Monday, December 27, 2010

Met Office, Mormons and myth

'Must read'
Boxing Day in Scotland on Sunday supplied a dose of well deserved, if gentle, mockery of the druidical illogicality and gnosticism of the AGW movement.  In it Gerald Warner poked a bit of fun at Anthropogenic Global Warming devotees, using outlandish religious imagery to underline his pitch that the global warming movement is not based on empirical or theoretical evidence.

Now whilst you can take the religious metaphors too far (some of 'religion' is based on excellent evidence), he makes some very good points.  Last week I highlighted evidence of a distinct bias in the Met Office, showing that they had over predicted the mean global temperature in ten out of eleven years.  Warner lampoons them for other failed predictions:
These are challenging times for climate jihadists. Last week the Met Office was forced to issue a press release stating it "categorically denies forecasting a 'mild winter' ". In fact, in October, its long-range probability map predicted an 80 per cent probability of warmer than average temperatures from November to January in Scotland. It claimed Scotland, along with Northern Ireland, the eastern half of England and Cornwall, would experience temperatures above the 3.7°C average, more than 2°C higher than last winter.
The failure of the probability map to give the anxious nation the right steer for the forthcoming winter might be more forgivable were it not for that other forecasters in October were forecasting a cold winter. Add to that the previous predictions starkly falsified (barbecue summer and last year's predicted 'mild winter' come to mind).  And the brazen denial - without addressing the issue - is an echo of the outright denial of anything significant amiss which has accompanied the refutation of the basis of some key planks of 'climate science'.  These matter as our public policy is driven by a belief in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming which is not supported by the evidence.

The partisan (yet bizarrely labelled 'independent') public enquiries into the Climatic Research Unit are an example of conduct which undermines CAGW credibility.  The conduct of the Hockey Stick team, now surely discredited, in denial and obfuscating for all they are worth, is another example.

Which brings me to a book recommendation.  If you have not read the 'The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science' by Andrew Montford, don't allow yourself to proceed far into 2011 without reading it.  Warner labels the Scottish Parliament
. . . that tabernacle of AGW piety . . .
I agree.  Our Scottish legislaters, who in 2009 passed the (then) world leading Climate Change Act, might have done better due diligence if they had been aware of these and similar issues which were open for any diligent scrutineer.


  1. I am a late-comer to the side of reason, having followed the herd for a long time on this, and very much appreciate these comments.

    I am now, for good or ill, one of those dubbed "Climate-Change-Deniers" and laugh at the ad hominem methods of those who pretend to be dealing with alternative views while all along propping up a multi-billion dollar industry that long ago lost any interest in facts, data and science.

    Keep it coming because there are those of us out here who need to know stuff and where to find stuff and so much of the scientific establishment seems reluctant to help.

  2. Mike,
    Thanks. Two people who have done a much to provide balance and evidence are Andrew Montford (Blogroll: Bishop Hill) and Steve McIntyre (Blogroll: Climate Audit).