Off to Europe

I’m leaving for a week in a few hours and will only be in intermittent contact. No fighting please. Anybody that feels like fighting – take a deep breath and don’t. Save it till I come back. If you’re suspended by John A while I’m away, too bad. TCO, this includes you. Maybe bender or James Lane or someone will intervene with John A but I’m not going to deal with it until I return. If someone feels like writing something as a head post, send it to John A. Cheers, Steve


39 Comments

  1. TCO
    Posted Sep 8, 2006 at 4:33 PM | Permalink

    Have fun in EU, Steve.

    I will try to behave (not drunk-post). I reserve the right to post disagreements with you or with the cause (including while you are gone), since I think we should secure all posting if we are going to secure those who disagree with you and the cause.

  2. Armand MacMurray
    Posted Sep 8, 2006 at 7:10 PM | Permalink

    Good luck in your talks! If you happen upon any links to video/audio/text of talks at either event, please post!

  3. Pat Frank
    Posted Sep 8, 2006 at 7:52 PM | Permalink

    Good luck, Steve. I’m looking forward to reading of your impressions, the story of how you’re received by whom, and whether you think your work or talks changed anyone’s mind.

  4. Tom Brogle
    Posted Sep 8, 2006 at 8:01 PM | Permalink

    Is this my opportunity to iintroduce a new topic namely the albedo change discovered by Pinker et al
    “http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/308/5723/850″>

  5. Louis Hissink
    Posted Sep 9, 2006 at 1:35 AM | Permalink

    Steve

    Good luck! Enjoy the Netherlands – a jealous expatriot Dutchie :-)

  6. Posted Sep 9, 2006 at 1:44 AM | Permalink

    Just forget proksydata, hopeless graphs, is cores, and take a look at this link and look at the moon and his mysterious smile.

    http://ansatte.hials.no/hy/climate/default.htm

    translation on the bottom of the side.

  7. fFreddy
    Posted Sep 9, 2006 at 4:29 AM | Permalink

    John A, can I be the school sneak and request some snipping here, here, and particularly here.

  8. John A
    Posted Sep 9, 2006 at 5:21 AM | Permalink

    Re #7

    Done. F33r my l33t m0d p0w3rZ!

    Re #1

    Behave or get spam karma’d off the blog. Your choice.

  9. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 12:36 AM | Permalink

    It’s amazing how computer technology keeps improving. I turned my new portable computer on, there’s a wireless network here, and I’m online in an instant. HOwever, I’m mostly offline.

  10. Brooks Hurd
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 1:24 AM | Permalink

    Steve,

    Good luck and enjoy the trip!

    Re: #1 Please, no more drunken rants.

    Posted from Shanghai (which is why I am not in Europe)

  11. TCO
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 9:59 AM | Permalink

    For Steve/John:

    In the Warwick Hughes thread, below, few disagreements/suggestions that I have:

    1. Please re-open the comments. Comments were closed by JohnA after 38 comments, because he “figured Steve would want discussion on WH’s blog”. I don’t see why Steve would not have closed the comments in that case, immediatly or said so. In any case, I think it’s reasonable to discuss it here within the community. We post stuff from RC and discuss it here for instance. Patterico posts stuff from Captain Ed and discusses it on his blog.

    2. I can’t find the comments from John, now, but he seems to imply that Steve Bloom (or someone like that) needed to atone or apologize for comments expressed in another arena (Hughes’s blog) before he could post here. I think this is actually the DIRECT opposite of how nettiquette should work. Just because you have a war in one arena is no reason to extend it to another. In fact if you do “import your wars” then you are in the wrong. This is one reason that I disagreed with Gavin’s censorship of Steve. It doesn’t matter what Steve says on his blog. If he observes the posting rules at RC, he should be allowed to speak (if it is an uncensored forum).

    http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=777

  12. Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 10:28 AM | Permalink

    Re #11

    1) Since the post was simply to point people to another blog, it seems disengenuous to discuss the contents of that post over here. I’m sure Warwick would like to have a little traffic from time to time.

