President Obama is allowing the heroic US military – and, therefore, the American people – to be humiliated in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is withdrawing US soldiers from Iraq and leaving some in Afghanistan under demeaning conditions imposed by vengeful, spiteful, corrupt enemy leaders.
Diana West writes at Townhall:
This withdrawal [from Iraq] will mark the end of a misguided misadventure to convert, in a zealously secular and even philo-Islamic way, a member of the Islamic world to the ways of the West. Despite the courage, dedication and sacrifice of American and allied troops, despite the so-called surge, despite the endless (and endlessly expensive) attempts to win Iraqi “hearts and minds,” it was a flop.
The top American spokesman in Iraq, Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan, can spin all he wants – “It’s not about winning or losing but making significant progress” – but this eight-year “counterinsurgency” didn’t work. It was a failure – unless, of course, you’re Iran. To borrow from the great Winston Churchill, also unenthralled with the British misadventure in Iraq in the year 1922, we have been paying billions of dollars “for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano out of which we are in no circumstances to get anything worth having.”
In Afghanistan … President Hamid Karzai has just presided over a gathering of the clans, a “loya jirga” assembly of some 2,000 Afghans, who have produced a list of conditions for a continuing American presence.
Here, culled from different news sources, is a list of the loya jirga’s conditions:
1) no more immunity from Afghan law for U.S. forces;
2) no more night raids by U.S. forces;
3) no more “arbitrary” detention of Afghan suspects;
4) no more U.S. detention centers;
5) transfer Afghan detainees to Afghan detention centers;
6) a capped 10- year limit to any pact with the United States;
7) Afghans must lead all security missions after 2014;
8) the United States should commit to training role and “support”;
9) no more U.S.-run “parallel” structures to handle contracting and other matters; rather, America should support Afghan institutions; and
10) no U.S. attacks on neighbors [ie Pakistan, Iran] from Afghan soil.
What they’re saying, these vicious, uncivilized, dark-minded men, is “continue to give us what we want from you, but don’t interfere with anything we choose to do”.
But still Karzai wants more. “The U.S. wants military installations from us. We will give those to them. But we have conditions for this. We will benefit from this. Our soldiers will be trained. Our police will be trained. We will benefit from their money.”
The Iraqis and Afghans are, she says, “cold and numb to the blood and sacrifice of tens of thousands of Americans.”
So too, it is plain to see, is President Obama.
A few samples of the sublime silliness of Islam:
It has been mentioned that the person who masturbates shall be resurrected on the Day of Judgment with a pregnant hand. – Shaikh ul Arab wal Ajam Hazrat Maulana Shah Hakeem Muhammad Akhtar Saheb
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: None of you should drink while standing; and if anyone forgets, he must vomit. – Sahih Muslim 23:5022
Whoso is wont to think (through envy) that Allah will not give him (Muhammad) victory in the world and the Hereafter (and is enraged at the thought of his victory), let him stretch a rope up to the roof (of his dwelling), and let him hang himself. Then let him see whether his strategy dispelleth that whereat he rageth!. – Qur’an 22:15
Buraida reported on the authority of his father that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: He who played chess is like one who dyed his hand with the flesh and blood of swine. – Sahih Muslim 28:5612
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: Once the Prophet, while passing through one of the grave-yards of Medina or Mecca heard the voices of two persons who were being tortured in their graves. The Prophet said, “These two persons are being tortured not for a major sin (to avoid).” The Prophet then added, “Yes! (they are being tortured for a major sin). Indeed, one of them never saved himself from being soiled with his urine while the other used to go about with calumnies (to make enmity between friends). The Prophet then asked for a green leaf of a date-palm tree, broke it into two pieces and put one on each grave. On being asked why he had done so, he replied, “I hope that their torture might be lessened, till these get dried.” – Sahih Buhhari 1:4:15
Abu Dharr reported: The Messenger of ‘Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him (a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog. I said: O Abu Dharr, what feature is there in a black dog which distinguish it from the red dog and the yellow dog? He said: O, son of my brother, I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as you are asking me, and he said: The black dog is a devil. – Sahih Muslim 4:1032
Abu Umama narrated: “The Messenger of God said, ‘Everyone that God admits into paradise will be married to 72 wives; two of them are houris and seventy of his inheritance of the [female] dwellers of hell. All of them will have libidinous sex organs and he will have an ever-erect penis.’ ” – Sunan Ibn Maja, Zuhd (Book of Abstinence) 39
