This video neatly sums up the reality of “Green”. Politicians, including those who have been most vocal about reducing CO2 emissions, are saying one thing in public to the gullible greens and doing something entirely different.

You can fool everyone some of the time, but you really can fool greens all the time – because the reality is that green means gullible. They start by being clueless about energy use (particularly their own) – and so they are utterly clueless whether politicians deliver any of their “promises” (which they don’t).

Scanning the dying news stories I spotted a lot of the “pause denial” stories based on NOAA altered data & analysis and I began wondering why it didn’t concern me in the slightest that they had all these news-stories.
Why wasn’t I concerned that they “got rid of the pause”?
And then it struck me. For years the zealots like NOAA have been saying “the data cannot be interpreted in any other way – the world is warming”. Then when we sceptics said “but recently the world is not warming”. They initially denied it, then admitted it – and then started to come up with all types of excuses.
At that point, they had a tenable argument. The world was warming as predicted, the data was correct, but something they had not previously considered was causing a temporary pause.
So, the temperature data is secure, the analysis of the trend is secure – there was just something else that they had not considered.

THEN – like complete idiots …

NOAA came out and said: “actually the data is not secure, the analysis was not correct”. In short, they’ve just proved what we sceptics have been saying all along –

you can get whatever trend you want by manipulating the data

And they are seriously trying to use this trick against the people who above any other know how to manipulate data to get whatever trend they desire: POLITICIANS. They have spotted this a mile off. These academics have blown their credibility with a cheap trick that every politician understands.
And add to that they’ve thrown a huge custard pie at every academic who’s been on TV saying “yes I agree that we’ve seen a temporary pause but I think it’s explainable by … <enter another excuse>”.
And sure as eggs are eggs, like every other previous excuse for the pause, this one will be quietly forgotten – firstly because they’ve basically said every other group compiling temperature data showing a pause has LIED and secondly, because there is now an industry in creating papers explaining the pause and too many academics are now on that bandwagon for them all to jump off with any credibility left.

For a while, I’ve become more and more frustrated looking for news stories on Global Warming, because not only have the number gone down dramatically, not only do those that remain lack “meat”, but almost invariably those media outlets who still publish Global Warming bullshit, do so without allowing comments. From Wikipedia to the BBC-Guardian, to DeSmugBlog the alarmists can only publish their propaganda when they prevent sceptics from giving the evidence on the other side.

Quite literally the debate is over.

There is no longer anywhere I know of that allows free debate – not because sceptics are not willing to argue rationally, but because alarmists can’t stand the overwhelming dominance of sceptic views which is now prevalent on every open forum.
The best analogy I know is this – at the end of WWII, when the Americans were invading islands, many Japanese sat in bunkers refusing to come out even though they could not possibly win the battle and they were just wasting their lives. Their action was totally futile – just as those like the BBC-Guardian, etc. are futile. They cannot possibly turn the tide, the debate has moved on from their non-science alarmism. They’ve lost and sometimes I really do wish I had a proverbial flame thrower to stop their stupid pathetic pot shots.

I haven’t been able to take climate academics seriously for a while, but when Gavin Schmidt hosted a conference where this type of graph (below) was presented and then far from laughing at it, they allowed someone to conclude based only this data and models they were “very certain”… I realised I was wasting my time with these pathetic clowns.
Unfortunately, many cut and paste snooze-papers have reported “research” by NOAA as showing the pause did not happen. Bollocks!
The only thing this latest “research” shows is that these climate academics who have been so completely deluded that they thought could just deny the pause and they expected everyone else to follow them in their madness … have again tried to to deny the pause. That’s not news! How many excuses are there for their failed climate predictions? 50? 100? 200? They deny the pause – there’s nothing at all unexpected there!
I was thinking how to finish this article – the TV is on and it just said “our comedy season starts”. That’s as good a summary as any for this “research”.

The English government in Westminster, is reported in the Telegraph as planning to scrap the hated “Renewable Obligation” as early as this week. This will leave the Scottish government (who were given the power to increase consumer bills through devolution) out on a limb as it continues to push for ever higher consumer bills to pay for its anti-fossil fuel policies (to sate the Greens) whilst it hypocritically & irrationally pushes for “Scottish Oil” on the hand.
This won’t immediately cut the hundreds of pounds households are paying for this policy in terms of direct costs on electricity bills,  indirect costs as suppliers increase bills to as a result of their higher prices & lost jobs an economic prosperity as companies move outside EU, but it will stop most of the steep rise in bills predicted as a result of this insane policy.
No details are available on the future pricing (outside Scotland) of the “Renewable Obligation Tax” for those developments already in place. But hopefully, this marks a general downward move on electricity prices which undoubtedly will make many wind scams unviable, particularly toward end of life – so we can all look forward to rusting wind scrapyards all the sooner!).