    2) Steve Bloom utilizes that netiquette you mention in order to gratuitously insult people off blog, and then use that person’s blog to insult other people. It’s a clear pattern of abusive behavior that I was and am determined to prevent happening here (and WH on his blog by all accounts). SB moves from blog to blog doing this, never answering for his statements made offblog let alone explaining or apologizing for them.

    Nobody believes that RC in uncensored or will be. It has the most comprehensively onesided moderation policy ever.

  13. TCO
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 1:35 PM | Permalink

    Steve?

  14. TCO
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 2:12 PM | Permalink

    John: I know we’re in disagreement, since I’ve stated your position as negative and you as positive. Not sure that we can really get anywhere, but for what it’s worth, I don’t care what Steve does on other blogs and don’t think the readership should either (of this blog). I think you are really forwarding your ownd disagreement with Steve from other blogs and using your mod powers to advantage to effect a war occuring elsewhere. Would prefer you reconsider and open the thread. Even if you still feel yourself in the right, please for the sake of landing question calls on the side of free discourse, open the thread.

  15. fFreddy
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 2:56 PM | Permalink

    TCO, if you don’t like John’s decision, why not leave it until Steve gets back and appeal it to him.

  16. TCO
    Posted Sep 10, 2006 at 3:12 PM | Permalink

    Sounds good.

  17. cbone
    Posted Sep 12, 2006 at 10:22 AM | Permalink

    Not really a head post idea, but there is an interesting ‘discussion’ taking place in the Michael Mann (scientist) wikipedia talk page. It is regarding the legitimacy of using blogs as sources in wiki biographies, and in general a bashing of CA. Worth a good chuckle if you have a few minutes. The recent commentary is at the bottom of the talk page.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Michael_Mann_%28scientist%29

  18. Posted Sep 14, 2006 at 5:21 PM | Permalink

    Just back from the lecture of Steve M. in Amsterdam at the Vrije Universiteit (Free University).

    I didn’t take notes and my memory is not anymore what it was 40 years ago… So, only a brief comment. Maybe Hans Erren can do it better, or Steve M. himself after his return (if he didn’t drink all the Belgian beer at once, I did give him, or he will be in deep trouble).

    It was a nice presentation, be it for non-specialists a little high tech here and there. A lot of students of the Free University itself, but no professors of the climate unit (!). Several questions thereafter, only few about technical matters, some about why the HS still is defended, and what Steve M. himself thinks about global warming.

    At the same university, All Gore will give a presentation within a few weeks (I suppose less technical, and still promoting the HS?).

    Ferdinand

  19. L Nettles
    Posted Sep 14, 2006 at 7:08 PM | Permalink

    Re #17 The wikipedia page on Mann is very entertaining, thanks for the link.

  20. David Archibald
    Posted Sep 14, 2006 at 7:21 PM | Permalink

    This just in from a vintner in the Margaret River region south of Perth:

    I keep a temperature record for my vineyards as hourly data. In the process of researching the plant response to declining seasonal temperatures I discovered that recent seasons have brought us to the edge where it gets to be difficult to ripen Cabernet Sauvignon. So, I started to look around a bit and discovered that the cold is coming from a rapidly cooling Antarctica. My theories involve the prediction of potential grape quality from climatic circumstances anywhere in the world. If you are going to have a theory it needs to have universal applicability. So I also get hourly data from Europe and America. In the upshot I was led to look at the reason for the rise and fall in temperatures and so to the story attached. England has just seen the fourth year of decline in August temperatures after a sunspot cycle peak. The usual is two or three, never four. Our growing season temperatures have been in decline here since 1999.

    It is getting too cold to ripen Cabernet Sauvignon!

