22 thoughts on “Sandpit

  1. Australia’s Shame

    J.M. Coetzee

    “Cross-border migration is a fact of life in today’s world, and numbers will only increase as the earth heats up, former pastures turn to desert, and islands are swallowed by the sea. There are messy but humane—or at least human—ways of reacting to this world-historical phenomenon, just as there are neat but inhuman ways.”


  2. Graeme Bird says: https://johnquiggin.com/2019/09/03/not-everyone-likes-the-grand-bargain/comment-page-3/#comment-213799

    Mr Bird please expain;

    1) “Because the science workers disagree.”. Lab assistants?

    2) “The idea that there is a consensus is a clear lie.” Proof?

    3) And your clairvoyance will obviously be able to explain; “And so if you cannot tell which scientists are following the scientific method,”

    Don’t Dont bother with this one gb…”you are left totally without a clue” A ridiculous statement.

    “and dependent on taking the faith-based approach” – pure clairvoyance, projection and snark.

    Please provide one – any reference, data or fact gb.

    My apologies to all I tickled gb’s opinion. Must. Not. Engage!

  3. https://www.juancole.com/2019/09/defies-investment-troops.html
    Has this link been mispitched? Do Australians play cricket?
    From my pespective this is the best politcal news in ages. With the Chinese Army having bases in Iran to protect the infrastructure that they are going to build there to protect their access to oil and probalby even more importantly natural gas there is no way in hell that the US can risk a large scale military attack on Iran unless it is prepared to go to war with China too.
    The US could get away with small attacks against Iran far from any chinese troops. But that will not get them any where as the Iranians will be able to launch small scale counter attacks that the US will not be able to put an end to because they will not have the option of a massive air attack on Iran without an even greater risk of widening the conflict than already existed before Chinese troops were present. The risk of a US attack on Iran eventually leading to a war with Russia was already substantial. But now it does not take an expert to see the risks involved.

    Of course in the longer term this action will delay a response by China to moving away from fossil fuels which delays the already late response to human induced global climate change.

    I am still going to celebrate with an exta piece of Toblerone today.

  4. Earlier today I claimed that back in 2008 I could not find an honest temperature record where the data was not rigged. I also claimed that any honest temperature record will show the 30’s to be hotter than the 90’s but with two potential caveats.

    Well some progress has been made since 2008 it seems. So thats good news. And there may be something for everyone here.

    “[The U.S. Climate Reference Network] includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings.”

    This is EXACTLY what I was after back in the day. Of course we expect the normal trickery but at least they are making the right noises.

    There is a few things here. No real warming since 2005. But on the other hand no serious cooling trend, which we would expect given the weak solar cycle 24 and the fairly weak 23 that preceded it. Is the added CO2 compensating for a weak sun? Well maybe. Too early to tell. Lets look more closely :

    ” selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings…..”

    Thats what we wanted but think about it? Could these be desert regions? In the desert even I expect some CO2-warming. Because in non-desert areas CO2 effects will be pre-empted by water vapour. You are probably thinking “there is no pleasing some people.”

    “114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states.”

    It doesn’t sound like they can be all desert. On the other hand the compensation between weak sun and more CO2 might be concentrated in the cold mornings after the dew has fallen. Slightly less frosty mornings ought not upset anyone.

    For now this is the graph I would have to accept. But notice that they didn’t take data backward in time. That would have been a massive giveaway if they did. No warming recently and a hotter 30’s than the 90’s, that would really ruin the story. I think everyone should take from this one case of supposedly honest data that there may be some effect. But there ought to be no panic. Getting every aspect of energy right has to be a decades if not centuries long process. There is nothing in this tiny dataset to show that there ought to be panic going on. The real graph which tells us to panic is the one that shows traditional oilwells going into a rough plateau around 2005. Thats the real problem. Our society was geared up for more oil every year and now we don’t have that. We have some improvement from fracking but thats all an unsustainable mess. More of a financial play than anything else. A misallocation of resources if ever there was one. The fracking industry ought to be there. But it ought not have been this rushed affair.

    So I say you don’t have the evidence for any kind of temperature panic. Lets just slowly and surely get every aspect of energy right. From city layout, to rail to agriculture. The whole thing.

  5. “The idea that there is a consensus is a clear lie.” Proof?

