Monthly Archives: February 2010

This game looks familiar

Tree Lobsters!: #118 Skeptics & Charlatans.

Thanks to Dave C at Auckland Skeptics in the Pub

Anti-science lies being exposed – slowly

This is a sane word of advice at the time of hysterical attacks on climate science and scientists under the “climategate” tag.

It comes in a submission from the  University of East Anglia to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Science and Technology investigating the “climategate” business. It finishes with the comment:

“Given that the stakes for humanity are so high in correctly interpreting the evidence of global warming, we would meanwhile urge scientists, academics, journalists and public servants to resist the distortions of hearsay evidence or orchestrated campaigns of misinformation, and instead to encourage open, intelligent debate.”

Ah, if only! Recently on another thread we had a denier accusing scientists of “Lying” and being “eco-fascists,” “lying parasites,” and “parasites of the environmental movement.”

For those of you who want a bit more sanity in this discussion have a read of the university’s submission. It’s avalable as a word document (submission) and together with an appendix.

The submission covers the key accusations being made by the climategate deniers and might be an eye-opener to some.

They say “Lies get half way around the world before truth gets its boots on.” It takes time but truth will eventually out.

I look forward to the time that all these inquiries report their findings.


Update (or BREAKING NEWS as Ian Wishart would claim): It’s also worth having a read of this statement Climate change and the scientific process from the Office of the NZ Prime Minister’s Science Advisory Committee. A printable version of “Climate change and the scientific process” is available for download here ( PDF file, 139 kb).

Permalink

Similar articles

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Share

Deniers distort Phil Jones

Let’s differentiate again between climate change sceptics (who are prepared to rationally consider and discuss the science) and climate change deniers (who have an emotional commitment to denying climate change and see the science as just the result of a huge conspiracy). Currently there is a feeding frenzy amongst the deniers. Hysterical claims are being made and promoted on the flimsiest of evidence, even against the evidence. They are promoting anything and everything that can possibly be misinterpreted to discredit scientific conclusions and scientists. And, yes, these attacks do get nasty and personal.

This must be making the true climate change sceptics very uncomfortable. More of them should publicly dissociate themselves from this hysterical anti-scientific campaign.

Warming since 1995?

Predictably, several local blogging deniers took on the misreporting of the recent BBC interview with climate scientist Phil Jones. Several of his statements have been used to make distorted, even completely fraudulent, claims. Here I only consider the misreporting of Jone’s comment on global warming since 1995:

Here is the question and answer (see Q&A: Professor Phil Jones for full interview):

Question: Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Answer: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.”

At least three local bloggers reported this as a u-turn. A concession that warming was no longer occurring. A denial of previous work! Essentially they were repeated the headlines of overseas conservaqtive and denier newspapers and blogs.

Now you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see these bloggers are completely distorting the whole meaning of Phil Jones’ comment. But, if you want to dig a bit deeper and get your head around the implications of statistical comments like this watch this video by potholer54. It deals specifically with this distortion:

YouTube – 8a. Climate Change – supplement.

An earlier video from potholer54 deals with the more general question. See  8. Climate Change — Has the Earth been cooling?

Permalink

Similar articles

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Share

Faith schools

Here is something for parents to consider.

I think that, under the humour, there is a serious message.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

New Zealand has bigots too

I actually thought this wouldn’t happen in good old New Zealand. We are a tolerant lot and seem quite happy with our largely secular society. But there’s always some die-hards wanting to spoil it, isn’t there?

This press release from the NZ Atheist Bus Campaign describes how the NZ Bus company has reversed their approval of the adverts because of public complaints.

The NZ Atheist Bus Campaign, which late last year raised in excess of $20,000 from public donations, has met a set back in their plans. Nationwide bus company NZ Bus, who had tentatively approved the campaign’s ads on buses in major city centres, have now rejected them.

NZ Bus stated that they have received a number of complaints from the public about the proposed ads, which read “There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.”

Spokesperson for the Atheist Bus Campaign Simon Fisher says “It’s concerning that peaceful atheist messages are not allowed on buses while religious messages are often seen on buses and in public. Messages of atheism are rare in New Zealand and we aim to raise awareness for the one-third of New Zealanders who are unconvinced by the claims of religion.”

Organisers of the Campaign tried to reach a resolution with NZ Bus, and later attempted mediation sessions through the Human Rights Commission. NZ Bus refused to participate in these mediation sessions. Because they are refusing to discuss the matter and reach an agreement, the organisers of the Campaign are now investigating the possibility of taking this case to the Human Rights Review Tribunal.

