What is Evidence of AGW?

It’s the big question at the moment…what really constitutes (or would constitute) evidence that anthropogenic (or man-made) CO2 is the primary driver of the earths climate?

Thankfully, the brilliant statistician William M. Briggs gives us the low-down here.

It’s worth remembering his points when you next watch an alarmist news report on man-made global warming.

Climategate – BBC goalpost shift…

Okay, so I was watching BBC News this morning. Full of the usual statements of “fact” about climate change and today part of the spin was about how maybe carbon offsetting wasn’t all it was cracked up to be (you don’t say) and maybe instead we should just…travel less!

So it seems that the general discussion of the climategate scandal involving the Hadley CRU hasn’t phased them at all. I still haven’t seen them discuss it on the BBC News channel and they’re back on the anthropogenic global warming alarmist bus. Or that’s what I thought.

Buried (and it really is well hidden) in the “Sci-Tec” option if you press the red button for Sky/FreeSat/Freeview viewers today, there is a tiny 6-7 line “article” that mentions some crackpot scientists (no names mentioned, interestingly) think that a series of El Nino’s explain why we had the medieval warm period and the maunder minimum (or little ice age) around the late 19th century. Nonsense. The MWP lasted for hundreds of years. El Ninos last months.

But it’s an interesting thing to read. The BBC had long decided that the MWP and LIA didn’t really exist. Since the Hadley CRU emails were leaked and it seems like the MWP & LIA were just “massaged away”, the new tack of Aunty Beeb is to say “Yeah sure, okay, you got us, so they existed. But it was a random freak occurrence.”

Or to put it another way, they’ve acknowledged the validity of the hacked/leaked emails and documents, and so are shifting the goalposts so they can continue to scare us about anthropogenic CO2 being the main driver for the planets changing climate. Seems like the spin and lies will continue on this subject. How many ‘smoking guns’ are the skeptics going to need?

Andy Jones TV: The Hadley Climate Research Unit Scandal

As promised, from Andy Jones TV:

To summarize this vid: basically I want to know why weren’t the mainstream media reporting on the real story here?

In the wake of the incredible leaked/hacked emails and documents from the Hadley CRU that suggest that maybe the main advocates of anthropogenic activity being the primary cause of global warming don’t have as solid a case as they publicly state and have potentially committed crimes violating the Freedom of Information Act, the main left-of-centre media (such as the BBC) are just reporting that there has been a leak and NOTHING about the content of the leak. That’s incredible. Based on the reaction of the CRU people involved, it seems now highly likely that these emails are 100% real, with no changes at all (they’d have pounced on any changes by now).

But the way that the Beeb et al are reporting it is incredible. Making this story about “Ooh, isn’t it terrible that this private information was leaked by some nasty anonymous person from those nice scientists?” is just like making the Watergate scandal about “Ooh, isn’t it terrible that this nasty Mr. Deepthroat has illegally leaked all this private information about the lovely Mr. Nixon’s activities?”

If you think that’s the real story, then you’re a pretty shoddy journalist.