    Have you not noticed an argument going on? Science fraud Michael Mann took scientist Tim Ball to court and lost because he is still hiding his hockey stick data. So clearly there is still a raging argument. Thankfully we now have what looks like honest data to look at. But just not very much of it.

    How do you reconcile this Hockey Stick with the US unrigged raw data? Where is the Medieval Warm period in this fantasy? How did science fraud Michael Mann get this hockey stick? He won’t tell us. The dog ate his data. If you are using rigged data you aren’t following the scientific method. Evidence is data related to a specific hypothesis by way of a reasoned argument. I wasted so much time trying to make sense of the rigged data. For a long time I thought that I was seeing a clear CO2-warming signal, but I saw this as a very good and fortunate thing. Now I don’t see any such signal at all. But on the other hand there really ought to be some effect after the dew falls and in the deserts. In other situations there should be some cooling effect as well. So its still too early to know for sure what the net effect is.

    Now lets have a look at an honest CO2 record:

    After most big wars you have all these famines. But you don’t hear much about that sort of thing after Bonaparte was defeated. Look how high the CO2 levels were? Nice to finish a war and get plenty of CO2 to help cope with the hunger. Did the CO2 warm the planet? Well it was still a cold era. But it might help a bit where the air is dry on the cold mornings. Extra CO2 could help relieve frost damage a little bit one supposes.

    Usually when you look at graphs labelled CO2 you are looking at the ice proxy data. This is not a CO2 record. Its only a proxy. It understates and averages the data. Buffoons like Mann will mix up these data sets to tell a story.

    You need three proxies minimum to replace an unknown dataset. So lets say you started with the ice core proxy. Then you get a leaf stigmata proxy and they disagree? What do you do? You need to find another proxy to tell you which one (if either) is giving you a valid replacement figure. And you need to keep going until you have three proxies that concur. The science workers drop these requirements whenever political pressure from the oligarchy is applied. So for example we have a distorted view of cosmology thanks to astronomers relying on red shift alone. Mann doesn’t go through this process of tracking down three proxies and resolving the matter. He uses more than one proxy but not in the way described. He can be relied on to use tree ring growth to tell a story of rapid heating because CO2 causes greater tree ring growth. So thats double dipping.

  6. Graeme – I’m Not debating this. At this moment our home is under “watch and act” bushfire threat as I type, after what is the driest year to date on record here. Following on from one of the warmest winters – last year’s being the hottest. Drier and hotter is NOT a good combination. I am only commenting at all during breathers from raking, roof clearing and making sure we can get out at short notice. I expect we will have to evacuate soon but want to raise the chances of our home being saved.

    Graeme, I’ve chased your kinds of arguments down denier rabbit holes too many times to expect to find real foundations under them – they always fall apart when I look beyond the data selections and interpretations provided. I will take the assessments of respected science institutions like the Royal Society and US National Academy of Science over any blog comments and strongly recommend anyone with doubts to look to them. For governments to choose anything other than that level of expert advice is dangerously irresponsible. A government that has not just allowed, but have actively encouraged such views as yours to flourish is, in my view, morally bankrupt – and my local MP’s assisting and promoting of the late Bob Carter’s lecture tours come to mind as a more egregious example. (Mr Joyce as it happens.)


    Right now I think I could really appreciate a home that is girt by… concrete – or bare dirt would do. Since they are on my mind right now, some recommendations for homes in bushfire risk areas – and I think a lot of suburbia in the age of Global Warming should be in that category – would be…

    A home that is girt by concrete – verandahs or paths – with decent gap before any garden beds. No flat roofs; enough pitch that leaves slide off. Metal gutter guards (the plastic stufff is useless), well fitted to gutters that are lower than the edge of the roof (so leaves slide off). If I could I would go for more even more girting – one fire break or better, two, that go all the way around; two so that hazard reduction fires are easier to do in the space between. I would really like to have a fire sprinkler system built in the home, with strategic fire hose connections – although evacuations can mean no-one is around to start it.

    As I type our power went off. Any doubts about our spending money adding some batteries to the PV were already long gone, if just for blackouts. Doubly so now. I just flicked a switch – and since household water is electrically pumped that could be very important.

  7. Birdy,

    Your so called evidence is nothing but rehashed conspiracist junk, by way of affidavit Ball claimed that he was sick and irrelevant and the case was dropped. Mann’s data has been published and is everywhere and has been replicated by others.

