Scottish Sceptic

Hatching chickens can teach you an awful lot about global warming science. I made the mistake last time of just “checking” the temperature using an industrial probe … it wasn’t quite right, so I tried a glass thermometer, that was out, but how did I know whether it was the incubator or the thermometers. So, I hit on the idea of buying a few clinical thermometers and putting them in various places around the incubator. Again, none of them showed the expected temperature, and all of them were slightly different. I must have fiddled with those thermometers on and off for the full three weeks. Continue reading →

Over on real climate I spotted this article:

It would not surprise me if the denialists would deny the existence of the new book by Haydn Washington and John Cook (skepticalscience.com) ‘Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand‘. Somehow, I don’t think they will read it – but they are not target group of this book either. Anyway, denialism is, according to the book, a common human trait – we should all know somebody who deny one thing thing or another.
Furthermore, denial is not the same as being skeptical, either, and Washington and Cook argue it is quite the opposite. Hence, the term “skeptics” for these deniers can be described as Orwellian “doublespeak”“newspeak”. (Source: lizard bunker)
Denial is apparently caused by our lizard brainstem. …

And I thought I wrote drivel. Lizard brainstem indeed! Paints a wonderful picture of lizards standing on rocks … “it’s warm, its warming, it global warming” …. then the sun goes behind a cloud …. “its cold, it’s colder it’s global cooling.”
“Warmer colder, colder, warmer … I know how to solve this … we’ll invent something with half the brain that doesn’t have to decide and call it mann!”
And just to be clear this book does not exist – repeat after me …. it does not exist. It is only a figment of their imagination.

Once you examine it closely, the idea that “renewable” energy is green and clean looks less like a deduction than a superstition.
What does the word “renewable” mean? Last week the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a thousand-page report on the future of renewable energy, which it defined as solar, hydro, wind, tidal, wave, geothermal and biomass. These energy sources, said the IPCC, generate about 13.8% of our energy and, if encouraged to grow, could eventually displace most fossil fuel use  (For More see:  source)

There is a petition afoot to repeal the UK’s Crazy Climate Change Act.
Sign here.

There are two big energy scares, one based on a premise of “manmade warming” which says there is too much fossil fuel for our own good, and the other based on too little fossil fuel.
Both can be turned by the wind industry that was largely responsible for flaming the global warming scare to sell windmills, but because they imply very contradictory views of fossil fuels (too much and too little), it is not logically possible to support both at the same time. So I’ve always expected there to be a point when the eco-evangelists stop trying to flog the dead horse of the failed global warming scare and start flogging a new horse: peak oil.
Well it happened to today (or at least its the first clear case I’ve seen) in http://www.environmental-expert.com.

How to develop a business plan for oil depletion Continue reading →