But why not make it official.  I will be out of town most of August, so don’t expect much blogging. Follow me on twitter if you want to see what I am up to.

Download audio file (IC10.mp3)

Irregular Climate is now accepting donations.
Feedback is always appreciated.

This is the last episode until September. I am taking a late summer hiatus.

Subscribe in To irregular Climate:

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. Irregular Climate Episode 8
2. Irregular Climate Episode 9
3. Irregular Climate Episode 3
4. Irregular Climate episodes 5 and 6
5. Irregular Climate Episode 2

Part 2

By Peter Sinclair

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. Study that underestimates sea level rise pulled, deniers cheer… huh?

Left-wing Env. Scientist [Denis Rancourt] Bails Out Of Global Warming Movement

Wow! Now that is worth writing about, or rather it would be if there were any truth to this statement (ok even then it wouldn’t really matter). As Kevin Grandia at DeSmogBlog points out:

Rancourt has been writing rants against the science of climate change for years.

Morano is trying to spindoctor this into a newsworthy story by making it seem like Rancourt is someone who was completely accepting of the scientific reality of climate change and then just woke up one morning last week and decided to jump ship.

What makes this all the more ridiculous is that Morano himself pushed the exact same story about Rancourt in 2009 when he worked for Senator James Inhofe.

This is the dishonesty we have to deal with. If only this was an isolated incident.

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. It’s OK, if you are a climate change denier
2. The self-contradictions of Marc Morano
3. It’s OK, if you are a climate change denier, Part 2
4. Dishonesty and hate; my brush with Marc Morano
5. The 1998 cherry pick

Thankfully Friends of Gin and Tonic didn’t:

• On one hand: Carbon dioxide from the human burning of fossil fuel is building up in the atmosphere at a frightening pace, enough to double the present concentration in a century. This buildup has the potential to raise average temperatures on the earth several degrees centigrade, enough to modify the weather and accelerate melting of the polar ice sheets.
• On the other hand: Climate change, by contrast, is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself.

So which is it?

The truth is that climate changes due to what climatologists call forcings. Some of them act on very long time scales (aka geologic time), while some (such as our greenhouse gas emissions) act over much shorter time scales.

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. Scientists have to be right 100% of the time
2. Deniers aren’t skeptical, they are gullible
3. Record cold winter proves global warming is a farce… ha!
4. Study that underestimates sea level rise pulled, deniers cheer… huh?
5. The self-contradictions of Marc Morano

It has always been funny, in a gallows humor sort of way, to watch conservatives who laud the limitless power and flexibility of markets turn around and insist that the economy would collapse if we were to put a price on carbon. All serious estimates suggest that we could phase in limits on greenhouse gas emissions with at most a small impact on the economy’s growth rate. -Paul Krugman

Conspiracy theorists claim to believe that global warming is a carefully constructed hoax driven by scientists desperate for … what? Being needled by nonscientific newspaper reports, by blogs and by right-wing politicians and think tanks? I have a much simpler but plausible ‘conspiracy theory’: the fossil energy companies, driven by the need to protect hundreds of billions of dollars of profits, encourage obfuscation of the inconvenient scientific results. I, for one, admire them for their P.R. skills, while wondering, as always: ‘Have they no grandchildren?"-Jeremy Grantham

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. The folly of believing in a warming conspiracy
2. Lies, damn lies, and fake quotes
3. Quote of the day
4. Conspiracy theories
5. How to assassinate the truth

This is pure hypocrisy.

And the absolutely hilarious blog Denial Depot has noticed:

Several Eminent Physicists Skeptical Of AGW fear for their academic lives tonight as WhatsUpWithit irresponsibly publishes their names on a public blog: Seven Eminent Physicists Skeptical of AGW

Questions are being asked as to why WhatsUpWithIt, previously a reliable campaigner against blacklisting skeptical scientists, has today published a blacklist of our secret eminent physicists.

Concerns mount that WhatsUpWithIt has been infiltrated by enemies of our Nation. Has WhatsUpWithIt fallen to Red Communism?

Related Climate News Items:

• Bafflement as 31,487 American scientists skeptical of manmade global warming inexplicably add themselves to a blacklist.

Anthony Watts (who runs the notoriously inaccurate Watts up with that blog) was one of those decrying the PNAS paper as a blacklist. Not only that but he invoked Godwin’s Law, and made disgusting references to the holocaust. But now he willingly publishes a ‘blacklist’ of his own?

He will probably use the same absurd logic used by both Morano, and Luboš Motl, who claim that the lists compiled by deniers are positive because… well they don’t really give a reason, at least not one that amounts to anything other than ‘they are positive because they were created by deniers’.

So according to denialism logic, taking names from these positive white-lists (remember the data from the PNAS study all comes from these lists), not naming names and doing aggregate analysis on their publication record somehow turns the list black.

Hypocrisy indeed!

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. Those accepting the science of global warming have more credibility and prominence than those who remain unconvinced [UPDATED]
2. Deniers are doing all conservatives a disservice
3. Contradictory denier arguments
4. The fact that denier science is rejected by the peer-reviewed literature is not evidence of bias, or conspiracy
5. Quote of the day

Download audio file (IC9.mp3)

Irregular Climate is now accepting donations.
Feedback is always appreciated.

Subscribe in To irregular Climate:

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. Irregular Climate Episode 8
2. Irregular Climate Episode 10
3. Irregular Climate Episode 3
4. Irregular Climate episodes 5 and 6
5. Irregular Climate Episode 2

Imagine if you filled a room with a representative sample of 100 climatologists, how many would  agree with the basic scientific consensus that our GHG emissions are warming the planet? According to a recent study, and a survey conducted last year,  97 of them (the green ones) would agree, while only 3 (the red ones) would disagree.

Why does this matter? Does a consensus of climate experts prove that humans are causing global warming? No, science doesn’t work that way. The evidence for man-made global warming lies in the multiple, independent observations that confirm man’s influence on climate . It’s not based just on theory or models or even just a single dataset but many different observations all pointing to a consistent result. In my quieter moments of introspection when I wonder if this could all be wrong, ultimately I can’t avoid all the different lines of evidence.

But not everyone has the time or inclination to dig through the peer-reviewed literature to uncover all the empirical evidence. Or read the thousands of pages in the IPCC reports. When it comes to complex science, whether it be climate science or heart surgery or how a plane manages to stay up in the air, we defer to the experts who do this stuff for a living. Why? Because they know every nook and cranny of their area of expertise. Every day when they go to work, climate scientists are knee deep in the full body of evidence. They arrive at their opinion of man-made global warming by taking into account all this evidence. The reason why there’s a consensus of scientists is because there’s a consensus of evidence.

See part 1 for more visualizations

Related Posts (auto generated and almost random):

1. The climate consensus visualized
2. Climate change: The big picture
3. Where is the debate on climate change taking place?
4. Why I accept the scientific consensus on global warming, and what would change my mind
5. Climate Change and the Integrity of Science [Part 3] thousands of scientists push back against denier claims