Fifteen years ago, Britain’s top climate scientists announced the end of snow.
According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past – Environment – The Independent
Today they have a different story.
Since the original forecast was made 15 years ago, Northern Hemisphere winter snow extent has rapidly increased to record levels.
The term “mass hysteria” comes to mind. They have worked themselves up to a frenzied pitch. Logic and common sense are out the window in the field of climatology.
Nothing unusual. Just the modern version of tulip mania. Such hysteria affects societies from time to time. And then it passes. Unfortunately in the age of the Internet these hysterias are amplified and more widely distributed.
Tulip mania did not offer unlimited power and money to goverments. We have a “positive feedback loop” this time.
Wow, can I make money by selling climate derivatives?
They’re called carbon credits.
Be careful what you wish for with derivatives Hugh. Jo Nova did a post on derivatives , in general, the other day. Sobering reading
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/04/financial-system-on-the-rocks-repo-spike-suggests-derivative-bomb-is-triggered/
“Herein is a parable of imperious regulators who subordinate science to a green political agenda. While imposing huge societal costs, government policies have failed to achieve their stated environmental purpose.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/forget-the-missing-rainfall-california-wheres-the-delta-smelt-1430085510
Children certainly don’t know what science is. And some of them are now legally adults.
I wonder how Scotland’s ~ 200 neo-glaciers are doing? http://iceagenow.info/2014/08/glaciers-forming-scotland/
After all if the world temperature fell from 62.45F in 1997 to 58.24F in 2014 the earth is well on its way to the next glaciation. snicker…
As soon as the Islamic State is established in Britain, climate change will no longer be a topic of interest, as everyone will just be trying to keep their heads.
Obvously already lost their heads.
So what, most of them are already brain dead zombies.
“Calling Dr. Viner…”
Heck Wunderground can not even predict the high temperature for the day. The nice sunny 70° F | 44° F has barely reached 64° F @ 1:20 PM and they have just down graded the predicted high to 69° F.
I am turning the space heater back on before my toes and fingers get frostbite… Grumble…
It is more than ten degrees colder where I am.
3 out of 4 super hot days caused by AGW:
http://www.apnewsarchive.com/2015/Human-caused-global-warming-is-responsible-for-3-out-of-4-super-hot-days-new-study-calculates/id-eb57f82186644726b30862ef2baf4d6e
Lead author Erich Fischer, a climate scientist at ETH Zurich, a Swiss university, and colleague Reto Knutti examined just the hottest of hot days, the hottest one-tenth of one percent. Using 25 different computer models. Fischer and Knutti simulated a world without human-caused greenhouse gas emissions and found those hot days happened once every three years.
ROTFLMAO!!!
How to Deal with a Dead Horse
-Buy a heavier whip
-Change riders
-Threaten the horse with termination
-Appoint a committee to study the horse
-Arrange to visit other sites to see how they ride dead horses
-Appoint a project team to re-animate the dead horse
-Create training to increase the rider’s load share
-Change the form to read: “This horse is not dead.”
-Hire outside contractors to ride the dead horse
–Harness several dead horses together for increased speed
-Increase funding to help the horses performance
-Do a time management study to see if lighter riders would improve productivity
-Purchase an after-market product to make dead horses run faster
-Declare that a dead horse has lower overhead and therefore performs better
-Form a quality focus group to find profitable uses for dead horses
-Rewrite the performance requirements for horses
-Hire a consulting firm to perform a strategic study of best practices in continuous improvement in utilizing dead horses
-Promote the dead horse to supervisory position
‘Lead author Erich Fischer, a climate scientist at ETH Zurich, a Swiss university, and colleague Reto Knutti examined just the hottest of hot days, the hottest one-tenth of one percent. Using 25 different computer models. Fischer and Knutti simulated a world without human-caused greenhouse gas emissions and found those hot days happened once every three years.’
I am wordless faced with this masterpiece of arithmetics. Dunning-Kruger by the author.
Why couldn’t they just look at the temperature record and show how many more hot days we have now than, say, 80 years ago. That would clearly show that AGW…
…oh. Never mind.
I wonder if anyone has called Dr. David Viner to ask him how his prediction has turned out… ???
Seems nobody is ever held accountable for the spread of FEAR and Hysteria
.. think I’ll track this guy down and email him… see if he responds like Gavin did…
You’re naughty if you do that. Naughty sceptic, or evil sceptic.
Call him Phillippe & arrange an interview on ITV ; Viner deserves to be shamed out.
It’s snowing in the Scottish Borders at the moment, I’m standing in my kitchen waiting for my tea to cook and watching the hills go progressively whiter 🙁
David Viner needs to take a peek the f#÷k out the window….
It’s snowing again David!!…
Pull yourself off the computer screen for a second …. off the bogus computer model and look f’ing outside dude…quit scaring the children…
I agree to your point, but I would also add that scientists are not only open to criticism, but also to funds. If you want them to prove something, even if those things don’t really exist, just give them funds, and you would be surprised about what they could prove. No, I don’t want to say that all of them are like that, but, unfortunately, there are many “dirty” scientists. Otherwise, why didn’t they pay real attention to the climate and how come they ignore, among other things, discussing oceans, when you cannot talk about climate without referring to the oceans?
… there are many “dirty” scientists.
I call them “grantologists”.
Funny name! I like it 🙂
It fits, perfectly.
It’s not a question of dirty scientists vs. honest scientists, when 97% of the dirty scientists are funded and published, and 97% of the honest ones are not.
Most likely [email protected] …..