    You need to stop uttering potentially slanderous comments.

  8. @mrkenfabian. Thanks for your generous reply to gb, again better expressed than my exaspeartion.

    And gb, thanks for being clear about your – opinions – and ONE data point – a paper using a nural net – assisted by the ipa…[ how can anyone argue from above??? ]

    GB said; “…you can probably dismiss it as something entirely contrived, like say the Virgin birth.”

    No Graeme, neural nets are your contrivance, faith and a virgin birth – “It is often claimed that they are emergent from the network itself. This allows simple statistical association (the basic function of artificial neural networks) to be described as learning or recognition. Alexander Dewdney commented that, as a result, artificial neural networks have a “something-for-nothing quality, one that imparts a peculiar aura of laziness and a distinct lack of curiosity about just how good these computing systems are. No human hand (or mind) intervenes; solutions are found as if by magic; and no one, it seems, has learned anything”. Wikipedia

    And the second of your superlative sources – all two of them… [ thanks. We have been asking for weeks.]

    “IceAgeNow regularly publishes articles skeptical of climate change by its author, and sole employee, Robert Felix — a former architect. George Monbiot at The Guardian describes IceAgeNow as primarily serving to promote Felix’s book about the “coming ice age.” Monbiot says that Felix selectively picks evidence in his attempt to disprove man-made global warming.”

    GB the weather is currently cool at my place. But i cannot put enough water into my land to stop it cracking. I have a virtually unlimited water source. 20yrs have past and no matter the amounts of water I pour into the ground, it is still cracking – drying -more than previously. There is your gift – a data point of ONE. Please have this data fed into the neutal net too. You will surely be able to gather such single point data re weather vs cliamte – via peter ridd, canegrowers and gina, and convince 99% of scientist they are wrong. We await the updated paper.

    But in the interviening glacial age before you “prove” your faith, my thumb now has – via a real neural net ! -muscle memory ‘ flick past gb.’

    Is this all just my bias GB, or just my faith in a 99 to 1 consensus.

  9. “Mann’s data has been published and is everywhere and has been replicated by others.” No thats lies. And its not okay to tell lies.

    mrkenfabian High CO2 levels lead to wildfires. Thats totally proven and there is no denying that. Do you have time to download this free advice on dealing with the big fires?


  10. “GB the weather is currently cool at my place. But i cannot put enough water into my land to stop it cracking.”

    Your soil is low in organic matter and cannot hold water. Thats a big problem to solve.

  11. They are lying. Their data is rigged. And you cannot make the Medieval Warm period disappear. These are frauds using rigged data.

  12. For starters do you see the 1999 Hockey Stick graph up there? Thats Mann’s second Hockey stick atrocity. It went from 1000-2000. So to bail Mann out these guys have shortened it from 1400-1980. So they could have cut him off at the knees. But they are trying to help him out by cutting out the medieval warm period which to make disappear must have been thought an over-reach. Then the next thing with Ammann is they have the “instrumental record” in black. It appears to match the proxy series but they don’t say clearly which proxies they used for the most recent time period. But that instrumental record is rigged data. So thats no good. So how did they manage to get a proxy series to match rigged data????? You would have to use tree rings and know for sure that CO2 had been rising. That would be the way to cheat in that situation. Did Mann cheat using this method? I have no idea. He won’t produce his data. But I’ve seen him use this dodge on other occasions. He writes far more clearly than Ammann and the whitewash crew, so its easier to see what Mann is up to. He’s a kind of flack-catcher for the others.

    Other than that Ammann and the whitewash crew are being obscurantist as to their proxies. They are writing it with all the lack of clarity and lack of traceability that a whitewash requires. You don’t need hundreds of proxies, just three good ones, but they cannot be tree rings, since thats double dipping. You cannot possibly audit how they have employed these proxies and neither can I because they are being obscurantist with a vengeance. I told you how to reconstruct a data set through proxies. You wind up with three. It becomes very easy and the further you go back the wider the era bars become, since you may have to drop one of them. But you have confidence with two, since you’ve tested three prior. They aren’t going through that process and by failing to go through this process they can basically make up anything they like.

    Sami Solanki went through the correct process for the sun versus temperature and he had a great correlation up until 1980 but going back 8000 years. He had these really fat error bars 8000 years ago. He was with the Max Plank institute. His magnificent study only stayed up online a few months. He must have been leaned on.