  21. Steve Bloom
    Posted Sep 14, 2006 at 10:00 PM | Permalink

    Re #20: I was curious about this, and in particular as to why this vintner neglected to mention the rest of Australia. A quick look at the BoM climate summary for 2005 finds this (excerpts):

    “Australia recorded its warmest year on record in 2005.

    “Temperatures were consistently above average throughout the year, but autumn was particularly warm.

    “Despite some regional variations, the warm conditions in 2005 were remarkably widespread. Apart from Victoria and Tasmania, all States and the NT recorded 2005 mean temperatures among their top two warmest years on record. The only region recording a cooler than normal year was a coastal strip of WA extending from Cape Leeuwin to Carnarvon. Since 1979, all but four years have been warmer than average in Australia.”

    So Margaret River and environs appear to have just gotten lucky.

    Regarding the claim that “England has just seen the fourth year of decline in August temperatures,” I checked on the UK Met site and found the following assessment for this last summer:

    “Summer 2006 was one of the warmest on record for the UK, with an average temperature of 15.7 °C, 1.5 °C above the average expected at this time of year.”

    August did indeed continue a slight cooling trend over the last four years, but was still noticeably warmer than the 30 year average for August.

    David, if you check on the internet I suspect you’ll find that the bit about “rapidly cooling Antarctica” is equally misleading.

    Oh, and the vintner mentions U.S. temps but cites no current statistics. Possibly because of the record heat?

  22. David Archibald
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 3:13 AM | Permalink

    Re 21 The vintner did not mention the rest of Australia because he was recounting his personal experience. Real life experience, affecting his harvest, his hearth, his home, his livelihood. His is taking meticulous hourly records of natural phenomena and wondering what it means, and where it will lead. The Margaret River region is the first landfall from the weather factory that is the Antarctic. Margaret River at 34° S. Lat. is cooler in midsummer than Bordeaux at 45° N Lat. With a weak solar cycle 24 to be overprinted on an already cooling Antarctic, the prognosis is poor. Without sun and heat, the grapes will have stunted sugar levels and produce anaemic wines.

  23. Steve Bloom
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 2:47 PM | Permalink

    Re #22: You said: “The vintner did not mention the rest of Australia because he was recounting his personal experience.”

    But he said: “If you are going to have a theory it needs to have universal applicability.” Indeed.

    Don’t forget to look up that “rapidly cooling Antarctic” reference. He also made reference to data from Europe and America. Were those part of his personal experience?

    If you’re correct about solar cycle 24 those vintners are going to be out of business.

  24. TCO
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 7:01 PM | Permalink

    The isolated data points (Australian vintners) are as silly from colders (Aussie vintners) as they are from warmers (Katrina, heat waves, etc.). That the other side does it is irrelevant. The colder claim is that they are rational and fair and the warmers are not. When I see this kind of silliness, it really makes me doubt the whole colder community.

  25. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 7:42 PM | Permalink

    TCO, you might want to go read, sometime, what the late John Daly had to say about why he had no remorse about turning the warmer’s tricks back on them. Basicically, he pointed out he was greatly outnumbered and until the world was willing to listen he’d get their attention using the same sorts of hysterical nonsense, if necessary, that the warmers do. I can’t say I totally agree, but there are a fair number of us who aren’t into overstating their case, so if a few on our side are too shrill, so frigging what!

  26. Armand MacMurray
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 9:10 PM | Permalink

    Sorry, Dave. Bad science is bad science. Too much of it, and it even starts scaring away the good science. However, most don’t post bad science knowingly, so IMHO the proper response is education, not derision. Don’t doubt the community, TCO, educate it!

  27. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 10:17 PM | Permalink

    Armand, those most needing education are also those most resistant to it. I could propose a few names, but I won’t. Meanwhile, those who are out to hoodwink the public are to be allowed free rein as we who are above their tactics pull our punches?

