Trip to England

I’ve been away at a lake over the weekend. On opening my email, I find that over 120 readers have contributed support to my trip to England. I appreciate this not just for the financial support (which is appreciated), but as a demonstration of interest by readers. I must say that I take satisfaction in the sequence of deciding to take the trip and readers volunteering support, as opposed to engaging in a public telethon to ratchet up contributions before making the decision. The Guardian has confirmed that they will accommodate me in the panel. They seem a bit impressed that public support extends to actual contributions.

I have several offers of accommodation which I appreciate. Hotel prices in London do leave one with sticker shock if you aren’t on a government tab.

I’ve got lots of time to fill in. A few CA readers are helping to make appointments; I’ll do some emails later today and see what turns up.


  1. Speed
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:15 AM | Permalink

    Citizen Science.

  2. Barry Woods
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:17 AM | Permalink

    Another tip added for your flight..

    Don’t forget to purchase your JPMORGAN CHASE ClimateCare Certificate (carbon offset) for your flightover…. 😉

    If I was being cheeky, you could ask George Monbiot, or the Guardian to pay for it…

    Seriously, If I ask a question there, it will be, CAGW, right or wrong..
    Does anybody think Carbon trading, carbon economy, etc is a good idea..?

    Except of course investment banks and other vested finacial interests, who see a huge money making opportunity..

    “The ClimateCare team has been a part of J.P. Morgan’s Environmental Markets group since April 2008”

    JPMORGAN bought Climatecare, in 2008, before the dust to the world financial disaster had even settled,following there involvement in Lehmen Bros, clearly seeing all things CARBON as the next ‘opportunity’

    Enjoy your stay in London.

  3. Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:21 AM | Permalink

    Go on. Come on up to Edinburgh. Your invitation has been emailed to you. Hope you can come.

    • Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 3:01 PM | Permalink

      I contributed for the trip in the tip jar. Pleased to do so. And yes, come to Edinburgh. We’ll organise something.

  4. Henry chance
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:44 AM | Permalink

    It was my understanding Big Oil funded these excursions.

    This is a very important web site.

    • mpaul
      Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 2:09 PM | Permalink

      From time to time, I have purchased gasoline from Exxon Mobile for my car. So using the Team’s standard of truthiness, they will now claim to have proof that SMc has accepted financial support from persons known to have ‘business dealings’ with Exxon Mobile!

  5. Chuck Norcutt
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:47 AM | Permalink

    Be sure to see Anthony’s report “New Chinese study in GRL disputes the hockey stick conclusions” before you go.

    • geo
      Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 9:11 AM | Permalink

      I’m hoping Steve will apply his usual standards to that study, since it seems up his alley. I’m curious to see what kind of cooperation he does/doesn’t get in attempting to do so. And his findings too, of course.

  6. Barry Woods
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:59 AM | Permalink

    For Henry Chance:

    The Guardian is letting some stuff through moderation: (not me)

    Print Edition Front Page Headline today (july 05, 2010):

    Climategate changed science for the better, say scientists

    Let the promoters of emissions trading /global warming speak for themselves.

    International Emissions Trading Association (IETA)

    The biggest lobbying group at Copenhagen was the International Emissions Trading Association Its members include :-

    BP, Conoco Philips, Shell, E.ON AG (coal power stations owner, EDF (one of the largest participants in the global coal market), Gazprom (Russian oil and gas), Goldman Sachs, Barclays, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley..

    It has existed since just after Enron ordered Al Gore to put the emissions trading system into the Kyoto Protocol. Funny that.

  7. Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 9:11 AM | Permalink

    We’re all going to be in pins and needles until you report back. Good luck!

  8. Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 9:11 AM | Permalink

    That should be ON pins and needles. 😮

  9. Dick
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 11:02 AM | Permalink

    McIntyre – beyond a doubt, the most important participant.

  10. Anthony Watts
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 12:46 PM | Permalink

    Hopefully, they won’t lock you out in the hallway.

    Godspeed sir.

  11. doug
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 12:58 PM | Permalink

    Money in the tip jar. Some of it can be traced to when I worked for big oil 20 years ago. They taught me sequence stratigraphy, which shows just how dynamic the natural climate has been.

    Thanks for doing this Steve.

  12. mpaul
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 2:18 PM | Permalink

    I stay at the Melia White House by Regents Park when I go to London. It’s not outrageously expensive (by London standards) and it’s right across the street from a tube stop, so its very easy to get around.