“Each time we sleep with a Houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [i.e. Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetizing vaginas.” – Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an, p. 351
Abu Huraira reported: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) said. When any one of you awakes up from sleep and performs ablution, he must clean his nose three times, for the devil spends the night in the interior of his nose. – Sahih Muslim 2:462
And Allah taught Adam all the names as follows: He taught him the name of everything, down to fart and little fart. – Tabari I 267
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet said, ‘When you eat, do not wipe your hands till you have licked it, or had it licked by somebody else.” – Sahih Bukhari 7:65:366
Narrated Abu Said: A man came to the prophet and said, ‘My brother has got loose motions. The Prophet said, Let him drink honey.” The man again (came) and said, ‘I made him drink (honey) but that made him worse.’ The Prophet said, ‘Allah has said the Truth, and the abdomen of your brother has told a lie.” – Sahih Bukhari 7:71:614
Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah: The Prophet used to stand by a tree or a date-palm on Friday. Then an Ansari woman or man said. “O Allah’s Apostle! Shall we make a pulpit for you?” He replied, “If you wish.” So they made a pulpit for him and when it was Friday, he proceeded towards the pulpit (for delivering the sermon). The date-palm cried like a child! The Prophet descended (the pulpit) and embraced it while it continued moaning like a child being quieted. The Prophet said, “It was crying for (missing) what it used to hear of religious knowledge given near to it.” – Sahih Bukhari 4:56:784
There are many more with those came from.
(Hat-tip to our reader and commenter Andrew M)
Chris Christie asks Obama, “What the hell are we paying you for? ”
A Melbourne Israeli Dancing group was dropped from participating in a Victorian dance festival [ie a festival held in Victoria, Australia] after refusing organisers’ moves to drop all references to Israel.
Find the full report here.
The Machol Israeli Dancing Club was scheduled to appear at Multicultural Folk Dance Festival of High Country in the Victorian country town of Mansfield earlier this month.
The festival was organised under the auspices of the Victorian Multicultural Commission and a grant had been awarded to Marta Balan who according to a submission to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission approved the performance of the Machol Group.
When the participants’ names were released, Esther Blumenthal-Skop of Machol was surprised to learn that the name of the Machol Israeli Dancing Club had been truncated to Machol Group and all references to Israel had been removed with the club being described as a Jewish dance group.
But that wouldn’t be an accurate description since not all the members of the Machol dance group are Jewish. (How many are not, and what they are is not reported.)
No change had been made to [the names of] other groups including Chinese, Hungarian, Armenian and Ukrainian Traditional Folk Dances and the Irish Reel and Jigs.
In her submission to VEOHRC, Blumenthal-Skop said she asked for an explanation and was told that the organiser would not be held responsible for consequences if the words “Israel” or “Israeli” were used to describe the group.
Consequences? What might they be? Whose reaction to the name was to be dreaded? The Chinese? The Hungarians? The Armenians? The Ukrainians? The Irish? The Australian hosts? All of them?
Or was there an invisible presence, a ghostly threat hovering over the Multicultural Event? If so, what could it be? What – invited or uninvited – “culture”? What is its name? What might it do? And was the organiser quite sure that it wouldn’t find the name “Jewish” just as offensive as the name “Israeli”?
Would Israelis be saved from this unnamed terror, we wonder, if their country were to change its name to – say – Judea?
The politically correct organisers of multicultural events could try putting it out there; dub any old Israeli troupe or team of any art or sport “Judean”, and see how it floats.
Multiculturalists simply have to become more resourceful in dealing with these anonymous forces of evil.
Islamic “justice” and the development of Islamic power advance in North Africa.
USA Today reports:
The victory of an Islamist Party in Morocco’s parliamentary elections appears to be one more sign that religious-based parties are benefiting the most from the new freedoms brought by the Arab Spring.
The phrase “new freedoms” means an election, nothing more.
Across the Middle East, parties referencing Islam have made great strides, offering an alternative to corrupt, long serving dictators, who have often ruled with close Western support.
Are they less likely to be corrupt or dictatorial? And if the new bosses should turn out to be much like the old bosses, will they fail to secure Western support?
