The vultures of climate activism: Part III

Last year, when the Russian Heat Wave™ was laid at the footsteps of ‘global warming’, that was ‘Part I’ of this despicable saga.  The parts consist repeatedly, of the act of jumping on the first best thing of summer and blaming it on global warming.

When the Japanese tsunami struck the Fukushima coast this year Part II unfolded, well before summer, and with something as far removed from global warming as can be.

It is quite evident that there is a reason for why these ‘attribution entrepeneurs’ succumb to temptation and hucksterism during natural diasters and ‘extreme events’. How can we know that? Simply because there is a pattern in the openly available evidence, and the pattern recurs. In fact, the occurence of this sorry phenomenon is one of the surest, most predicatable aspects of climate change, far more predictable than the events that occur in nature themselves.

How strange is this coincidence that just when climate science, we are told, has reached its pinnacle in scientific understanding and prediction abilities and is able to clearly provide the link for attributing specifc weather events as being man-made,…also happens to be the same time when learned experts so nonchalantly admit, as Bishop Hill points out, that there will be no ‘progress’ in climate action unless these sorts of cataclysms do occur and they are linked to man-made global warming?

A challenge to activist scientists

The summer is about to begin in the northern hemisphere in about a month or so. So, here’s a challenge for climate activist scientists and activists: Please predict the exact extreme climate events that are to happen in 2011, now. If you cannot, or do not want to do that today, then do not attempt to claim credit for ‘global warming’ for any such event when it happens.

Why is it possible to ask for this?

  1. We can be absolutely sure that there will be one, a few, or many drought/flood/heatwave/heavy rains/heavy snow/mild snow/severe winters/mild winters, in the coming year
  2. We can also be absolutely sure that someone will ‘attribute’ these to ‘global warming’.
  3. We know that climate science has increased its ability to diagnose climatic changes precisely by the process of elimination, advanced computer modeling and increasing data measurements.
  4. We can also be sure that the scientists or organizations that make the ‘attribution’ will be able to pick out existing papers or ongoing studies to bolster their attribution, within a short period of such climatic disturbances occurring, say like three to five days.

(1)-(4) taken together means, climate scientists, especially of the activist variety, should be able to predict what ‘extreme weather events’ will occur this year, in advance. If climate activists can come up with complex climate explanations attributing extreme events to global warming within three days of any extreme event actually happening, they can surely  come up with the explanations months in advance. Surely the science that enables them to reason out the global warming link does not get done in those three days.

All the necessary ingredients required to make such predictions are present. What is missing are the events themselves.

P.S: I checked on this. Last year’s Russian Heat Wave was blamed on global warming by the same activist blogger Brad Johnson, who is blaming tornado deaths on ‘global warming’ this year (i.e., Part III). This post is based on comments submitted at Judith Curry’s Climate Etc blog in January.

Advertisements

3 comments

  1. hpjunior

    I live in the southeastern US, and I am infuriated by the vulture Brad Johnson taking sustenance from the dead bodies of the tornado victims.

    Someone aptly said that Johnson was dancing on the graves of those who died in those terrible events.

    Thank you for this excellent write-up, as well as the important work you do, week in and week out.

  2. Shub Niggurath

    Brad Johnson’s 28th of April headlines were particularly vulture-like.

    In the post linked to above, he says:

    Throughout human history, the climate system has been a source of life and death, the sun and rain capable of feeding our crops and bringing us comfort, or unleashing terrible devastation in wind, fire, drought, storm, and flood

    If there was an unscientific, superstitious worldview of climate, this is it. Previously, what would be attributed to the ‘environment’, the ‘world around us’ or God, is now attributed to the ‘climate system’ by Johnson

    How is the ‘climate system’ a source of life? The answer is clear: whatever is, a source of life, has been labelled as part of the ‘climate system’. Everything in the whole universe, except two things – man, and volcanoes, is part of the ‘climate system’.

  3. Oliver K. Manuel

    They usually leave the Sun out also, as one totally unimportant variable in the causes of climate change.

    For reality about the stormy Sun that heats the Earth, completely engulfs our planet and sustains our very lives, see references 1-4 below:

    1. “The Sun: Living with the Stormy Star”, by Curt Suplee in the National Geographic Magazine (July 2004)

    http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0407/feature1/index.html

    2. “The Sun Kings: The unexpected tragedy of Richard Carrington and the tale of how modern astronomy began” by Stuart Clark (Princeton University Press, 2007). The solar eruption that completely surrounded the Earth in 1859 is described in the front flap.

    http://www.amazon.com/Sun-Kings-Unexpected-Carrington-Astronomy/dp/0691126607

    3. “Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science” by Ian Plimer (Conner Court Publishing Pty Ltd., 2009)

    http://www.amazon.com/Heaven-Earth-Ian-Plimer/dp/0704371669

    4. “WeatherAction” and the long range weather and climate predictions of astrophysicist Piers Corbyn.

    http://www.weatheraction.com/

    Oliver K. Manuel