Ponder this comment found on Bolt’s:

And just how is it doing that if its been cooler in the last decade ? more fairtails from the best scammers of all ,THE GREENGATE LIARS.I THINK THEIR LITTLE BRAIN MIGHT BE SHRINKING .I bet those Dinosoars were wondering how they got so big when it was so much hotter than now .c02 is the lowest its been in 600 million yrs according to the latest research .

My soul hurts.

I’m happy to admit that I don’t fully understand climatic science or the technical arguments behind global warming. I’ve got a rudimentary understanding of science but I’m not qualified in such areas. I’m happy to admit that my scientific knowledge is open to scrutiny. I haven’t brainwashed myself, to the point of intellectual orgasm, that I’m some kind of home-baked expert on the topic. I freely admit that an education in the liberal arts is about as relevant to climatic science as, say, doing Year 12 in Werribee or a drama degree in Queensland.

An engineering degree might have more relevance – or at least it would if you’d actually done any engineering work since graduating in the early-80s, like our unrepresentative in the Senate, Steve Fielding. Lately Steve has risen from his near-sickbed after receiving Tamiflu for a case of almost-swine flu, to take up the cudgels of global warming scepticism. He’s probably just after a dinner date with Bolta, we’ll never know, but whatever the reason the Herald Sun is playing along. Today it bellows “This is why Al Gore’s wrong“ on Steve’s behalf and links to the pseudo-Senator’s own website. The reason? Steve has done found himself a graph – and it’s a purdy one – showing the correlation, or lack thereof, between rising CO2 levels and ’steadying’ global surface temperatures:

Ain’t that sweet? But is it true? According to the Herald Sun “the graph was used by the UN in its reports on the effects of climate change” but I had a quick search and couldn’t find it. OK, no sweat, it cites temperature data from two sources: the Hadley Centre and the University of East Anglia. Was Fielding’s graph – or at least the temperature component of it – on their websites? Nope. Hmm.

So what do these places have to say about global surface temperatures? Here is the Hadley Centre’s summation of global average, land surface and sea surface temperatures. And here is the University of East Anglia’s. Each spans a longer timeframe than Steve’s 15-year snapshot, but nevertheless looks different to his Al-you’re-wrong graph.

In any event, doesn’t “air temperature anomaly” describe variations from the norm? All of the anomalies on Fielding’s graph are in the positive range, so if we accept this data as valid then all Steve has ‘proven’ is that global temperatures have risen less in some of the last 15 years. In 2008 it almost dipped down to average, but otherwise there’s been a steady increase of +0.3 or higher since 2001. The increase in global temperatures may have flattened out but global temperatures themselves have not returned to normal, in fact they more than a half-degree higher than when Steve Fielding was going through puberty.

I’m hoping Steve can pop around for a cup of rooibos tea and a Marie biscuit to explain to me where in his God’s name he got this graph, whether he thinks its title is deceiptful and if he genuinely believes it disproves a link between CO2 emissions and global warming. Just don’t bother dressing up as an inanimate object, and leave your Bible at home.

Not content with denying global warming, Bolt’s brave commenters have blown the lid off another “green con” – ozone depletion.

Who could forget the insidious leftist plot to kill off the aerosol can industry? Luckily, we will always have brave science warriors to point us in the right direction.

So, GrodsReaders, which scientific battleground will The Right be fighting next? “Carbon is a leftist myth”? “Newton’s second law of motion is a leftist myth”? “Oxygen in the atmosphere is a leftist myth”?

Suggestions in comments.

Just when you thought that the award Australia’s stupidest political party had been taken by Family First, along comes a party so ludicrous all you can do is laugh.

Presenting – the Climate Skeptics, noble crusaders against alarmism of all kinds (emphasis below mine).

Anthropogenic or man-made Global Warming (AGW) alarmism is the biggest con, fraud, hoax, swindle, deception and mass hysteria in the history of modern civilization, because climate changes naturally.