The Justice and Development Party dominated Morocco’s elections through a combination of good organization, an outsider status and not being too much of a threat to Morocco’s all-powerful king.
By taking 107 seats out of the 395 seats, almost twice as many as the second place finisher, the party ensured that King Mohammed VI must pick the next prime minister from its ranks and [it will] form the next government out of the dozen parties in Morocco’s parliament.
It is the first time the PJD will be part of the government and its outsider status could be just what Morocco, wracked by pro-democracy protests, needs.
Although it didn’t bring down the government, the North African kingdom of 32 million, just across the water from Spain, was still touched by the waves of unrest that swept the Arab world following the revolution in Tunisia, with tens of thousands marching in the streets calling for greater freedoms and less corruption.
The king responded by modifying the constitution to give the next parliament and prime minister more powers, and held early elections.
But there was still a vigorous movement to boycott the elections. There was only a 45 percent turnout in Friday’s polls, and many of those who went to vote turned in blank ballots or crossed out every party listed to show their dissatisfaction with the system. …
But now they’re getting what USA Today thinks they need?
In the face of such widespread distrust of politics, historian and political analyst Maati Monjib said a government led by a new political force could be the answer.
If the abstainers had thought PJD was the answer, wouldn’t they have voted for it?
“If the PJD forms a coalition in a free and independent way and not with a party of the Makhzen,” he said referring to the catch-all phrase for the entrenched establishment around the king, “this will be a big step forward for Morocco.”
In Tunisia, Morocco, and on Monday most likely also Egypt, newly enfranchised populations are choosing religious parties as a rebuke to the old systems, which often espoused liberal or left-wing ideologies.
“The people link Islam and political dignity,” said Monjib, who describes himself as coming from the left end of the political spectrum. “There is a big problem of dignity in the Arab world and the people see the Islamists as a way of getting out of the sense of subjugation and inferiority towards the West.”
They were subjugated by their own tyrants, not the West. But if they feel inferior to the West they are only being – for once – realistic.
Like the Ennahda Party in Tunisia, the PJD is also from the more moderate end of the Islamist spectrum.
The term “Islamist” was coined by Western appeasers to designate Islamic extremism, so that “Islam” could be exonerated from charges of aggressively waging jihad. But now we have moderate Islamism.
The party doesn’t describe itself as “Islamist” but rather as having an Islamic “reference,” meaning that its policies follow the moral dictates of the religion. …
Only the moral dictates? Beating wives, stoning adulterers, amputating the limbs of thieves, executing apostates and homosexuals, keeping slaves, waging aggressive jihad? That’s the good side?
Egypt, where there is an election in progress, will end up getting a more religious government too, and as Professor Ephraim Karsh of King’s College, London, said at a recent conference:
Islam remains the strongest identity framework in Egyptian society in particular, and in Arab society generally. The Arab national dictatorships that were layered over this basic Islamic identity for the past 80 years were but a thin veneer of repression. With the fall of these dictatorships, what remains is the core Islamic underpinnings of society, and these will now come to the fore. Consequently, no democratic structures, processes or values are likely to emerge in the Arab world for many generations.”
We think he’s right.
But for an alternative view – for the sake of balance – see what Wadah Khanfar, writing in the leftist Islam-sympathetic Guardian has to say. Here’s a bit of it:
The uproar that has accompanied the Islamists’ gains is unhelpful; a calm and well-informed debate about the rise of political Islam is long overdue. …
We must understand the history of the region. In western discourse Islamists are seen as newcomers to politics, gullible zealots who are motivated by a radical ideology and lack experience.
Sure we suspect, on very good evidence, that they’re zealots motivated by a radical ideology. But do we say they’re gullible newcomers lacking in experience? Not in any discourse we’ve heard in our corner of the West.
In fact, they have played a major role in the Arab political scene since the 1920s. Islamic movements have often been in opposition, but since the 1940s they have participated in parliamentary elections, entered alliances with secular, nationalist and socialist groups, and participated in several governments – in Sudan, Jordan, Yemen and Algeria. …
A number of other events have had an impact on the collective Muslim mind, and have led to the maturation of political Islam: the much-debated Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979; the military coup in Sudan in 1989; the success of the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front in the 1991 elections and the army’s subsequent denial of its right to govern; the conquest of much of Afghan territory by the Taliban in 1996 leading to the establishment of its Islamic emirate; and the success in 2006 of Hamas in the Palestinian Legislative Council elections. The Hamas win was not recognised, nor was the national unity government formed. Instead, a siege was imposed on Gaza to suffocate the movement. …
What lessons were learnt from such examples? He doesn’t say.
