Thursday, June 21, 2007

IPCC: liars

Via Bishop Hill (who seems to be making climate change one of his specialities), Roger Pielke Snr has posted a list of papers that contradict the "concensus" on temperature records. As the Bishop says:
None of these are cited by the IPCC because they conflict with the need to obtain a particular result. Pielke is quite straightforward about this - it's bias.

The IPCC's mission statement runs as follows:
The 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports have the following stated goals:
“A comprehensive and rigourous picture of the global present state of knowledge of climate change”

“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been established by WMO and UNEP to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant for the understanding of climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”

There then follow tens of links to reports that contradict the IPCC's Reports. And the conclusion?
The IPCC WG1 Chapter 3 Report clearly cherrypicked information on the robustness of the land near-surface air temperature to bolster their advocacy of a particular perspective on the role of humans within the climate system. As a result, policymakers and the public have been given a false (or at best an incomplete) assessment of the multi-decadal global average near-surface air temperature trends.

In other words, we are being lied to for the convenience of politicians.

Now, it may be that self-important, no-nothing tossers like Sunny Hundal may think that we shouldn't question the IPCC "because it gives the false impression that there is still a debate to be had and that it could go either way" but luckily he's just a piss-poor excuse for a journo.

However, when those who have real power, like Batshit, say that "the evidence of cause and effect was unambiguous", then we should be seriously worried. Of course, Batshit did say that he'd give us all an insight into his opinion.
A number of emails after the programme also disputed the facts and I promised to provide links via my blog to the science.

And he did so. Not surprisingly, he linked to all of the reports that apparently support this devious little shit's position. Not one of the papers linked to by Pielke's Climate Science post appear in Batshit's list.

To what extent is Batshit being lied to, and to what extent is the four-eyed fucker lying to us? Well, going on previous form, I believe that he is being extensively lied to and that he is simply too ignorant to understand the science. In fact, I believe that he is too stupid to even understand the difference between theory, data and "facts".

Whatever: he zeal for his brief is going to curtail our freedoms, bugger our economy and cauyse the deaths of thousands in the Developing World.

Batshit Miliband is an ignorant, totalitarian cunt who should have the decency to kill himself now. And Spam Cameron should join him, the massively-foreheaded fuckwit that he is.


JuliaM said...

"In other words, we are being lied to for the convenience of politicians."

Sounds familiar.....

"...he is simply too ignorant to understand the science..."

I'd always subscribe to the 'cunning like a fox' thoery with politicians, before I considered the 'dumb as a fence post' one.

daddysunny said...

"luckily he's just a piss-poor excuse for a journo."

Luckily the people who commission articles are far more intelligent than some dickweed with a blog and tourettes syndrome.

Devil's Kitchen said...

Of course, daddysunny; that is why they continue to hire Polly "documented liar" Toynbee. Unlike you, I am not impressed by "commissioning editors" because I hold almost all journos in contempt.


daddysunny said...

Well isn't it lucky then I'm not looking for your approval or acceptance when it comes to my choice of career, or, in fact, anything that I write.

Devil's Kitchen said...

Which is a pity, because you might learn something. Like some science.

Or, and I'm assuming that you are the great Hundal himself here, how not to put your point of view so badly that you utterly piss off your own contributors by writing a load of horseshit that you, apparently, don't believe.

Come to think of it, that's probably why the MSM commissioning editors like you.


flashgordonnz said...

Yawn! I sleep in my car now to evade those africanised bees. But I took my hammer to all those computer gizmos so that Y3k bug cannot take control of my car so that it dives off a cliff and into a reservoir of dihydrogen monoxide. I also became vegan so that I was not responsible for bovine flatulence. But then I stopped eating altogether because once the farmer harvests the food, absorption of that terrible pollutant CO2 ceases. Currently I exhale into plastic bags and I am sealing the bags and placing them under my bed for now. I am using USED plastic bags, of course.

daddysunny said...

"Which is a pity, because you might learn something. Like some science"

Yeah, keep believing your own hype. Probably why you have all these idiotic testimonials on the sidebar. Going by this post the only thing I'd learn from you is to copy and paste from others.

If you want to keep pretending you can string a coherent sentence together or sound intelligent on a given topic, that's your problem, not mine.
Anyway, I've wasted too much time here already.

Devil's Kitchen said...


Ha ha! You are a scream! I note that whenever you have posted here, you have utterly failed to address any of my arguments, preferring instead to concentrate on the fact that I use... er... robust Anglo-Saxon.

This is, of course, because you are a blank slate -- a man utterly devoid of any of his own opinions, a screen for displaying the projected opinions of others.

Your sad inability to write a coherent article, to repudiate any of my arguments or evidence, or to answer your commenters in any significant way except through the words of others -- and, my my, what wonderful journos Hari and Freedland are -- show a paucity of thought and an unwillingness to engage in an intellectual capacity that would astonish a moderately intelligent twelve year old.

Your adherence to insults in the comments above merely reiterates my point. If my commenters feel that I am merely paying you back in your own coin, then they need only examine your ramblings at Pickled Politics to see that I speak the truth.


guido faux said...

I just visited Bishop Hill. Interesting stuff. Non-scientific types should check out his IPCC guide for the layman.

I can't believe some of the fiddling that's been going on such as Truncating inconvenient graphs.

What I really find outrageous is the fact that nobody has attempted to prove the "tree-ring" model by actually measuring recent tree-ring widths and comparing with recent instrumental records. Unbefuckinlievable. I mean that is extraordinarily bad practice. A scientist should always verify their model.

Good work on this DK. What worries me though is that your average punter will not have the time or inclination to follow the arguments and will adopt a "better-do-something-just-in-case" strategy. Which is of course what the environ-mentalists wanted in the first place.

Devil's Kitchen said...

"What I really find outrageous is the fact that nobody has attempted to prove the "tree-ring" model by actually measuring recent tree-ring widths and comparing with recent instrumental records."

Actually, they did. The tree rings were shown not to correlate with temperature or CO2 levels in the way that had been expected (and relied upon); so, the report was quietly shelved.

I shall try to find a link for you.


guido faux said...

"Actually, they did ... the report was quietly shelved"

extraordinarily even worse practice.

Anonymous said...

what a bunch of lying twats, just like Tony Bliar and Gordon Brownarse

Anonymous said...

What a bunch of lying bastards they are, just like Bliar and Brown, cunts the lot of them!!!!!!!!