  28. bender
    Posted Sep 15, 2006 at 11:26 PM | Permalink

    I had the same thought as #24 when reading the “colders'” posts, but decided not to say anything … for exactly the reasons cited in #25. It’s obvious from context what the “colders” are doing: poking fun at the warmers by turning the weakest of their arguments against them. Let it slide. As long as we don’t take it too seriously.

    Although – and not to alarm anyone – there is an ice age coming. [There really is!]

  29. Armand MacMurray
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 2:30 AM | Permalink

    Re: #27
    No punches need be pulled (although I think bender ends up fighting tar baby too much). A helpful word or link should suffice for the unintentionally mistaken.

  30. David Archibald
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 8:09 AM | Permalink

    Re #23, I am concerned as you are. These vintners could go out of business. I just checked in my cellar — only ten cases of red. Pathetic, really. I need more, much, much more. And only one case of grand cru. A timely reminder, and thankyou Mr Bloom.

    Re #25 and #26, shrill and bad science? Wash your mouths out. You would mock those who actually have thermometers, and use them, and make records of temperature that aid the conduct of their business? This is the tradition of the naturalists of the 18th and 19th centuries who recorded natural phenomena for the benefit of all mankind. If his results don’t agree with you preconceptions, you are well advised to re-examine those preconceptions. He may be a lone man in a field, but his results are corroborated by a great constellation of satellites that ceaselessly and constantly record the night time temperatures of the seas of this wonderful planet. I refer no less than to this site: http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climo.html

    Observe the great band of cold water that surrounds the Antarctic continent in the most recent image. No polar bears to drown here, only the relentless marching of the penguins. That great, menacing band of blue, indicating a below average temperature anomaly. And if you go back, month by month, notice how persistent it has been. Imagine, if you will, being that vintner, and having that great big cold anomaly throwing cold fronts at you, remorselessly, and watching your grapes just sit there, and not ripen. Only a heartless soul could look at that image and not feel even a little empathy for our correspondent from the Margaret River.

  31. bender
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 8:21 AM | Permalink

    Re #29
    Point taken. Will chill.

  32. jae
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 9:18 AM | Permalink

    Although – and not to alarm anyone – there is an ice age coming. [There really is!]

    That’s certain. But when? Soon? It looks like it to me.

  33. TCO
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 10:23 AM | Permalink

    Thanks Armand, bender. I care more about good science than about which side wins, about “skeptic conferences” or the like. About high quality, full, detailed, fair written arguments…(insert TCO refrain…which Wegman backs me on…)

  34. Barney Frank
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 11:54 AM | Permalink

    I care more about good science than about which side wins, about “skeptic conferences” or the like.

    I think everyone appreciates that about you TCO. I know I do.
    But, sometimes you start to sound like Mencken’s Puritan. Surely good science can withstand a goofy anecdote once in awhile can’t it? :)

  35. TCO
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 12:17 PM | Permalink

    No aenecdotes until you pick up your toys and do your homework. :)

  36. Steve Bloom
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 12:22 PM | Permalink

    Re #28: There are a fair number of posts that are just kidding, sure, but I’m afraid the solar crowd is quite serious. About that ice age, now would be the time to start holding your breath.

    Re #30: Hmm, a year ago things seem to have been different. Also, please explain how the cold fronts managed to pass up the rest of southern Oz (much of it closer to Antarctica that SW WA)?

  37. ET SidViscous
    Posted Sep 16, 2006 at 12:28 PM | Permalink

    “now would be the time to start holding your breath.”

    I already am, Sea Level is coming up so fast I only have a few thousand years before its over my head.

  38. TCO
    Posted Sep 20, 2006 at 8:52 PM | Permalink

    Steve, I would like to post in the Warwick Hughes thread. Could you please open it?

  39. Posted Dec 22, 2009 at 12:51 AM | Permalink

    Круто! Надеюсь продолжение будет не менее интересным…

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,251 other followers

%d bloggers like this: