Climate contrarians/deniers are cherry picking again

Cameron Slater at Whale Oil Beef Hooked  is displaying his confusion again. He’s casting doubt on the findings of climate science by reproducing extracts of a MailOnline article about the bad snow storms in the UK (see Global Warming bites Britain in the arse, freezing weather kills thousands of pensioners). He adds his own “profound” comment with:

“The warmists still insist the planet is warming, and they want us to attempt to cool it down. Meanwhile the freezing temperatures have killed an extra 2000 pensioners.

When will the f*ckwits who think climate change making the earth cooler is a good thing start to apologise. History has shown us that civilisation flourishes in warm and ebbs away in the cold. Yet they insist on pushing us down the path of cooling the planet.”

Of course this is just cherry picking on a grand scale. Climate change deniers like Slater (and his mates at the local contrarian/denier blog Climate Conversation Group) seem to spend the New Zealand summer and autumn in the northern hemisphere, intellectually anyway. They continually comment on, and lament, snow storms and freezing pensioners in the UK, Canada or the US, while the rest of us are moaning about the local record droughts and high temperatures.

And they blatantly imagine their comments on regional weather are somehow directly relevant to global trends. Well, they aren’t – and there is plenty of data showing that. Here are recent examples from Arctic News (see Huge patches of warm air over the Arctic).


Have a look at the colour codes. Sure the UK is suffering from lower than normal temperatures (blue/purple) – but other regions suffer from higher than normal temperature (yellow/red).

Naturally Arctic News is concerned about the Arctic. The blog comments:

“Over the past month or so, huge patches with temperature anomalies of over 20 degrees Celsius have been forming over the Arctic.

The three images [above] show such patches stretch out from Svalbard to Novaya Zemlya (top), north of Eastern Siberia (middle) and over West Greenland and Baffin Bay (bottom).”

The comment further:

“Indeed, as the jet stream slows down and becomes more wavier, such patches of warm air can be expected to extend more regularly into the Arctic. The result can be a huge melt of Arctic sea ice, as well as a huge melt of snow cover in Greenland, which also dramatically lowers albedo, as occurred in 2012 and as discussed in the earlier post Greenland is melting at incredible rate.

This spells bad news for the Arctic sea ice, which may well disappear altogether this summer.”

Cameron Slater and his mates are very parochial – but during our summer/autumn months they seem to be living in a completely different hemisphere. (Some commentators suspect they actually live in a different world).

Even so, they still keep their blinkers firmly aligned.

Similar articles

18 responses to “Climate contrarians/deniers are cherry picking again

  1. richardcfromnz

    “Huge patches of warm air over the Arctic” ?

    Weather for Barrow, Alaska

    ‎Sun, Mon, Tue, ‎Wed
    ‎-18° ‎-24°, ‎-21° ‎-27°,-18° -26°,-16° ‎-22°

    Weather for Oymyakon, Siberia
    ‎Mon,Tue, ‎Wed,Thu
    -8° ‎-16°,-5° -20°,‎-6° ‎-24°, ‎-9° ‎-32°

    Do you know what an “anomaly” is Ken?


  2. Yes Richard – do you understand how dishonest cherry picking is, though? You do a lot if it.


  3. richardcfromnz

    So you’re not implying, by copying the blog headline with the word “warm” in it in conjunction with the anomaly plots, that Arctic temperature is up to 20°C in “huge patches” over the Arctic then?

    If not, what are the absolute temperatures in those “huge patches” Ken?

    Wouldn’t absolute be a better indicator of whether the air is warm or not than anomalies?

    BTW, do you think Sam Carana knows the difference between absolute and anomaly?

    That headline does tend to give the game away though doesn’t it?


  4. Yes, my headline is specific, Richard. Climate change deniers and contrarians very often try to make their case by cherry picking – as Slater did in his post. I showed that by giving global examples in contrast to regional ones.

    It’s quite normal to use anomalies. After all how else does one see relative temperatures. But I guess you are trying to hide the changes aren’t you?


  5. richardcfromnz

    >”Yes, my headline is specific”

    I wasn’t referring to your headline, I was referring to Carana’s headline that you quoted and hotlinked.

    >”It’s quite normal to use anomalies.

    Yes it it is but the anomalies in your post give no indication of whether the air is “warm” or not do they”

    >”After all how else does one see relative temperatures”

    Celcius and Kelvin are both relative scales Ken.

    >”But I guess you are trying to hide the changes aren’t you?”

    Changes to what absolute temperatures Ken?

    Don’t you agree that the Arctic temperatures below are cold rather than “warm”?

    Weather for Barrow, Alaska
    ‎Sun, Mon, Tue, ‎Wed
    ‎-18° ‎-24°, ‎-21° ‎-27°,-18° -26°,-16° ‎-22°

    Weather for Oymyakon, Siberia
    ‎Mon,Tue, ‎Wed,Thu
    -8° ‎-16°,-5° -20°,‎-6° ‎-24°, ‎-9° ‎-32°

    Where exactly – since I’m “cherry picking” – is the “warm” air over “huge patches” of the Arctic?