He makes it plain as he goes on, however, that he has great hopes of desirable outcomes from Islamist rule in North Africa:
The region has suffered a lot as a result of attempts to exclude Islamists and deny them a role in the public sphere. … Islamists should be careful not to fall into the trap of feeling overconfident: they must accommodate other trends, even if it means making painful concessions. Our societies need political consensus, and the participation of all political groups, regardless of their electoral weight. It is this interplay between Islamists and others that will both guarantee the maturation of the Arab democratic transition and lead to an Arab political consensus and stability that has been missing for decades.
And maybe that is what the Arab world needs. But what will the rest of the world get? The end of jihad? Skeptics that we are, we doubt it.
Earlier today there was another explosion in Iran, this one in Isfahan, “said to be the primary location of the Iranian nuclear weapons program” and “the site of Iran’s largest missile assembly and production plant … built with North Korean assistance … Involved in the production of Scud-B and Scud-C surface-to-surface missiles by assembling components bought in North Korea and China … Development and production … was said to include the Shehab 1 and Nazeat missiles …, the Chinese M-11 …, HY-2 anti-ship and Chinese M-type missiles …, Nodong/Sahab-3 missiles … ”
According to this report, the Iranians are claiming both that it was an accident and that there was no explosion at all.
The Revolutionary Guard said the accidental explosion occurred while military personnel were transporting munitions.
The deputy governor of Iran’s Isfahan province on Monday said however he had no reports of an explosion in his region. “So far no report of a major explosion has been heard from any government body in Isfahan,” he was quoted as saying by the semi-official Mehr news agency. …
A top Israeli security official said that the recent explosion that rocked an Iranian missile base near Tehran [see our post Ah, mighty Worm, all praise to thee!, November 18, 2011] could delay or stop further Iranian surface-to-surface missile development.
This one should make delaying or stopping it even more likely.
Was it the work of the mighty Stuxnet computer worm again? Or of Duqu, son of Stuxnet?
We may never know. But don’t let not knowing delay or stop the celebrations.
Raymond Ibrahim comments:
This picture, taken at a recent protest in Egypt, has been making the rounds on various Arabic websites. Note the rope around the women, herding them like camels; note the man to the right holding the leash, walking them.
I am told this is a common “precautionary measure” to keep women from mixing with men during protests.
Considering that certain Islamic texts describe females as “she-camels in heat,” or that it is traditional for some men to divorce their wives by saying “you are given free rein and unloosed like that camel” … this measure must surely seem natural.
At any rate, to those who think that history must always progress, take note: fifty years ago, the overwhelming majority of women in Egypt wore modern clothes, hair uncovered, and would never have condescended to being walked on a leash.
Such is “progress”—”Arab Spring” style.
A Sunny day is a happy day.
Here she talks about those super-villains, Millionaires and Billionaires. And Thousandaires.
There is a newly released batch 0f 5,000 emails (out of 220,000 held by the whistleblower) sent by scientists to each other about “manmade global warming”. You can find a selection at Climategate 2 FOIA 2011 Searchable Database here.
The last lot came out shortly before the UN’s Copenhagen Conference on climate change, December 2009, and helped to make it a failure. These, almost certainly released by the same unknown hand, appear a few days before the Durban Conference which starts November 28, 2011. We hope they will have the same effect.
Many of them show an intention to deceive, some an uneasiness about the deception, and very few a frustrated desire to tell the truth.
Examples from the selection –
On fixing the information in the UN’s IPCC [International Panel on Climate Change] report:
Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary […]
I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.
It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much talking goes on beforehand, the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by a select core group.
Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive […] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC […]
The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out.
I agree w/ Susan that we should try to put more in the bullet about “Subsequent evidence” […] Need to convince readers that there really has been an increase in knowledge – more evidence. What is it?
Hence the AR4 Section 126.96.36.199.2 dismissal of the ACRIM composite to be instrumental rather than solar in origin is a bit controversial. Similarly IPCC in their discussion on solar RF since the Maunder Minimum are very dependent on the paper by Wang et al (which I have been unable to access) in the decision to reduce the solar RF significantly despite the many papers to the contrary in the ISSI workshop. All this leaves the IPCC almost entirely dependent on CO2 for the explanation of current global temperatures as in Fig 2.23. since methane CFCs and aerosols are not increasing.
