This world is a strange madhouse. Currently, every coachman and every waiter is debating whether relativity theory is correct. Belief in this matter depends on political party affiliation. –Albert Einstein, 1920

Phil Jones was the man at the center of the CRU email leak last last year. Since then he has been hounded by deniers almost non-stop, but few of them have bothered to ask themselves whether or not the criticisms of Jones are valid. Instead they rabidly jump on any accusation with little regard for... Continue Reading →

... but I play one on TV More videos in this series

In my experience, with regard to AGW the policy consequences of our current state of scientific knowledge and data, the risk spectrum, are unusually clear. The debates y’all are engaged in are particularly heated because the outputs of contemporary climate and geosciences are extraordinarily consequential for human civilization, not because the science itself is imbued... Continue Reading →

From America's finest news source: Christian Groups: Biblical Armageddon Must Be Taught Alongside Global Warming (h/t Andrew Weaver on Facebook)

This video (language NSFW, in case you can’t tell from the post title) has been making the rounds: I can't vouch for the accuracy of this video (what the hell do I know about oil booming?), but it didn't set off any bullshit meters.

Something is very wrong in the Gulf of Mexico…

Iceland, Eyjafjallajökull - May 1st and 2nd, 2010 from Sean Stiegemeier on Vimeo.

Peer Sinclair addresses the bat question, and many more, in his second movie on wind power: I do think that the bat problem can, and will be solved.

In 2002 there was a global agreement to slow biodiversity loss by 2010. We failed, and biodiversity is still declining at an alarming rate. Here is a recent article abstract from Science: In 2002, world leaders committed through the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to achieve a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss... Continue Reading →

A little extra carbon dioxide in the air may, unfortunately, go further towards warming Earth than previously thought. A team of British and U.S. researchers have uncovered evidence that Earth’s climate may be up to 50 percent more sensitive to long-term increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide than current climate models predict. The reason for the... Continue Reading →

The recent open letter signed by over 250 members of the National Academies of science, was just the latest in a string of letters that have been written since the CRU email leak. May, 2010 statement from 255 members of the US National Academy of Sciences defending the integrity of climate science, and condemning "McCarthy-like... Continue Reading →

Along with the open letter from over 250 members of the National Academy of Science, the journal Science has published an editorial by Brooks Hanson the deputy editor for physical sciences. It takes a different tone than the original: The scientific community must recognize that the recent attacks stem in part from its culture and... Continue Reading →

University of Virginia Faculty Senate Executive Council condemns Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli’s investigation into Michael Mann, and warns of the the potential chilling effect: Dr. Mann is an internationally respected and highly cited climate scientist. The funding he received for his research resulted from impartial, stringent peer review by respected independent scientists under the auspices... Continue Reading →

An open letter published in Science and signed by over 250 members of the National Academies of Science calls on climate-change deniers to cease with the personal and political attacks and focus on the facts. And those facts are that there is “compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in... Continue Reading →

Peter Sinclair has made another video: A few years ago, I wrote about the possible environmental costs of window power (personally I am more concerned about bat deaths than bird deaths), and suggested that we cannot ignore those costs.  Awareness of the problems of wind power has helped reduce them, and there is great potential... Continue Reading →

It started with Senator James Inhofe's claim that he was looking into for ways to prosecute and criminalize more than a dozen leading climate scientists: Senator James Inhofe, ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, has gone a step beyond promoting his long-notorious global warming denialist propaganda. He is now using the resources... Continue Reading →

Hacking emails is bad: A 22-year-old economics student is reported to be facing a maximum of 20 years in prison and a fine of $500,000 (£331,000) after being convicted last Friday of hacking into Sarah Palin's private Yahoo! email account and posting some of the contents online while she was campaigning to become the Republican... Continue Reading →

One of the key criticisms of the Oxburgh inquiry was that it ignored three key papers written by people at CRU, but these papers are only being considered key because they were not investigated. Had they been looked at, other papers would have been declared key. The Oxburgh report considered some but not all CRU... Continue Reading →

Bashing economists is commonplace within the environmental movement, and while some of the criticisms are justified, they need to to put into proper context. The fact is that a large majority of economists agree that we need to cut our greenhouse gas emissions and that placing a price on carbon (be it via a carbon... Continue Reading →

Andrew Weaver has been the recipient of some rather nasty commentary from some less respectable members of the Canadian press writing in the National Post. This sector of the press has over the years, but especially since the CRU email leak, shown a consistent disregard for reality. Weaver feels that his reputation is being unfairly... Continue Reading →

Yet when it comes to coverage of global warming, we are trapped in the logic of a guerrilla insurgency. The climate scientists have to be right 100 percent of the time, or their 0.01 percent error becomes Glaciergate, and they are frauds. By contrast, the deniers only have to be right 0.01 percent of the... Continue Reading →