Simon Fisher says “we’re disappointed at the response from NZ Bus and plan to look at options going forward. We owe it to the thousands of Kiwis who have supported this campaign with donations and messages of support.”

Advertisements with identical wording ran in the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and Spain. Similar campaigns also ran successfully in Croatia, Finland, Holland, Italy, America and across the Tasman in Australia.

“We are gravely concerned that in New Zealand we’re unable to present an atheistic message, showing that we do not have the same practical freedom of expression as in other first world countries. It highlights why this campaign is so necessary.” said spokesperson Simon Fisher.

The Campaign will continue to accept donations for advertising, see http://www.nogod.org.nz for further details.

Why don’t these complainants identify themselves? Let us hear their arguments. A complaint to the Human Rights Review Tribunal might provide us that opportunity.

Permalink

Similar articles

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Share

Belief and social identity

Glenn, at “Say Hello to my Little Friend” has a very useful post on a Christian perspective of open-mindedness (Scepticism, Open Mindedness and Mistrust). I think this perspecitve is not just a Chrsitian one. It is one that I recognise also in those advancing dogmatic secular ideologies. For my generation his analysis applies equally well to Maoists, to the Red Guards of China’s so-called “Cultural Revolution.”

Here’s how Glenn justifies a closed mind to non-Christian viewpoints:

“So it is when a Christian is asked to consider atheism. It’s not true that the Christian should be as open minded to the possibility of atheism as he would like people to be to the possibility of Christianity, any more than I should be as open to the possibility of my wife’s unfaithfulness as I would like people to be to the possibility of her faithfulness. A person who is a Christian has what he or she takes to be a relationship of trust. They have a prior commitment (and in fact the relationship between Christ and the church is likeness, in the Bible, to a marriage e.g. Ephesians 5:31-33). When I talk about a prior commitment here, I do not just mean a prior belief, something that they affirmed before and don’t want to give up. I mean not a commitment to a proposition but to a person – to a relationship, call it what you will. It is a relationship of trust, and more than that, of worship.”

So, this religious conviction is not about primary beliefs. It’s about a “relationship of trust,” “a prior commitment,” even a relationship “of worship.”

Continue reading

Etiquette for the office global warming denier

One has to laugh.

There have been some rather nasty “humour” on climate change denier blogs attacking scientists lately. So I rather enjoyed. this. It’s much gentler and not personal.

YouTube – SNOWMAGEDDON ETIQUETTE – at work.

Thanks to ecopolitiology and  Kate Sheppard

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

NZ blogs sitemeter ranking – February ‘10

There are 152 NZ blogs with publicly accessible sitemeter stats on this list. Mind you I have now found over 1000 NZ blogs and most of them just don’t make their statistics accessible. I am sure there are some bloggers who don’t understand how to install a publicly accessible sitemeter or statcounter.

The blogs are listed in the table below, together with daily visits and page view numbers averaged over the previous 7 days. The data was that given by the NZ blog ranking tool on Wednesday February 17th.

This can be seen at NZ blogs average daily visits.

Have a look at that tool. Its a way of comparing your own blog’s performance from day to day – a roller coaster ride which can be quite exciting!

Just be aware that it relies on spreadsheets at Google Docs and data is not always available. If the data is missing or incomplete, wait a while and reload the page. It will eventually show up.

Meanwhile I am still keen to hear of any other blogs with publicly available sitemeter stats that I have missed. Contact me if you know of any. Continue reading

Climate change confusion – a conspiracy of sorts

The current “climategate” attacks on science must bewilder many scientists. Why the hysteria? Why the wild claims? The facts don’t warrant that sort of reaction!

One is tempted to see a conspiracy – and no doubt there are all sorts of links between organisations and campaigns are easily plotted. But I think what we have is something a bit more uncoordinated. More an accident of history.

Continue reading

WARNING! People might find us out!

Skeptical Science available on Itunes Iphone App StoreRecently I passed on detail of a new iphone/ipodtouch app providing access to the facts of climate change science (see Get your climate change science on the run). This seems to be catching on.

Anyway it’s upset some of those involved in trying to create confusion about climate change.

Yesterday one of their blogs, Climate Realists, sent out this alert see (WARNING! New Site set up as an iphone app to put down “Climate Realists”):

WARNING! There is an iphone app trying to put down what we have to say under the heading of “Skeptical Science”.

We need as many of you as possible to promote that this iphone app is yet another attempt to discredit “Climate Realists”.

I can only hope the general public can see through this as a cheap trick to prop up the FAILED SCIENCE OF MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE.

We need another iphone app that shows our side of the argument as it is, rather then what a supporter AGW thinks it is!

Please send this message to all known friendly sites that support our side.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]Truth will out!