I find myself in the strange position of being very skeptical of the quality of all present reconstructions, yet sounding like a pro greenhouse zealot here!
Getting people we know and trust [into IPCC] is vital – hence my comment about the tornadoes group.
On the importance and difficulty of spinning the message for political ends as the government among others requires:
I can’t overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the Government can give on climate change to help them tell their story. They want the story to be a very strong one and don’t want to be made to look foolish.
if we loose [sic] the chance to make climate change a reality to people in the regions we will have missed a major trick in REGIS.
Somehow we have to leave the[m] thinking OK, climate change is extremely complicated, BUT I accept the dominant view that people are affecting it, and that impacts produces risk that needs careful and urgent attention.
I agree with the importance of extreme events as foci for public and governmental opinion […] ‘climate change’ needs to be present in people’s daily lives. They should be reminded that it is a continuously occurring and evolving phenomenon
We don’t really want the bullshit and optimistic stuff that Michael has written […] We’ll have to cut out some of his stuff.
the important thing is to make sure they’re loosing the PR battle. That’s what the site [Real Climate] is about.
Having established scale and urgency, the political challenge is then to turn this from an argument about the cost of cutting emissions – bad politics – to one about the value of a stable climate – much better politics. […] the most valuable thing to do is to tell the story about abrupt change as vividly as possible
we as an NGO working on climate policy need such a document pretty soon for the public and for informed decision makers in order to get a) a debate started and b) in order to get into the media the context between climate extremes/desasters [sic]/costs and finally the link between weather extremes and energy
In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media
I agree with Nick that climate change might be a better labelling than global warming
But it will be very difficult to make the MWP [Medieval Warm Period] go away in Greenland.
You chose to depict the one based on C14 solar data, which kind of stands out in Medieval times. It would be much nicer to show the version driven by Be10 solar forcing
A growing body of evidence clearly shows  that hydroclimatic variability during the putative MWP (more appropriately and inclusively called the “Medieval Climate Anomaly” or MCA period) was more regionally extreme (mainly in terms of the frequency and duration of megadroughts) than anything we have seen in the 20th century, except perhaps for the Sahel. So in certain ways the MCA period may have been more climatically extreme than in modern times.
On the science being far from settled :
The results for 400 ppm stabilization look odd in many cases […] As it stands we’ll have to delete the results from the paper if it is to be published.
What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably […]
Although I agree that GHGs are important in the 19th/20th century (especially since the 1970s), if the weighting of solar forcing was stronger in the models, surely this would diminish the significance of GHGs. […] it seems to me that by weighting the solar irradiance more strongly in the models, then much of the 19th to mid 20th century warming can be explained from the sun alone.
If the tropical near surface specific humidity over tropical land has not gone up (Fig 5) presumably that could explain why the expected amplification of the warming in the tropics with height has not really been detected.
would you agree that there is no convincing evidence for kilimanjaro glacier melt being due to recent warming (let alone man-made warming)?
[tropical glaciers] There is a small problem though with their retreat. They have retreated a lot in the last 20 years yet the MSU2LT data would suggest that temperatures haven’t increased at these levels.
There shouldn’t be someone else at UEA with different views [from “recent extreme weather is due to global warming”] – at least not a climatologist.
I am not convinced that the “truth” is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships
Also there is much published evidence for Europe (and France in particular) of increasing net primary productivity in natural and managed woodlands that may be associated either with nitrogen or increasing CO2 or both. Contrast this with the still controversial question of large-scale acid-rain-related forest decline? To what extent is this issue now generally considered urgent, or even real?
Phil, thanks for your thoughts – guarantee there will be no dirty laundry in the open.
He’s skeptical that the warming is as great as we show in East Antarctica – he thinks the “right” answer is more like our detrended results in the supplementary text. I cannot argue he is wrong.
This will reduce the 1940-1970 cooling in NH temps. Explaining the cooling with sulphates won’t be quite as necessary.
It is interesting to see the lower tropospheric warming minimum in the tropics in all three plots, which I cannot explain. I believe it is spurious but it is remarkably robust against my adjustment efforts.
