Scottish Sceptic

If you haven’t been to uClimate.com, in a while, it now has a host of new features including what’s currently popular what’s most popular this week and this month. NOW including the latest news from Google!
To see the latest news – just go to uClimate.com.
To see what’s popular – go to the real time list of what’s Popular which shows what everyone has been reading – ideal for the keen enthusiast!
Missed a few days? – then find out what has been popular this week, or even this month.
What is uClimate.com? – uClimate is a list of all the latest climate articles from all over the globe, both sceptic and convinced.
Why isn’t ???? on uClimate.com?
uClimate.com uses a list of around 200 sites which are constantly changing. Apart from two sites (Lucia) and one of the bigger convinced sites which are currently having technical problems, if the site has blogged this month, it regularly blogs on climate and is not in the list of active sites then please add the name and url to the comments.
I’d like to be able to …
Suggestions for new features are always welcome. Please add to comments.

In the past big institutions talked to big-institutional news media who then decided what news THEY thought was suitable to tell us plebs. They justified their control, because THEY said they were impartial, using a totally arbitrary split between “left-right”. This view of politics was that you had a choice – because we could choose the “left” views of the Guardian Dinosaur News Media or the “right” views of the Telegraph Dinosaur News Media.

In other words, it was no real choice at all.

I’ve often described this by a new ending to animal farm (A book in which the pigs take over the farm and begin behaving like men – in reference to communism in the USSR):

“… and the pigs gathered all the animals together and said: ‘from now on you will all be free to choose which pigs are to run animal farm'” Continue reading →

“to encourage the best quality science and engineering assessment of the impact of human activity on the climate, help determine and assess the impact of any changes to our economies, society & environment and to assist governments to develop the most appropriate policy recommendations”.
After posting this comment as the suggested aims of sceptic, I got a detailed reply from Derek Alker which highlighted some deficiencies  but also suggested it might make an interesting conversation. So, I’m posting this as an article in its own right.
This in particular was a very good point:

After many years unpaid work observing academia: during several different stints in University where I several times had a chance to view academic culture anew; after years on various forum, particularly BRITARCH (British Archaeology) and on global warming; after studying the development of renewable energy in the UK compared to Denmark around 2000, and now having set my mind to understand the reason for the hostility in the online climate debate, the survey of online participants to the climate debate, and the reaction to several articles, has now endorsed a theory** I have been developing describing this situation and explaining the nature of the on line debate.
That is the good news.
The bad news is that this theory which I will call “The Cassandra++ Theory”, predicts that nothing I ever write will ever be believed by academia. In other words, my current strategy is not only ineffective but is positively counter productive.
That is not to say that there may be one or two people in academia who are “oddballs” who might appreciate what I say, but in general, the very fact I am not an academic means anything I say will be seen as a threat: it will either be ignored, rejected or as in the global warming debate, viciously attacked in in person or via proxy groups.
Yes I can egg on the crowd of sceptics, yes I can create a huge fuss, but no, nothing I do will ever change the mind of academia, indeed egging on the sceptics & proving we are right will just make academics more hostile and more motivated to reject us.
Indeed, the Cassandra theory strongly suggests, that the single factor that is most likely to elicit this hostile reaction from academia is the one I thought was my strongest: my methodical and academic investigation of the subject in an entirely academic and altruistic way without working for any money at all.
The more I know, the more I will be attacked and the more vehemently anything I write will be rejected. And please note, their reaction is not “motivated” hostility or political hostility, it is simply a consequence of the situation and whilst I don’t like being attacked, I will not blame anyone for doing so. They do not know what they do or why they do it.
So, I’m going to have to think about what I do. There may be a way forward – but I haven’t yet thought of it.
However, there is a strong likelihood that I will stop blogging and it is likely I will close the Scottish Climate & Energy Forum. I also need to think hard about how I handle the survey of the climate bloggosphere. I think the results are dynamite, and there have been so many times in the last few weeks I just wanted to rub certain people’s noses in them and it was heart breaking not being able to do so. But now I realise that may be entirely counter productive.

**I use theory as the word is used in social science which is a descriptive narrative not a testable hypothesis.
++Cassandra was a Greek who was cursed by being given the gift of prophecy – so she could foretell the future, but it was ordained that she would never be believed.

From Jo:Nova: UK Met Office in December predicted a 15% chance of Jan-Feb-March being the wettest category

SUMMARY – PRECIPITATION:
Latest predictions for UK-precipitation show a slight signal for near or just above average rainfall during January-February-March
as a whole. The probability that UK precipitation for January-February-March will fall into the driest of our five categories is around 20% and the probability that it will fall into the wettest category is between 10 and 15% (the 1981-2010 probability for each of these categories is 20%).
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/02/uk-met-office-predicts-15-chance-of-heavy-rain-britian-gets-biblical-floods/

More proof that we can’t yet predict the climate just a few months in advance to add to the evidence the Met Office cannot predict climate one year or even a decade ahead, to add to the evidence that none of the climate models predicted even something as simple as the pause.
PS. I’m disabling comments as you can comment at Jo Nova and I’ve got other things to do at the moment.

After Mr Connolley’s outrageous behaviour I got a few emails in sympathy amongst which was this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJho5cHvjJY
Normally I wouldn’t have posted it. But why not? It is hilarious and it so neatly sums up all climate propaganda “science”. This is no eco activist “warrior”, but just another middle age balding man huffing and puffing on a toy pretending to himself he is achieving something but in reality going nowhere.
Correction
Following my post, it has just been pointed out to me that Connolley is not a climate scientist. And yes, as far as I can see has no scientific qualifications and so I apologise for all real scientists and have amended the article to reflect this.
Comments disabled
Given that Connolley has been allowed to say his piece, that he has a track record of provoking stupid and pointless discussions and I’ve got far more important things at the moment. I’m disabling comments.

I need to take some time away from blogging to prepare some material.
So, unfortunately, blogging and commenting will be light for the next few weeks.
I’ll be back!