Comments on: Don’t Mistake Other People’s Public Confidence for “Proof”

By: An Inquirer

An Inquirer — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:06:59 +0000

Perhaps related to the Public Confidence of Others, I think there is a remarkable story coming out of Australia. I believe no exaggeration to point out that CSIRO has been particularly alarmist among the AGW movement. Now, they have issued a statement that there was “no evidence linking climate change to drought in eastern Australia. . . At this stage, we’d prefer to say we’re talking about natural variability. The science is not sufficiently advanced to say it’s climate change, one way or the other. The jury is still out on that,” Dr Post said.

I could go on to clarify many misconceptions about droughts in Australia, but suffice it to say that this statement from CSIRO is truly noteworthy. It would be remarkable progress if government agencies start being the source of reliable information in the area of climate issues.

By: ADiff

ADiff — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 20:38:08 +0000

Methinks all the more reason to only vote for candidates who show a willingness to be skeptical enough to tell a silk purse from a sow’s ear……

This story’s amazing enough without even considering we’re talking about such egregious ‘willing suspension of disbelief’ by the Chairman of the IPCC.

If there were any remaining doubt the IPCC was a purely political body, without deserving even a shred of scientific credibility, this story removes it.

By: Pete Ballard

Pete Ballard — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:05:34 +0000

It’s like everyday is Christmas. I can’t wait to see what gets unwrapped tomorrow. Keep up the good work.

By: Ike

Ike — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:11:20 +0000

Jim, that’s easy.

The AGW bandwagon never relied on wheels. It is propelled along using the same “frictionless inertia technology” as The Can.

You know… “The Can” that George W. Bush “kicked down the road,” that somehow will never stop sliding forward.

By: Jim Turner

Jim Turner — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:18:15 +0000

So the IPCC publish statements based on ‘Chinese whispers!’ It is an insight into the mentality within the IPCC that they publish a statement that is unsubstantiated and unresearched, just accepted because it supports their position. Clearly it never crossed their minds that someone else might do their job for them and check it out. What I can’t understand is now that all the wheels seem to have come off the AGW wagon, how does it still roll on?

By: NancyL

NancyL — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 02:19:30 +0000

Pielke Jr has a timeline which includes that the erroneous source for the number joined Pachauri's TERI. You may now scream.

By: hunter

hunter — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:07:29 +0000

Spen,
And he receives big money from big ooi, too!
But he believes in AGW, so he is thereby completely qualified for AGW promotion.

By: Spen

Spen — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:52:11 +0000

Your quote –’A leading climate scientist [IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri’

He’s not a climate scientist. He was a railway engineer with Indian Railways.

By: hunter

hunter — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:12:58 +0000

BTW, reading the conclusion of the report brings the reader to a misleading claim:
That this latest failure is somehow more important than the crugate leaks and the systemic corruption they expose, or the falsification of the hockey stick, or the deliberately introduced heat bias into the record, etc. etc.
This IPCC scam is just part of the pattern of false claims that AGW promoters make.

By: hunter

hunter — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:10:07 +0000

There is no reason to believe, now that we can see GISS, crugate and the IPCC, that critical reviews of all orgs supporting AGW alarmism will not show similar or worse.