Does anybody have an explanation why there is a relative minimum (and some negative trends) between 500 and 700 hPa? No models with significant surface warming do this
This is an excellent idea, Mike, IN PRINCIPLE at least. In practise, however, it raises some interesting results […] the analysis will not likely lie near to the middle of the cloud of published series and explaining the reasons behind this etc. will obscure the message of a short EOS piece.
Norwegian Meteorological Institute:
In Norway and Spitsbergen, it is possible to explain most of the warming after the 1960s by changes in the atmospheric circulation. The warming prior to 1940 cannot be explained in this way.
On the nuisance of the urban heat effect:
I think the urban-related warming should be smaller than this, but I can’t think of a good way to argue this. I am hopeful of finding something in the data that makes by their Figure 3.
We found the [urban warming] effect is pretty big in the areas we analyzed. This is a little different from the result you obtained in 1990. We have published a few of papers on this topic in Chinese. Unfortunately, when we sent our comments to the IPCC AR4, they were mostly rejected.
there are some nitpicky jerks who have criticized the Jones et al. data sets – we don’t want one of those [EPRI/California Energy Commission meeting].
The jerk you mention was called Good(e)rich who found urban warming at all Californian sites.
On hiding the unreliability of data:
any method that incorporates all forms of uncertainty and error will undoubtedly result in reconstructions with wider error bars than we currently have. These may be more honest, but may not be too helpful for model comparison attribution studies. We need to be careful with the wording I think.
what he [Zwiers] has done comes to a different conclusion than Caspar and Gene! I reckon this can be saved by careful wording.
I’m sure you agree – the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year “reconstruction”.
Because how can we be critical of Crowley for throwing out 40-years in the middle of his calibration, when we’re throwing out all post-1960 data ‘cos the MXD has a non-temperature signal in it, and also all pre-1881 or pre-1871 data ‘cos the temperature data may have a non-temperature signal in it!
Now, you Keith complain about the way we introduced our result, while saying it is an important one. […] the IPCC curve needs to be improved according to missing long-term declining trends/signals, which were removed (by dendrochronologists!) before Mann merged the local records together. So, why don’t you want to let the result into science?
I am afraid that Mike is defending something that increasingly can not be defended. He is investing too much personal stuff in this and not letting the science move ahead.
One problem is that he [Mann] will be using the RegEM method, which provides no better diagnostics (e.g. betas) than his original method. So we will still not know where his estimates are coming from.
On religion being brought to bear on the subject:
I heard that Zichichi has links with the Vatican. A number of other greenhouse skeptics have extreme religious views.
Houghton [MetO, IPCC co-chair]:
[…] we dont take seriously enough our God-given responsibility to care for the Earth […] 500 million people are expected to watch The Day After Tomorrow. We must pray that they pick up that message.
My work is as Director of the national centre for climate change research, a job which requires me to translate my Christian belief about stewardship of God’s planet into research and action.
He [another Met scientist] is a Christian and would talk authoritatively about the state of climate science from the sort of standpoint you are wanting.
On the fallibility of climate models:
I’d agree probably 10 years away to go from weather forecasting to ~ annual scale. But the “big climate picture” includes ocean feedbacks on all time scales, carbon and other elemental cycles, etc. and it has to be several decades before that is sorted out I would think. So I would guess that it will not be models or theory, but observation that will provide the answer to the question of how the climate will change in many decades time.
[“Future of the IPCC”, 2008] It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.
While perhaps one could designate some subset of models as being poorer in a lot of areas, there probably never will be a single universally superior model or set of models. We should keep in mind that the climate system is complex, so that it is difficult,if not impossible to define a metric that captures the brea[d]th of physical processes relevant to even a narrow area of focus.
there is no individual model that does well in all of the SST and water vapor tests we’ve applied.
[IPCC AR5 models] clearly, some tuning or very good luck involved. I doubt the modeling world will be able to get away with this much longer
[IPCC AR5 models] So using the 20th c for tuning is just doing what some people have long suspected us of doing […] and what the nonpublished diagram from NCAR showing correlation between aerosol forcing and sensitivity also suggested.
Basic problem is that all models are wrong – not got enough middle and low level clouds.
GKSS is just one model and it is a model, so there is no need for it to be correct.
On (not proving the case but) promoting “the cause”:
By the way, when is Tom C going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc.
