Recent cyclones have been wildly exaggerated by the authorities, hoping for once for a catastrophe to actually happen: Category Five storms aren’t what they used to be, says Joanne Nova. Dr Marohasy adds: When Measurements Don’t Matter: Calem Smith
‘Environmental obscenity’ is now in epidemic proportions, and Tim Blair has it pegged:
It’s a well-known fact that no prediction of ecological catastrophe has ever come true.
Remember Tim Flannery’s claim that Sydney might run out of water by 2007? Our dams are currently 85 per cent full. What about poor poley bears going extinct? The big guys seem to be doing all right. And how many people ended up dead from radiation because of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear meltdown in 2011? Try exactly none. […]
No children at school today have seen any warming. The frighteners are now out in preparation for the next boondoggle in Paris.
Now, the failing media try one on Dr Willie Soon, who has produced a peer reviewed paper, falsifying the warming nonsense. The media now feel threatened: NYT SMEARS SCIENTIST WILLIE SOON FOR TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT ‘GLOBAL WARMING’
The paper that rocked the media: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~wsoon/Hiremath2012-d/AgnihotriDuttaSoon11-Aug5-TSIderivativevsISM-final.pdf
There’s always an excuse for everything: Update, Climategate was the beginning of the end of the warming scan, Dr Willie Soon is the first to have his science slandered: NYT smears scientists Willie Soon for telling the truth about ‘global warming’
By James Delingpole
Another day, another attack on the integrity of the Harvard-Smithsonian astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon, this time in the New York Times.
I first became aware of Soon in 2009 when reading through the Climategate emails. One of them was a jocular suggestion by a warmist called Tom Wigley as to how best to smear Soon and his co-author Sallie Baliunas.
“Might be interesting to see how frequently Soon and Baliunas, individually, are cited (as astronomers). Are they any good in their own fields? Perhaps we could start referring to them as astrologers (excusable as..’oops, just a typo’.”
You might be wondering what Soon and Baliunas had done to incur the wrath of the climate alarmist establishment. Well, they’d just published a meta-analysis of all the papers which had been written on the Medieval Warm Period (MWP). What their paper showed is that contrary to claims by one Michael Mann (the name may be familiar), the MWP was not a small, localised event but global, big and widespread.
Bishop Hill, with the last word: Another witchhunt
So the usual suspects in the green-tinged media are running another of their witchhunts. This time they have returned to the attack against Willie Soon, with the New York Times‘ Justin Gillis and the Guardian‘s Suzanne Goldenberg in the front line.
As far as I can see, the story is that Soon and three co-authors published a paper on climate sensitivity. At the same time (or perhaps in the past – this being a smear-job it’s hard to get at the facts) he was being funded by to do work on things like the solar influence on climate by people that greens feel are the baddies. They and the greens feel he should have disclosed that baddies were paying him to do stuff on a paper that was not funded by the baddies.
I guess you can make a case that he should have done, but I’m struggling to get very excited about it as a transgression.
And as a fairly ugly attempt to poison the well the articles in the New York Times and the Guardian are an indictment of the standards at those once respected publications. Their failure to discuss the contents of the Soon paper speaks volumes.