As discussed previously, the words “con” etc suggest that scientists are deliberately hoaxing the folks – presumably to introduce communism, I’m sure. A great start.

They are a party firmly rooted in common sense:

In their marvellous “child abuse” page, they liken teaching children about science to sending them off in the Children’s Crusade.

The Climate Sceptics object in the strongest possible terms to the kind of child abuse being inflicted on children by AGW alarmism in school classrooms. It is not science. It is religio-political indoctrination. It is a drive to sweep up children in one of the most fanatical movements the world has ever seen.

The Children’s Crusade of 1212 C.E. was one of the most shameful events in the history of the Christian West. After four Crusades had failed to wrest the Holy Lands from the Mohammedan powers, many thousands of children were swept up by the mass hysteria and religious enthusiasm of the day to do what the armies of Christendom had failed to do – repossess the Holy Lands.

Oh boy! A crusade!

Their climate change page is as sparse, selective and unscientific as you’d expect, and contains every meme and rambling, incorrect quote that has already been dispelled at actual scientific sites.

Their ABC page is hysterical:

The Climate Sceptics will have the following Policy for ABC programming about AGW:
POLICY

1. The IPCC will not be treated as an indisputable authority about AGW
2. Statements and predictions about AGW from IPCC, the Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO will be subject to critical analysis and not accepted at face value.
3. Equal time will be given to sceptic scientists and spokespersons in response to announcements and media releases in support of AGW.
4. Sensationalist and alarmist language should not be used in the reporting of AGW predictions and statements of alleged consequences of AGW.
5. The ABC will undertake a measured and thorough analysis and presentation of what AGW is and the alleged evidence to support it.

I suppose Catalyst will be presented by Andrew Bolt?  Will the news be running non-alarmist items about global warming child abuse?

I don’t like to use the word hypocrite (okay, I do!) but it is hypocritical to complain about “alarmism” from one quarter (and “alarmism” in itself is not an argument against global warming) while calling for the censorship of the ABC and accusing schools of “child abuse” for teaching real science and not hamstrung political ideology.

More on this party when my housemate isn’t pining for the PC.

A firefighter joins the crowing:

Consider the devastation in Victoria. Research by the CSIRO, Climate Institute and the Bushfire Council found that a “low global warming scenario” will see catastrophic fire events happen in parts of regional Victoria every five to seven years by 2020, and every three to four years by 2050, with up to 50 per cent more extreme danger fire days. However, under a “high global warming scenario”, catastrophic events are predicted to occur every year in Mildura, and firefighters have been warned to expect up to a 230 per cent increase in extreme danger fire days in Bendigo. And in Canberra, the site of devastating fires in 2003, we are being asked to prepare for a massive increase of up to 221 per cent in extreme fire days by 2050, with catastrophic events predicted as often as every eight years.

So now even the firefighters are pleased about the bushfires. Because that is what you mean by crowing, isn’t it Bolt? We’re pleased that people have died, right? We’re using the dead to push our socialist agenda?

Just keep digging that hole.

Andrew Bolt is having a difficult week. Victoria has had the worst bushfires ever and suffered the highest temperatures of all time. This presents problems for little old Bolt because he is one of the chief global warming denialists in the media, and frequently responsible for spreading distorted information and outright lies (seven graphs, anyone?).

Obviously, global warming didn’t cause the bushfires, but years of dry conditions caused by global warming have made the situation a lot worse than it would have been thirty years ago.

Andrew is now stuck at an impasse – the massive bushfires we’re seeing are what his targets Tim Flannery and Robyn Williams have been warning about for years. Now they’ve arrived, and suddenly global warming isn’t looking like the Leftist conspiracy it once did.

So what does Andrew do?

His new tactic is to try to guilt people into not even mentioning “bushfires” and “global warming” in the same sentence. That’s wrong, you see. Maybe he thinks the bushfires were made worse by global cooling, I don’t know.