Emailing him NOW… lets see what happens… “Hey David.. I’m drowning in a most unexpected snowfall over here… and my children sure as hell DO know what snow is all about… I was reading your yr 2000 prediction about a snowless UK and wondering how you could have been so wrong?? What went wrong with your prediction and what are your thoughts now about Climate Change… if there is any.. and future snow?”…
Please don’t mail him – hate mail just offers him an opportunity to be a victim.
Why not? I did. These guys need to be ridiculed forever when you consider the overall harm this BS science has done.
Who said hate mail? Do you hate your kids when you correct them? Shame can be a powerful tool, and the worst/best thing my parents could do to correct my behavior, was to make me ashamed of it.
When people correctly point out they are wrong, the alarmists consider that hate speech and something that needs to be banished immediately!
Yes, you are right. When I was a small and petulant child, I thought my parents hated me too. 😆
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/mann-photo.jpg
Phillippe, please post it if he responds.
Hugh, I think you have that backwards. People like him are the perps. With their junk science propaganda they create victims. They need to be exposed, and held accountable for the things they say. Until this scam ends.
That is why I like this website so much; Tony/Steve doesn’t give them a break.
+100
They do not deserve a break. They are without honor. They knowingly lie and have the blood of inocents on their hands.
Considering that we are at a temperature high for the 70 year PDO/AMO cycle, we can only expect more snow for the next 35+ years to come. I do not think Dr. Viner was aware of the cycles that mother Earth moves through on her trip through the cosmos. We still have the 1500 year cycle to contend with and following that, another ice age.
It seems that some people can’t see the forest for the trees.
By the time we do get to another ice age, the temperature record will be so polluted with positive corrections that we’ll put on our T-shirts and shorts in preparation.
+1
Natural cycles dominate. The AMO maximum may be with us for another decade. Perhaps super-quiet sun could shorten it.
When we get past these dark ages, scientists in the future will agree that CO2 forcing is so low, the anthropogenic portion of it is inconsequential and well-hidden in the noise. They’ll shake their heads about this CO2 hysteria of the early 21st century, this insane, noxious fog of propaganda in which we’re living today.
Today’s skeptical community will some day be looked back on as the heroes who got it right and didn’t go along with the idiotic AGW hyped-pothesis. What is so insane is that they ALL should be skeptics today, because NONE of the data support what they’re pushing as settled science.
There is none so blind as he who refuses to see.
Like the Mafia, once you’re in you never get out! (alive)
He left UEA in 2007:
http://www.sustainability.mottmac.com/careers/david-viner
http://www.sustainability.mottmac.com/article/614/mott-macdonald-appoints-dr-david-viner-as-pri
http://www.climasphere.org/#!author/David-Viner
Honest government-funded science is a thing of the past.
Ike did warn us.
Honest government never existed so science should NEVER be funded by government.
“Honest government-funded science is a thing of the past.”
There can be no honest government science. It is impossible. The State is a gang of thieves writ large and that evil can not produce real, honest science.
first year I can remember where, in maine, had flurries on my b-day (4-24) and so far every morning still running around 32-35 deg F.
Anybody have a link to information documenting the $29 billion spent on climate research in the US?
I do not doubt it, but some do…need proof to shut them up.
Climate Change
2011 US Federal Government Budget
NOAA 437 million
NSF 480 million
NASA 438.1 million
DOE 627 million
DOI 171 million
EPA 169 million
USDA 159 million
TOTAL = 2,312.1 million
From: http://climatequotes.com/2011/01/08/how-can-climate-scientists-spend-so-much-money/
The US government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change…
Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks are calling for more carbon-trading. And experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 – $10 trillion making carbon the largest single commodity traded….
From: http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/massive-climate-funding-exposed/
Well, thank you Gail, but the 29 billion number is tossed around a lot. Any idea about that?
I would love to provide a fast proof to this guy.
That climate quote link does not work, unfortunately.
I wonder if a lot of this is indirect costs. Tax break for solar and wind, money given to the Solyndras, etc…
Whitehouse.gov report stating 22 billion in 2014. top of page 3
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf
Nuclear subsidies are becoming as popular.
The proposed £16 billion Hinkley Point reactor has been signed yup to sell it’s electricity at a guaranteed price of £92.50 /MWh when the market price is almost half that. Amounting to about £17 billion in subsidies
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10611003/Nuclear-setback-as-EC-attacks-Hinkley-Point-subsidy-deal.html
This document shows a $21,408,000,000 budget for 2014. I am sure there is more that this budget does not show, but 21.4 billion dollars is still at least 21 billion too much.
The total is found on page 45, and page 5 explains figures are in millions of dollars.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf
This is a great start. He claimed that number was exaggerated by an order of magnitude.
This is over two thirds of that amount…I am sure there are other amounts elsewhere.
Thank you both!
This is only federal outlays.
States also spend in varying amounts, I am sure.
And private research.
And I do not think this includes tax credits…which some like to call “giveaways” when they go to a group they dislike…as if not taking someone’s money via taxation is somehow the same as giving them money.
Oh, but this snow is weather, not climate. See how that works?
It’s neither. It is a thing of the past, it’s history,
Only earth isn’t effect by the sun http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150422152158.htm?utm_content=buffer97957&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
I think it may not be long before we have a definitive answer to the question of solar influence and variability.
Or, at the very least, some much needed hard evidence, one way or the other.
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/11140070_1016328458380203_7634715246400800056_n.jpg?oh=9b98dcc425a9733df6a8b2d5eb75b93b&oe=55E0674C
Need to get Steve on the BBC
https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/11168023_940683329295432_3628165428010875237_n.jpg?oh=5b4759f75e01db65d1e89009a81b56f6&oe=55D485FB&__gda__=1439170674_b1aaac329dd69fd03322f9d227f98a91