  13. TA
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 2:22 PM | Permalink

    Just added $10. I’m a little embarrassed it isn’t more, but I would be even more embarrassed if I didn’t contribute at all. I’m glad to hear that 120 people (and more by now, I suspect) have contributed. I look at it as a dirt cheap “subscription” for the best education–and entertainment–on the web today, not to mention, with the symposium, a chance to expose the world to a little sanity. If you receive more than your travel expenses, that’s great, too. You deserve more than the tip jar will ever pay.

    Best wishes with the symposium and other appointments.

  14. Phillip Bratby
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 2:37 PM | Permalink

    If you get an invitation to visit the Met Office (!!!!), I can put you up 30 miles away. Jar tipped. Hope you top 200 tippers.

    • Hyperthermania
      Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 6:20 PM | Permalink

      Phillip I can beat that. 10 miles from the Met, but with a house full of kids and temporarily unable to drive (due to cardiac arrest) it probably isn’t that attractive an offer, however, Steve you would be most welcome. I haven’t added to your tip jar yet, but I will be at the Guardian debate to listen and learn.
      Look forward to seeing you there. If you do get roped into any other official engagements (in the South West of England) then please let me / us know about them. Have a good trip.

  15. BSM
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 2:43 PM | Permalink

    Just downloaded and read Climategate: The CRUtape Letters yesterday and finished reading today. I wasn’t able to put it down.

    YOU SHOULD BE KNIGHTED for all of your tireless work!

    • Hyperthermania
      Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 6:24 PM | Permalink

      If you’re flying economy keep a look out for Her Maj. She must be coming back soon.

  16. stumpy
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 3:01 PM | Permalink

    I thought we were all well funded big oil lobyists! lol!

    Its great to see grass roots people coming together and organising something like this – and that must be a scary thing for the AGW crowd! The many have more power than the few.

  17. matthu
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 3:02 PM | Permalink

    What point would you most like Steve to get across in the debate?

    Mine would be not so much the loss of trust in individual scientists, but a complete loss of trust in parliamentary enquiries / independent enquiries / the establishment and most specifically Oxburgh and Reese and most of the RS. I think we have all been well-enough informed about the nature of these enquiries to realise who the villains are here.

    Also a complete loss of trust in parliament’s ability ever to understand and debate e.g. the Climate Act 2008, where they failed even to examine let alone justify the huge costs involved.

  18. Tim Caton
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 3:11 PM | Permalink

    Jar tipped – best wishes for your visit here.

  19. Kenn Heeley
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 3:30 PM | Permalink

    My $20 in the tip jar, Steve …. welcome to England.

  20. Jacob
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 4:25 PM | Permalink

    I second that.

  21. Atomic Hairdryer
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 4:26 PM | Permalink

    jar tipped. The Melia hotel looks handy, RIBA is an easy stroll from there. Hope you don’t get too booked up with interviews and have time to see the sights.

  22. ZT
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 4:57 PM | Permalink

    Congratulations to Steve on the well deserved recognition from his readers. It is also worth remarking that Climate Audit is more read that Real Climate (see (The Guardian could learn something from such market research facts).

    OT – the latest from the Roger Harrabin the BBC:

    (…is it just me or is there a hint amid the activism of some nagging questions particularly about the Oxburgh inanity in this piece?)

    …expect the Muir Russel positioning article tomorrow.

  23. Dartmoor Resident
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 5:22 PM | Permalink

    I’m another Brit who is pleased to contribute (it makes me a bit less ashamed after seeing all the Bitish whitewash poured out recently).
    As a regular visitor to climateaudit (and WUWT) I’ve learned a lot and hope you and all the regular contributors can keep up the good work.

  24. Big oil
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 5:40 PM | Permalink

    If I tipped, could we keep it quiet? 🙂

    • Dave
      Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 8:56 PM | Permalink

      If it’s anything to do with BP, it’ll probably leak out somehow 🙂

  25. John Brady
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 5:57 PM | Permalink

    Steve, a tip from another long-time lurker, in support of your commitment to finding the truth (whatever it turns out to be). Sadly I can’t make it to London on the 14th so I’ll miss the panel but I hope you have a great debate.

  26. pat
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 6:01 PM | Permalink

    Jar tipped – have a great trip.

  27. Navy Bob
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 6:49 PM | Permalink

    Steve – you always disappear my comments for reasons I don’t understand, but I still like you anyway. Here’s 20 bucks.