He’s already attacked Bob Brown for bringing up global warming. As previously mentioned here, it’s kind of stoopid to attack someone by claiming they’re trying to gain political mileage out of it, and then doing the same thing yourself. Real stoopid.

And now, fatally, he has accused Freya Matthews of “crowing“, a veiled hint that she is actually happy the bushfires came – because they prove her right!

That is probably one of the most disgusting things I think I’ve read about the bushfires yet (his mate Danny Naliah excepted). What an utterly repulsive thing to say.

I ask you, fair reader, to look over Freya’s piece and see if you can find any “crowing”. Chances are, you won’t, unless you’re an idiot. It’s a completely level-headed article that points out the reality of what we’re facing here in Australia. Andrew Bolt, basically, knows he’s fucked because for a long time he’s been pointing to extreme cold to “prove” global warming doesn’t exist, but when the shoe is on the other foot, he’s suddenly throwing wild accusations around and trying to paint those with honest opinions as gloaters and crowers.

Watch over the next few weeks, and months, as he wields this attack on anyone who dare mention global warming in relation to these fires.

It needs to be said that the only real gloating or crowing that has gone on so far is from his buddy Danny. But, according to Andrew, he’s just excercising his right to free speech.

Don’t trip over the hypocrisy, Andrew.

News just in, we’re all going to die:

Today (Tuesday) will be the start of five days of unrelenting scorchers [in Victoria] with temperatures soaring to the 40s. The heatwave will arrive today with an expected maximum of 38 degrees, 41 on Wednesday and 40 on Thursday, Friday and Saturday.

The last time Melbourne had a heatwave of this intensity was a century ago when it suffered through five days of stultifying heat with temperatures in the 40s in January 1908.

Of course this proves that globule warmening really exists!!!1! And that Melbourne is teh Leftist capital of Australia and is being punished by Satan. And that Aurora’s blog was, in its last throes, spot on. And that all the smart people live in Queensland or Tasmania. And that we shoulda built more dams.

I hate the heat like a leftist hates meat cars, Holden pies and all other Australian icons. So I won’t be going down to Williamstown beach to compete with 10,000 zinced-up lunatics for a square yard of sand on which to lay my Australian flag beach towel.  Nor will I wander aimlessly at the tennis, hoping to get a look at a big name player but instead having to settle for court 18, where some unknown Belorussian is playing in the singles for girls under-18 with one arm. I could seek refuge by wandering the refrigerated maelstrom of Highpoint or Melbourne Central – but so will a million bogans without artificial cooling. 

No, looks like I’ll be spending my last three days of holidays inside our shuttered house, while my air-conditioner spews tonnes of non-offset carbons into the atmosphere - and I sip homemade lemonade and read good books, interspersed with the occasional blog comment. I don’t intend casting eyes upon the sun until Sunday.

The latest denialism blog meme to pop up is the one about sea ice being at 1979 levels. Wanna know how they came up with that?

That’s right – they  drew a line linking a point in December 1979 with a point in December 2008, even though the trend is clearly down. This goes even further than Mantaray refusing to accept that climate and weather are different. This is the graphic equivilant of shoving your fingers in your ears, shutting your eyes and shouting “I CAN’T HEAR YOU!”.

This is the difference between skeptics and denialists. The line in the sand is here.

Shocking stuff.

More at Open Mind and LP.

Andrew Bolt, whose deft scientific analysis provides the basis for many-a global warming denialist, describes linear trends thusly:

[A] graph of temperatures over just the past nine months, with a line drawn kind-of through them.

That’s right, denialists. This is the man who tells you what to think. Scary, huh?

In the comments of my post about global warming skepticism, David introduced me to a site I was unaware of, Skeptical Science, which is furnished with this comic:

Nice work!

