengths.

Humans as a species are quirky.

(To whom it may concern - that is, anyone who might have been too scared to post a comment: I expect to rarely have to resort to deleting comments from this blog. Nor would I expect to ever 'disappear' entire threads, especially not ones in my honour :D. The blog doesn't attract many comments.  It's mainly just a bit of fun.  So far some comments have been remarkably revealing, others comical, others informative, others correcting my errors (both real and imagined) and some - thanks people - personally supportive; and some all of the above.)