They will (see below) allow us to provide some discussion of the synthetic example, referring to the J. Cimate paper (which should be finally accepted upon submission of the revised final draft), so that should help the cause a bit.
I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’sdoing, but its not helping the cause
On trying to evade disclosure under Freedom of Information laws:
I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process
UEA does not hold the very vast majority of mine [potentially FOIable emails] anyway which I copied onto private storage after the completion of the IPCC task.
McGarvie/UEA Director of Faculty Administration:
As we are testing EIR with the other climate audit org request relating to communications with other academic colleagues, I think that we would weaken that case if we supplied the information in this case. So I would suggest that we decline this one (at the very end of the time period)
[FOI, temperature data] Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.
One plain fact emerges from the internal conversations of this coterie: the rest of us are being played for dupes, suckers, fall guys.
Communism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. A central authority with a monopoly of force – which is to say the state – must gather and distribute resources. Condition of the nation: serfdom and poverty.
Capitalism: “From each according to his need, to each according to his ability”. You decide what you need and work for it by providing others with what they’ll buy. The amount you get will be the measure of your ability. Condition of the nation: freedom and prosperity.
Collectivism: Economic equality achieved at the cost of liberty.
Individualism: The only desirable equality is an equality of liberty. My liberty should be limited by nothing except everyone else’s.
Walter Williams writes at Front Page:
Thomas Edison invented the incandescent bulb, the phonograph, the DC motor and other items in everyday use and became wealthy by doing so. Thomas Watson founded IBM and became rich through his company’s contribution to the computation revolution. Lloyd Conover, while in the employ of Pfizer, created the antibiotic tetracycline. Though Edison, Watson, Conover and Pfizer became wealthy, whatever wealth they received pales in comparison with the extraordinary benefits received by ordinary people. Billions of people benefited from safe and efficient lighting. Billions more were the ultimate beneficiaries of the computer, and untold billions benefited from healthier lives gained from access to tetracycline.
President Barack Obama, in stoking up class warfare, said, “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.” This is lunacy. Andrew Carnegie’s steel empire produced the raw materials that built the physical infrastructure of the United States. Bill Gates co-founded Microsoft and produced software products that aided the computer revolution. But Carnegie had amassed quite a fortune long before he built Carnegie Steel Co., and Gates had quite a fortune by 1990. Had they the mind of our president, we would have lost much of their contributions, because they had already “made enough money.”
Class warfare thrives on ignorance about the sources of income. Listening to some of the talk about income differences, one would think that there’s a pile of money meant to be shared equally among Americans. Rich people got to the pile first and greedily took an unfair share. Justice requires that they “give back.” Or, some people talk about unequal income distribution as if there were a dealer of dollars. The reason some people have millions or billions of dollars while others have very few is the dollar dealer is a racist, sexist, a multinationalist or just plain mean. Economic justice requires a re-dealing of the dollars, income redistribution or spreading the wealth, where the ill-gotten gains of the few are returned to their rightful owners.
In a free society, for the most part, people with high incomes have demonstrated extraordinary ability to produce valuable services for — and therefore please — their fellow man.
People voluntarily took money out of their pockets to purchase the products of Gates, Pfizer or IBM. High incomes reflect the democracy of the marketplace. The reason Gates is very wealthy is millions upon millions of people voluntarily reached into their pockets and handed over $300 or $400 for a Microsoft product. Those who think he has too much money are really registering disagreement with decisions made by millions of their fellow men.
In a free society, in a significant way income inequality reflects differences in productive capacity, namely one’s ability to please his fellow man. …
Stubborn ignorance sees capitalism as benefiting only the rich, but the evidence refutes that. The rich have always been able to afford entertainment; it was the development and marketing of radio and television that made entertainment accessible to the common man. The rich have never had the drudgery of washing and ironing clothing, beating out carpets or waxing floors. The mass production of washing machines, wash-and-wear clothing, vacuum cleaners and no-wax floors spared the common man this drudgery. At one time, only the rich could afford automobiles, telephones and computers. Now all but a small percentage of Americans enjoy these goods.
In a free country, the rich are not rich because the poor are poor; nor are the poor poor because the rich are rich.
Those are richest who serve others best. (In general, that is. There are of course exceptions, like George Soros.)
They create wealth.
So that, among free countries, where the rich are richest the poor are least poor.
As in the United States of America.