Nutters

It seems to be impossible to get away from politics at the moment.

Boris Johnson has dropped out of the Conservative party leadership race, to everyone’s astonishment. As a matter of interest, two of those remaining in the race, Michael Gove and Theresa May, both voted against the smoking ban in 2006.

And the Labour party seems to be tearing itself apart (again). In a resounding vote of No Confidence in party leader Jeremy Corbyn, MPs voted something like 170 – 40 against him. And yet he won’t step down as party leader! I can only suppose that the 170 Labour MPs will form their own party. It’s a complete mess.

So in addition to the already very heated US presidential election, we’re going to see months and months of infighting and electioneering in the UK.

In other news, Michael Mann, the famous inventor of the the “hockey stick” graph (my emphases):

Leading climate doomsayer Michael Mann recently downplayed the importance of climate change science, telling Democrats that data and models “increasingly are unnecessary” because the impact is obvious.

“Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,” Mr. Mann told the Democratic Platform Drafting Committee at a hearing.

“What is disconcerting to me and so many of my colleagues is that these tools that we’ve spent years developing increasingly are unnecessary because we can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens, in the 24-hour news cycle. Regardless of how you measure the impacts of climate change — be it food, water, health, national security, our economy — climate change is already taking a great toll… The stakes could not be greater in this next election — the future of our children and grandchildren literally hangs in the balance — nor could the contrast be any more stark. We have on the one hand a Republican Party whose standard bearer, Donald Trump, and a great majority of its congressional representatives deny that climate change even exists. We have on the other hand a Democratic Party that understands full well that while we can debate the policy specifics for dealing with this crisis, we cannot bury our heads in the sand and avoid dealing with the growing threat.”

No need to do any science. No need for careful measurements or climate simulation models. All you need do is watch the box. You can see it happening in real time.

Maybe you just have to look out the window to see it.

It sounds like Michael Mann sees absolutely everything as being caused by climate change. I wonder what happens when someone like him meets one of those antismokers who believe that absolutely everything is caused by smoking? Both believe that there’s just one root cause of all the evil in the world. They just happen to identify different root causes.

Or do they? After all, tobacco smoke contains carbon dioxide. So perhaps they’d agree?

None of these people are scientists. They’re all a bunch of nutters.

I’ve been watching Versailles on BBC iplayer for the past week or so. I’ve also been watching the Musketeers. The result is that I’ve got the two period costume dramas hopelessly confused with each other, and I keep expecting Athos, Porthos, and Aramis to show up at Versailles to clear the roads of murderous bandits for Louis XIV. They’d be perfect for the job. Bandits wouldn’t last ten minutes.

It also doesn’t help that both series feature near pitch-black, candle-lit sets in which you can hardly see anything. In these circumstances, Louis XIV looks just like Aramis.

But at least Versailles has a rather haunting piece of music over its opening titles. It’s something called Outro by M83. And it’s already been used as the haunting accompanying music for dozens of other films. Maybe the Musketeers is using it too.

 

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Nutters

  1. Tony says:

    More on past nutters claiming to be scientists though somewhat off topic. But food for thought because of the obvious parallels, I think.

    I happened to be reading about Alan Turing today. Turing was a mathematical genius. The father both of computer science and artificial intelligence research. And the code breaker who played a key role in winning WW11.

    In 1950 he published a paper called “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”. In it, he mentions E.S.P. and notes that as it doesn’t fit with known science, he would love to be able to discredit it. But he says: “Unfortunately the statistical evidence, at least for telepathy, is overwhelming” (p453)

    Belief in telepathy appears to have started in the late 19th century, gradually becoming academically respectable before being discredited in the 1970/80s. The most prominent, of many, researchers was https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Banks_Rhine.

    In 1940 Rhine co-authored with Joseph Gaither Pratt and other associates at Duke “Extra-Sensory Perception After Sixty Years” , a review of all experimental studies of clairvoyance and telepathy. It has been recognized as the first meta-analysis in the history of science.

    Martin Gardner published a paper debunking Rhine’s work in 1974 and that may have marked the decline of telepathy as a respectable subject. Rhine died in 1980.

  2. Some French bloke says:

    we can see […] the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens

    Just like the goggle boxes have been so convincingly and unanimously showing us how closely lung cancers rates reflect, of all things, cigarette consumption (!), give or take a few decades (2 to 6, according to need) of convenient lag-time!

    Indeed, “Everything that was directly lived has receded into a representation.” (Guy Debord)

  3. harleyrider1978 says:

    Professor Woodcock told the Yorkshire Evening Post:.

    “The term ‘climate change’ is meaningless. The Earth’s climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago. The theory of ‘man-made climate change’ is an unsubstantiated hypothesis [about] our climate [which says it] has been adversely affected by the burning of fossil fuels in the last 100 years, causing the average temperature on the earth’s surface to increase very slightly but with disastrous environmental consequences.

    “The theory is that the CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuel is the ‘greenhouse gas’ causes ‘global warming’ – in fact, water is a much more powerful greenhouse gas and there is 20 time more of it in our atmosphere (around one per cent of the atmosphere) whereas CO2 is only 0.04 per cent.

    “There is no reproducible scientific evidence CO2 has significantly increased in the last 100 years.”