Subsidies that have fuelled the spread of onshore wind farms are to be dramatically curtailed, under Government plans to be unveiled within days.
The Telegraph has learnt that a generous subsidy scheme will be shut down earlier than expected, effectively preventing thousands of turbines from getting built, under plans being considered by Amber Rudd, the new energy secretary.
The proposals, which could be announced as soon as this week, will set out for the first time how the Conservatives will implement their manifesto pledge to end any new public subsidy for onshore wind farms – amid concerns that turbines are unpopular with local communities.

Wind farm subsidies facing the axe (note pseudo-waywalled)

I’ve noticed an interesting phenomena online which is that overwhelmingly, if its a letter or a small blog or just a comment on a pretty mundane country snoose-paper, the sentiment has moved overwhelmingly toward sceptical.
But if its a Royal Society of “science”, the Biased Broadcasting Company or a lot of groups who consider themselves to be “intellectually superior” – then they are arrogant that global warming is “true” (even thought they personally have not looked at the subject themselves but they know they belong to a group where someone did – at least they’re sure it’s been looked at and … well they are just articulating “science” because that’s what people who call themselves “scientists” say) .
What is certain, is that those outside the “intellectuals” were first to spot the pause, first to recognise that models that did not predict the pause could not predict climate and first to recognise that the intellectuals were deluded about their own abilities.
The common explanation for this is “group-think”. But now I am beginning to wonder whether the real explanation is that ordinary people are actually smarter than the “intellectuals”. (Call it a hypothesis)
My own belief is that more or less we each are given the same intelligence at birth. That more or less we all develop our intelligence at the same rate …. BUT THAT SOME CHOOSE TO SPECIALISE IN NON-INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITIES (at least this is what I assume about people – I might be better in some areas – but doubtless they are better in others).
In other words, in order to become very intelligent in a specialist area – you can only do so by forsaking other areas which are commonly known as “common sense”. Or perhaps “knowing when you’re having the wool pulled over your eyes – sense”.
Son far from the Royal Society being cleverer as a group, they are in fact full of people who have concentrated their intellectual development toward their specialist subject – but unfortunately, that has entailed a much lower IQ in common sense – in knowing when other people are deluded.

For anyone that ever tried to edit Wikipedia, just like anyone who had to live in a 1960s concrete tower block, the idea that something so appalling might need protecting will likely seem crazy.
But the problem with destroying the past – even if it’s a totally abhorent symbol of the past whether slum housing or ideologically driven propaganda – is that if future generations can’t see these failings of the past, then they are bound to repeat them.
Take for example the notorious list from the Wikipedia talk page of “common complaints by sceptics”. It neatly encapsulates every sceptic argument – it’s like a “who’s who” of issues that should be in the article but were barred and replaced by overt propaganda.
And that it stood there for so long signalling to each and every sceptic that the article was clearly and obviously biased – is a testament to how deluded some people can become when they “get power”.
That’s a lesson we all need to learn.

Wikipedia is not a reliable source

Continue reading →

You know how once upon a time you threw out old toys when you grew up or discarded old fashioned technology. Then a few years later you see the same thing in a museum or up for auction and realise that you are actually quite nostalgic about what you once considered rubbish.
Well … I went to look at the talk page of “Global warming” on wikipedia and was quite horrified to find this:

Rename article?
NewsAndEventsGuy, suggested it last year. Today the term global warming is almost never used, either in the literature or in the media. Therefore WP should reflect that.

Of course, the reason I go back there is to see the academics who fabricated that article squirming every way possible to avoid the pause.  It’s fun to see what their latest excuse is for their denial of reality.
But when I saw they might get rid of the page altogether – I kind of realised I’d grown fond of that page and all the quirky non-science on it.
And it is so easy to just point someone at the page and say “look for the pause” – it doesn’t take a lot of effort to show people how biased Wikipedia is on the subject.
Fortunately, the con artist in chief who spent so much time fabricating the article doesn’t like the idea:

Disagree. Climate change covers the present period, too. Fiddling with the name is just pointless William M. Connalley (talk) 17:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

So, on reflection, if it puts connolley’s nose out of joint I wouldn’t be so sad to see it go. But we certainly need to keep a copy.
Does anyone know how to get a copy of all the talk comments?

The temperature signal is a form of 1/f noise – yes buried in that noise may be something manmade – but the bulk is just randomness.
I’ve often wondered what it would sound like speeded up – I don’t know how to convert the temperature data to an audio file, so second best: here is 10 hours of pseudo-climate signal. (Enjoy – around 5 hours in something startling happens – just joking!!)