  28. stephan
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 6:54 PM | Permalink

    re: Melia White House stayed there for a conference two years ago
    the breakfast is incredible go for it. It will end up being far more relevant than the yes AGW, no AGW.. LOL

  29. EdeF
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 7:29 PM | Permalink

    The Marriot County Hall Hotel at Westminster bridge, downtown London is a great location. Just across the river from Big Ben, Parliament, Westminster Abbey, etc. We have had some guys stay there on travel before. Right next door to Waterloo train station, you can get anywhere in the UK from that location. Price is not bad for downtown London.

  30. JRR Canada
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 9:29 PM | Permalink

    Contributions to this enquiry freely given, all dollars taken to fund Environment Canada spending on AWG bitterly resented. An irony Steve may appreciate, I am contributing to his endeavors what would have been my contribution to the Conservative Party of Canada, until the Canadian Govt reviews the science/political farce, not one penny from me.As a joke, Tarsands of Alberta; Canadians cleaning up Gods Oil Spill.Its the twist in our view that controls what we see? Sorry off topic, I’m cheering for you Mr McIntyre.Have a great trip.

  31. Howard
    Posted Jul 5, 2010 at 11:22 PM | Permalink

    Thanks for everything that you’ve done Steve.

  32. Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 12:05 AM | Permalink

    Can’t make a contribution through paypal (someone once cloned my card so they are, rightly, unprepared to risk my name again).

    Can make a contribution in kind. One thing you must do in London is have a great curry. Would be honoured to entertain you at the best curry house in London.

    If even slightly interested, please let me know by email … I’m not a dribbling stalker and I don’t tuck my shirt into my underpants.

  33. Dung
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 1:47 AM | Permalink


    If you are inviting SM to a curry (described as “the best” but with no peer review process!) Then should he accept you need to book the whole place!

    I am sure there is massive cross fertilisation between CA and Bishop Hill but it appears that over at the Bishop we are far better prepared for this event. As an example I discribe below the dress code we have been discussing so that we will recognise each other at the event (The debate, not the curry):

    As far as I can make out I need to be wearing:

    A carnation behind the ear.
    A Gulf petroleum, BP or Exxon T shirt.
    An endangered plant in a button hole.
    A scarf (but not Aldershot F.C. so as not to be mistaken for Mr Adler)
    Medieval dress (plus crash helmet?).
    An IOP T shirt (over or under the BP one?).
    Tiffany jewelry???
    The Collected Works of Nigel Molesworth.
    The Hockey Stick Illusion.
    A Bishop’s crosier.
    A Maple Leaf Hockey Stick.
    A home made badge saying “please dont eat my liver”.
    I also need to visit The Green Man, Crown and Mitre, and Masons Arms on the way.
    I need to be accompanied by a topless Katie and set fire to any available copies of the Guardian as soon as I get in.

    As a very unfit 62 year old some of the above may pose a problem, in particular getting past the Green Man.

    • Atomic Hairdryer
      Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 5:58 AM | Permalink

      Hey, we’re supposed to be an organised, well funded conspiracy and we can’t even get a uniform?

      • kim
        Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 8:27 AM | Permalink

        Judith in the sky
        With diamond wit glittering.
        Hurry the curry.

  34. Geoff Sherrington
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 2:03 AM | Permalink

    If I knew a media person with clout, I be asking you if it was appropriate to arrange a meeting. But I don’t, not in G.B.

    Would it be helpful for you to post here some of the people or types of people you’d like to meet? (Knowing a little of your style, you have probably organised the meetings you seek, if so do snip this.)

    Andrew Miller MP as head of the new Science & Technology Committee in the Commons comes over as cordial and knowledgeable.

    Watch out for British pork pies. We’ve seen quite a few lately and they are not appetising.

    • Latimer Alder
      Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 2:18 AM | Permalink

      Graham Stringer MP from the same committee is a scientist (chemistry) by training and the only one to ask even remotely difficult questions of CRU at the Parliamentary hearings. He also has a track record as a bit of an iconoclast…might be worth trying to see him.

      • Geoff Sherrington
        Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:26 PM | Permalink

        Graham Stringer MP is also a chemist, so he starts out with an advantage. I’m not aware if the new Committee has been appointed yet and if he is on it. I watched the video of the earlier Inquiry a couple of times and saw his capability contrasted with some others. It’s so different when you worked before in an honoured profession, rather than having no more than the qualifications of a political groupie.