    But his correlation completely broke down after about 1980. He got to a recent point where he had to admit that the match no longer worked. But he didn’t know the figures were being systematically rigged. So in reality his match might have worked quite well after all.

    McIntyre was probably the Mann crews loyal opposition. He came across as some private guy who had to be the leading statistician in the world or something. So he was good at auditing people on statistical esoterica but on his blog he would ruthlessly cull anyone who would bring up howling problems with the basic logic of the case.

  13. You don’t have the skill, intelligence or goodwill to make an argument worthy of consideration.

    Whether out of 10, 100 or 1,000 your credibility remains a constant ie zero.

  14. Ha ha ha. Well look. From your point of view I suppose you can make believe I don’t have the skill or intelligence if you want. But I know your religious views have been hurt. So I won’t try and force a retraction out of you on the goodwill deal. Because even you know you are wrong on that score “Steve.”

    I’ve had to spin around on a lot of people and a lot of things. I had the professor all wrong. I had being a neocon completely wrong. I had to spin around on Barry Brook. I had to spin around on James Lovelock who had climate wrong but clearly he was an exemplary scientist. I had to take another look at Clive Hamilton and take into account his patriotic sleuthing.

    But I also had to spin around on CO2-warming, declare “no clean data” and simply bail out for the last nine years. We couldn’t get clean data. We had the satellite data going back to 1979 that correlated with the balloon data, but we couldn’t be perfectly sure that it represented ground truth. Only truth somewhat toward the lower troposphere. Which was not good enough for a global warming crisis since the joules above my head won’t necessarily warm the oceans.

    Prior to realising that the data had been rigged, I agreed with Richard Lindzen and others that CO2-warming was REAL but probably a small thing and benign. Then with the data rigged I simply did not know. You kind of forced me to do an abrupt update, I found that data going back to 2005. It sounds good. I assume its good. But we need to take the same process and take the data back at least maybe 120 years (4 oceanic cycles and about 11 solar cycles) Abandoning weather stations as we do so and eventually going back until we get down to as few as 4 recording stations that we can all be happy with.

    The data going back to 2005 really only comprises a single solar cycle. That is to say solar cycle 24. Solar cycle 24 started sometime in 2008 and ended sometime in 2018. Notable for being both short and weak. Solar cycles that are short tend to be strong. Solar cycles that are weak tend to be long. 24 is a bit of a standout. What can you do with such short-range data? There is the possibility that the extra CO2 may be partially compensating for the weak sun. Beyond that you have nothing and neither do I.

    We know that extra CO2’s effect on temperature is pretty weak, one way or the other. We know that extra CO2 is a great thing for the plants and therefore makes bushfires really bad. But beyond that, neither of us have the honest data to make much more of a case out of it.

    This is a conspiracy. Of that we can be really sure.

    We need to diversify our energy sources. That may mean putting up the price on oil and coal. So the Professors suggestion is great on one level. But how rigid must we be? Must we damage Australians when we could have the cheapest electricity in the world simply by burning more coal? Must we fail in our necessary efforts to build a stronger relationship with Taiwan and Japan? Must we risk war with China? Must we damage poor countries by jacking coal prices even in the horror-show of the 2030’s?

    I like the idea of higher royalties that are akin to a carbon price. But there has to be some flexibility here because we have a lot of time with this climate scare. We don’t necessarily have a great deal of time when it comes to a bunch of other problems.

  15. If you are going to ma a religion out of it you should just give it away. You cannot do science rog. Science isn’t for everyone.

  16. @GB is both trolling AND doxxing.
    “Because even you know you are wrong on that score “Steve.””

    My neural net muscle memory has more training data.

  17. I should have known… JQ beat Coetzee by 15 years.

    “While I’m on the topic I’d like to express, yet again, my disgust at those who have endlessly parsed government lies about “children overboard” seeking to make them true by arguing that actions “morally equivalent” to throwing children overboard took place on occasions other than the one to which the lies refer. These people should never be allowed to forget that the policy these lies were used to defend is one of locking innocent children behind razor wire, in desert camps and remote islands, under inhuman conditions deliberately designed to discourage others. I can think of plenty of things to which this is morally equivalent, and they are all shameful.”

    Australia’s Shame by J.M. Coetzee

Leave a Reply

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 )

Connecting to %s