  6. Richard – you are either extremely naive or extremely dishonest. The term “warm” is surely relative. In this specific case it refers to temperatures in the arctic which are warmer than normal – as the anomalies clearly show. To talk about warmer air in the middle of an Arctic winter of course doesn’t mean it is tropical. I shouldn’t have to explain this to you.

    Whether one talks about relative or absolute temperatures one uses the normal temperature scales. Duh!

    Slater, you and our mates at Treadgold’s blog are referring to weather in the UK where the anomalies show cooler than normal. It is wrong to make global conclusions just by cherry picking one or the other. Yet you guys continually quote isolated weather examples as “evidence” against the conclusions climate science is making about global climate.

    You are upset because I presented the global picture here and that shows what you are doing. And why it is dishonest.


  7. richardcfromnz

    >”In this specific case it refers to temperatures in the arctic which are warmer than normal”

    “warmer” relatively? Are you still implying “warm” Ken (and no I don’t mean tropical, I mean in terms of melting ice?

    Are you seriously suggesting that temperatures in the range -5° to ‎-32° C say, are “warmer” than -25° to ‎-52° C (think of a deep-freeze refrigerator at -18° C Ken)?

    Wouldn’t a more “honest” description be “less cold”?

    Or do you actually consider, well, “intellectually anyway”, that -5° to ‎-32° C isn’t cold at all?


  8. Are you seriously suggesting that temperatures in the range -5° to ‎-32° C say, are “warmer” than -25° to ‎-52° C

    Richard Cumming, are you seriously suggesting that they are not?


  9. Richard, all is is a diversion from my article. But yes -32 > -52 and -5 > -25.

    “In terms of melting ice” – ice doesn’t melt in the Arctic during winter. However it does in summer – and more so than it used to.

    The temperatures you quote from Siberia and Alaska are meaningless in this context because there is no indication if they are warmer or colder than normal. Why don’t you quote anomalies?

    However, you are just attempting (very clumsily) to divert attention away from the dishonest cherry picking by Slater, you and your denier mates at Treadgold’s blog. That is the subject of my article.


  10. richardcfromnz

    Ken, I’ve checked the conventional definitions of “warm” and “warmer” just to be sure, e.g.

    adj. warm·er, warm·est
    1. Somewhat hotter than temperate; having or producing a comfortable and
    agreeable degree of heat; moderately hot: a warm climate.

    That’s not something that can be applied to anything below zero celsius is it?

    Isn’t it just possible that Sam Carana (and vicariously, yourself) doesn’t really understand the concept of “warm” and “warmer”?


  11. So Richard, is English not your primary language?

    Or are you just still clumsily trying to divert attention away from the message of this article


  12. Global Warming bites Britain in the arse, freezing weather…

    Deep fried stupid.


    Climate deniers need to learn English for a change.

    Global Warming bites Britain in the arse, freezing weather…

    Fuck me but that’s dumb. You really have to have rocks in your head to write something like that. A child could see how demented it is.

    Climate Denial Crock of the Week- “It’s cold. So there’s no Climate Change”


  13. Several years of consecutively unusual cold winters in Europe = Just weather
    One year of drought in NZ = climate change


  14. That’s a very naive statement, Phil. Who is coming out with that rubbish? Or is it your idea?

    Mind you, while you can’t easily attribute a weather event to climate change, we do know climate change can lead to increased frequency of extreme weather events. And that seems to be happening. NIWA sees an increase in local drought events in future, for example.

    Even the cold weather in Europe could be a result of warming in the arctic, and increased sea area exposure due to ice melting. these lead to weather and wind changes which can bring cold air from Siberia.

    Weather and climate are bloody complex.


  15. That’s a very naive statement, Phil. Who is coming out with that rubbish? Or is it your idea?

    James Renwick was the Kiwi guy whose idea was that teh N drought was only casued by climate change

    The cold weather in N Europe for the last 5 years is also “global warming” of “global weirding”

    Take ur pick


  16. Phil, Renwick is a respected local climate scientist. If you think he is making a mistake, do the work, contact him, discuss the issue with him. Or perhaps you could just acknowledge you have (perhaps purposely) misunderstood him.

    I certainly don’t interpret Renwick’s work or comments in your way.


  17. One of the reasons for prediction of increased extremes in the weather is down to a less stable polar vortex, that is, a wavier vortex with warmer masses of air from lower latitudes getting to higher latitudes, if this happens you’ll also see cooler masses of air from higher latitudes getting to lower latitudes (you can’t stick one mass of air into the arctic without simultaneously taking a similar mass of air out of the Arctic).


  18. Pingback: A global warming hoax meme is born – in New Zealand too! | Open Parachute

Leave a Reply: please be polite to other commenters & no ad hominems.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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