  35. Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 2:28 AM | Permalink

    I’m so glad you are coming here (if I could have done I’d hyave been there to support you), and in particular I am glad to hear you contemplating visiting Phil Jones. On that note, yesterday’s Guardian talks about all the hate mail prominent climate scientists have been receiving since Climategate, and though I know you would deeply abhor such actions, it would be really good to see you visiting Jones and/or doing a post here specifically distancing yourself from that kind of action, where you can be seen to distance yourself very clearly.

    This topic may well come up on the 14th and it would be a great shame to see science issues sidelined by the nefarious actions of people with whom you have no sympathy even though they appear to some to be on your side.

    • rcrejects
      Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 2:54 AM | Permalink

      I’m always suspicious about these hate mail stories. Not doubting that they have been sent. But by whom? A Machiavellian approach on the part of CAGW proponents, feeling beleaguered, might be to try to gain sympathy from the general public by a plan to send hate mail to climate scientists. Most of them wouldn’t even need to know what was happening.

      In politics this approach is called “false flag”.

    • Martin Brumby
      Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:16 AM | Permalink

      I suspect that much of the “hate mail” is likely to be along the lines of “No Medieval warm Period? You gotta be kidding me!” and so on.

      But some of the the blatantly tendentious agitprop that has been passed off as science is enough to make any rational person cross. And when this junk science is in turn eagerly taken up by the media and politicians keen to “save the planet” (and hike taxation and energy costs through the roof) then people will be even more annoyed.

      I don’t for one second condone hate mail – we’ve seen enough batted in our direction by the warmists. But if the latter get their way and (for example) domestic electricity bills rise to £5,000 per year by 2020, as the Government Regulator Ofgem predicts, then those who have made a lucrative career out of scare stories with little foundation are likely to be getting something a lot more unpleasant than nasty emails.

    • Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 8:15 AM | Permalink

      I sent a polite letter to Michael Griffin at NASA suggesting James Hansen is an embarassment and should be fired. Is that hate mail?

      Michael is no longer with NASA, so future hate mail of this sort should be sent to:

      Mr. Charles F. Bolden, Jr.
      NASA Headquarters
      Suite 5K39
      Washington, DC 20546

  36. Henrik Oelund
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 2:34 AM | Permalink

    It is men like yourself Steve, that makes me proud.
    Have a safe trip, hope there is enough money to go to the theater!

  37. pedro leanizbarrutia
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 3:22 AM | Permalink

    Desde España, diez dolares para el viaje a Europa. Muchos agradecemos su rigor y honestidad.
    Wellcome !

  38. Simon Ayling
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 3:24 AM | Permalink

    Jar tipped – welcome to the UK

  39. E O'Connor
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 5:53 AM | Permalink

    Bonzer News!

    May that Oxford University, especially the Philosophy Faculty, also be impressed.

    The debate will be at 4am (East Coast) Oz time and I should imagine a few of us will watch it live while snuggled in our doonas.

  40. Varco
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:05 AM | Permalink

    Tip jar tipped. I trust this trip to the UK will be remembered for all the right reasons, however you would be welcome to our shores at any time.

  41. Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:11 AM | Permalink

    I think I recall this Pearce event in London on July 14. Coincidently there is another event of interest in Edinburgh that same day: RSE/ICMS Discussion Forum – Climate change during the last 10,000 years: Reconstructions and uncertainties – Professor Heinz Wanner, University of Bern, Professor John Haslett, Trinity College, Dublin and Professor Gabriele Hegerl, Chair of Climate System Science, University of Edinburgh Location

  42. Hoi Polloi
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:30 AM | Permalink

    “The Guardian has confirmed that they will accommodate me in the panel.”
    I think this is the most important message and hopefully the start of McSteve being invited to other investigation pannels to follow.
    Tipped the jar.

  43. Andy L
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:39 AM | Permalink

    The (UK) Economist has an interesting on-line article headlined “Bias and the IPCC Report: Accentuating the Negative”. It refers to a report from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) published yesterday
    The final two paragraphs from the article are as follows:
    Perhaps the most worrying thing about the PBL report, though, is a rather obvious one about which its authors say little. In all ten of the issues that the PBL categorised as major (the original errors on glaciers and Dutch sea level, and the eight others identified in the report), the impression that the reader gets from the IPCC is more strikingly negative than the impression which would have been received if the underlying evidence base had been reflected as the PBL would have wished, with more precise referencing, more narrow interpretation and less authorial judgment. A large rise in heat related deaths in Australia is mentioned without noting that most of the effect is due to population rather than climate change. A claim about forest fires in northern Asia seems to go further than the evidence referred to—in this case a speech by a politician—would warrant.