    He also said:

    “Even the term ‘global warming’ does not mean anything unless you give it a time scale. The temperature of the earth has been going up and down for millions of years, if there are extremes, it’s nothing to do with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it’s not permanent and it’s not caused by us. Global warming is nonsense.”

    Professor Woodcock dismissed evidence for global warming, such as the floods that deluged large parts of Britain this winter, as “anecdotal” and therefore meaningless in science.

    “Events can happen with frequencies on all time scales in the physics of a chaotic system such as the weather. Any point on lowland can flood up to a certain level on all time scales from one month to millions of years and it’s completely unpredictable beyond around five days.”

    Also, the only reason we regularly hear that we have had the most extreme weather “since records began” is that records only began about 100 years ago.

    “The reason records seem to be being frequently broken is simply because we only started keeping them about 100 years ago. There will always be some record broken somewhere when we have another natural fluctuation in weather.

    “It’s absolutely stupid to blame floods on climate change, as I read the Prime Minister did recently. I don’t blame the politicians in this case, however, I blame his so-called scientific advisors.”

    When asked how can say this when most of the world’s scientists, political leaders and people in general are committed to the theory of global warming, Prof Woodcock answered bluntly:

    “This is not the way science works. If you tell me that you have a theory there is a teapot in orbit between the earth and the moon, it’s not up to me to prove it does not exist, it’s up to you to provide the reproducible scientific evidence for your theory.

    “Such evidence for the man-made climate change theory has not been forthcoming.”

    This lack of evidence has not stopped a whole green industry building up, however. At the behest of that industry, governments have been passing ever more regulations that make life more difficult and expensive.

    “…the damage to our economy the climate change lobby is now costing us is infinitely more destructive to the livelihoods of our grand-children. Indeed, we grand-parents are finding it increasingly expensive just to keep warm as a consequence of the idiotic decisions our politicians have taken in recent years about the green production of electricity.”

    Professor Woodcock is the latest scientist to come out against the theory of man-made global warming. James Lovelock, once described as a “green guru”, earlier this month said that climate scientists “just guess”, and that no one really knows what’s happening.

    Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, also said that she was “duped into supporting the IPCC” and added “If the IPCC is dogma, then count me in as a heretic

  4. waltc says:

    Not entirely off topic: As you may (or not) know, Michael Mann has been suing Mark Steyne –in Canada, I think, where free speech is a luxury–for Steyne’s debunking the hockey stick. The case seems to have dragged on longer than Jarndyce v Jarndyce (sp?) .In any case, if you’ve got half an hour, here’s Steyne riffing on political correctness, the death of jokes, and the rigidity of unsupported statist ideologies;

  5. waltc says:

    A propos only of Versailles and time melds …I was there once on a cold winter day when a paramour and I were the only visitors and got a personal guided tour. As we stood in one of those long ( long) narrow ballrooms, the guy told us that during ww2, the palace was dead center –a literal bridge–between Free and Vichy France and gutsy Frenchmen, stuck on the wrong side, would dodge German bullets to speed-ride their bikes right through that ballroom to (relative) freedom. Standing there I got a vivid image of the powder-wigged flunkies who, in Louie’s time, stood lined against the walls under the gold sconces watching impassively as the frantic bike-riders rushed the hall. A pn eerie breach in the fourth dimension.

  6. Manfred says:

    ‘Climate’ is accepted as a 30 year span over which climate variables (“anomalies”) are evaluated for trend. ‘Weather’ is reflected in moment to moment entrail gazing, MSM politics and eco-Progressive confirmation bias.

    Lloyd PJ. (2015) Energy & Environment showed that centennial variation for the last 8000 yrs. of the Holocene is 0.98C±0.27C, informing us that the anthropogenic signature of human CO2 radiative forced ‘global warming’ is undetectable and indiscernible from natural variation, aside from the glaringly and inconveniently obvious, since 1998, there has been an absence of statistically significant warming for 18+ years, (McKitrick, R.R. (2014) HAC-Robust Measurement of the Duration of a Trendless Subsample in a Global Climate Time Series. Open Journal of Statistics, 4, 527-535. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojs.2014.47050).

    The UN definition (there are four) of ‘climate change’ (2000) adopted when global warming became the politically incorrect and inconvenient untruth, speaks of the human influence on atmospheric composition and land usage. Climate change therefore reaches a theoretical ‘zero value’ of influence when Gaia is purged of ALL humanity.
    UN Climate change definition: https://web.archive.org/web/20140913102734/http://unfccc.int/files/documentation/text/html/list_search.php?what=keywords&val=&valan=a&anf=84&id=10

    I wish those that peddled the climate meme were simply ‘nutters’. Aided and abetted by a derelict Fourth Estate, their Progressive eco-propaganda is the back bone of an aspirant World Order expressed by the EU – UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, and currently quite visible in the Canadian Obama clima-fest – http://video.foxnews.com/v/5014184818001/gutfeld-terror-rains-on-the-climate-change-parade/?#sp=show-clips

    • Harleyrider1978 says:

      Problem is we don’t believe any junk science from the UN or IARC or who or CDC or any of them anymore it’s all politically biased trash for UN agendas

  7. prog says:

    Talking of nutters…

  8. Joe L. says:

    Here’s a great video that is more appropriate for yesterday’s post, “The Stolen Future,” but it also works for “Nutters.”

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s