Yesterday Jamaica’s Usain Bolt sprints across the line in 9.71 seconds to break the world 100-metre record … and Melbourne’s Andrew Bolt was even quicker with a wild and wilful misinterpetation of an analogy:

The Bishop [of Stafford] is … arguing that men who imprison and rape their daughters are really no worse than leading scientists who dispute the causes and dangers of global warming, which is further proof that this cleric is as stupid as he is hysterical.

Actually, that wasn’t what his Bishopness was arguing at all. His exact words were that the actions of Austrian incest freak Josef Fritzl “represents merely the most extreme form of a very common philosophy of life: I will do what makes me happy, and if that causes others to suffer, hard luck.” He didn’t liken them at all; he didn’t standardize their actions or use one to absolve the other. Nor did he refer to scientists, as Bolt claims, but rather to the general public. The bishop was simply suggesting that self-serving attitudes result in harm to others, whether on a local or a global scale.

Not so you’d notice from Bolt’s post, seeing how he snipped this quote:

“In fact you could argue that, by our refusal to face the truth about climate change, we are as guilty as he is – we are in effect locking our children and grandchildren into a world with no future and throwing away the key. We are right to be disgusted at these crimes. But mere disgust is too convenient. There are lessons for all of us to learn.”

…down to this…

“In fact you could argue that, by our refusal to face the truth about climate change, we are as guilty as he [Fritzl] is…’’

He also overlooked the fact that the Bishop’s remarks were clearly understood and appreciated by a director of the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, a charity that works with victims of child sex abuse. At least someone there is able to read and comprehend an analogy, not jump off the deep end, arms flailing, because if references both kiddy-fiddlers and carbon-squanderers.

Git.

Within three minutes of being asked if I would like to become a regular GrodsCorp contributor, I channelled Woody Allen for help and developed an ulcer in my stomach and called myself a shlemiel.

The pressure was on. The pressure to integrate myself into the GrodsCommunity as a worthy contributor meant that my debut post would have to be original, witty and instantly win the hearts and minds of lefties everywhere and incur the wrath of RWDB elsewhere. It also had to be Sydney-specific, to establish myself as the Sydney correspondent.

What better way to do that than to somehow invoke the gloomy spectres of Tim Blair and Andrew Bolt, I thought first to myself. No, was my immediate second thought. That was too easy. I needed something more illustrious. Something that was not going to sully my inaugural post. But it nevertheless had to be something to cause a widespread outbreak of collective frothing and foaming at the mouths of wingbats everywhere.

As I turned a corner onto Oxford Street in Sydney to a cafe on Thursday afternoon, deeply troubled by my personal circumstances, I was confronted with banners on lamp posts so large that I immediately knew what I was going to write. Only it wasn’t writing so much as pasting an image for all the global warming warmening sceptics out there.

EARTH HOUR banners adorn all of Sydney. OK, just Oxford Street in this instance.

There’s a LOT of them.

Tada. That’s my grand entrance out of the way. Sure, it was original, but the witty part failed miserably (and yes, I’m pre-emptively putting the boot into myself. Must I explain everything?). At least you cannot get any more Sydney than seeing a photo of Oxford Street, Darlinghurst, home to the gay community, kinky adult shops and nude live shows, and a liquor store beautifully named Lick Her Shop.

It’s raining, it’s pouring in Melbourne. Global warming has been definitively debunked.

I guess the wingnuts were right all along: Al Gore is a fatty boombalada.

And who said Australia signing Kyoto wouldn’t put pressure on the US?

I was a bit pissed that I missed The Great Global Warming Swindle on ABC TV the other night while I was overseas but I’ve had a great time reconstructing the doco and the subsequent Tony Jones debate through my blog RSS reader. John Surname has posted a very amusing clip of some crazy dude from the debate on YouTube and even remixed his comments into a funky song.

Check ‘em out.

UPDATE: Make sure you watch the video very carefully at the 50 second mark. The man sitting behind the nutter in the audience is having a big ol’ scratch of his nuts. Top stuff.