    The Netherlands look more floodable, Asian glaciers more fragile. A suspicion thus gains ground that the way in which the IPCC sythesises, generalises snd checks its findings may systematically favour adverse outcomes in a way that goes beyond just serving the needs of policy makers. Anecdotally, authors bemoan fights to keep caveats in place as chapters are edited, refined and summarised. The PBL report does not prove or indeed suggest systematic bias, and it stresses that it has found nothing that should lead the parliament of the Netherlands, or anyone else, to reject the IPCC’s findings. But the panel set up to look at the IPCC’s workings by Dr Pachauri and Mr Ban should ask some hard questions about systematic tendencies to accentuate the negative.

    • Geoff Sherrington
      Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM | Permalink

      One of the causes of misunderstanding, ignorance of caveats, etc., is that too much IPCC work is rushed to meet deadlines; often it is work in progress which should not be published until completion. The “hide the decline” is such a case. Given more time, the non-compliant data might have been assessed with more thought and a rather differnt type of conclusion reached, one woth ongoing value.

  44. Andy L
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 7:40 AM | Permalink

    web address for the article from The Economist (you may need to register)

  45. Wijnand
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 8:04 AM | Permalink

    My 2 cents in the jar. Go kick some beehind over yonder!
    (long time lurker but time to put my money where my mouth is)
    All the best

  46. Grant
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 8:27 AM | Permalink

    This event almost made me smile when I reached into my sporran–
    Bon Voyage

  47. Brokenhockeystick
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 8:55 AM | Permalink

    $10 from me and it couldn’t be going to a better place. Welcome to England Steve.

  48. Laurie
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 10:23 AM | Permalink

    Another lurker tipping. Safe trip and take care of yourself.

  49. geo
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 12:43 PM | Permalink

    I would think we must be getting in range of financing the whole thing, if I take the original 120 plus the indications since. Makes one proud to be a member of a community. . .

  50. steven Mosher
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 1:02 PM | Permalink

    A climate scientist’s view of hate mail:

    “How can you justify ClimateGate? You silly wanker.”

    provided by the guardian as an example of hate mail. yes, there are stronger statements in the pile. I’d say most of them are right up there with some of the comments you see on blogs. from both sides.
    Are warministas really shocked that people they call denialists return the favor by calling them Nazi’s

    And yes there are some really nasty death threats, like i hope an earthquake swallows your home.

    • geo
      Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 2:50 PM | Permalink

      I’m fairly sure “I hope an earthquake swallows your home” isn’t actually a death threat unless your secret identity is “The Mole Man”, in which case a call to Reed Richards may in fact be in order.

  51. Mike
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 1:44 PM | Permalink

    As another lurker, who appreciates all that you represent with both your work and moral compass I just put 50 Canadian loonies in the jar. Hope this helps with your ongoing dialogue with the climate loonies. (For none Canadians a “loonie” is a $1Cdn coin)

    In the spirit of openess and full disclosure this is “contaminated” since it’s from my Canadian oil company pension.


  52. Kenneth Fritsch
    Posted Jul 6, 2010 at 4:10 PM | Permalink

    I am making a contribution with hopes that it will be used to purchase, consume and enjoy a good single malt Scotch whisky while on the isle.

  53. Rod McLaughlin
    Posted Jul 14, 2010 at 6:44 PM | Permalink

    George Green Monbiot was a remarkably fair chairman. The Guardian Climategate debate was well attended by many intelligent people. It was much better than the meeting at the Nigel Lawson think tank the day before. Because Monbiot was fair, and the sceptics’ arguments are better, they won the debate, game, set and match. Thanks for coming, Steve.

4 Trackbacks

  1. […] have the courage to ask the plaintiff to get involved, and he didn’t. But Steve McIntyre is going anyway. Hopefully they’ll have the courage to hear what he has to say and not lock him out in the […]

  2. […] Trip to England […]

  3. By Top Posts — on Jul 5, 2010 at 7:12 PM

    […] Trip to England I’ve been away at a lake over the weekend. On opening my email, I find that over 120 readers have contributed […] […]

  4. By Niche Modeling » Monthly Roundup on Jul 6, 2010 at 6:12 AM

    […] senior climate scientists to the real world of professional transparency. Steve McIntyre has received overwhelming financial support from his readers for his trip to the Guardian’s debate in […]

%d bloggers like this: