A lifetime's worth of climate alarmism in a nutshell

 I think this comment by David M Hoffer (posted on WUWT) provides a witty but true summary of the alarmist positions and debating styles since 1971, with a 'projection' for the year 2031 ( I have added the boldening and italics):

Natural variation and climate cycles explained:

1971
Alarmists: There’s an ice age coming!
Skeptic: Looks like natural variation, not a long term trend….
Alarmists: Blasphemer! Ice Age! We’re all going to die!

1991
Alarmists: The world is heating up at an unprecedented rate!
Skeptic: But you just said….
Alarmists: CO2! CO2 is causing unprecedented warming!
Skeptic: OK, forget the ice age then, it STILL looks like natural variation, not a long term trend…
Alarmists: Blasphemer! Tipping point! We’re all going to die!

2011
Skeptic: You know, looking at the last 10 to 15 years, it doesn’t seem like there’s been any more warming….
Alarmists: Natural variation! It's hiding the warming!
Skeptic: Hiding the warming? Where?
Alarmists: Blasphemer! The warming is hiding in the bottom of the ocean where we can’t measure it, and/or being masked by aerosols, and/or being hidden by natural variation! We’re all going to die!

2031
Alarmist: There’s an ice age coming!
Skeptic: Looks like…never mind, I know where this is going. We’re all going to die. I for one, because a) I'm old and b) I’m sick to death of listening to alarmism.

Climate Classroom: questions to stick on the wall

'The climate-change con artists' 
is the title of a post by Leighton Steward in which he recalls Travesty Trenberth's Lament 'we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment', and goes on to pose eight questions which he would like to see addressed by climate alarmists, or 'climate-change con artists' as he also more colourfully describes them.  I think these questions would make a fine poster for the wall of any classroom in which climate change is raised:

1. Why can't warming alarmists produce a single legitimate example of empirical evidence to support the manmade global-warming hypothesis?
   
2. Why has Earth been warming for 300 years when man has only emitted measurable amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere for the last 150 years?
   
3. Why did Earth cool for 500 years before the recent 300 year warming and warm for several hundred years before that when even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says CO2 levels did not change?
   
4. Why was the Medieval Warm Period, a thousand years ago, warmer than today even though the CO2 level was 38 percent lower than today?
   
5. Why did many of Earth's major glaciers in the Alps. Asia, New Zealand and Patagonia begin to retreat nearly half a century before the Industrial Revolution and man's CO2 emissions?
   
6. Of the last five interglacials, going back 400,000 years, why is our current interglacial the coolest of the five even though Earth's CO2 level is about 35 percent higher?
   
7. Why has our current 10,000-year-long Holocene epoch been warmer than today for 50 percent of the time when CO2 levels were about 35 percent lower than today?
   
8. Why are correlations of Earth's temperature with natural factors such as sunspot numbers, solar cycle lengths, solar magnetic variations and changes in major ocean currents all better than the correlation of Earth's temperature with CO2 levels?

I am waiting for my copy of Plimer's new book  - it will shortly be in carry-on luggage and flying through the air to me from Australia.  I'll review it here later this month, and I anticipate a bumper crop of further questions that the conscientious teacher will not find any answer for in any climate-alarm-fouled syllabus. They would however be of value as conversation-pieces, or discussion-starters for any suitably qualified class with a suitably courageous teacher willing to raise questions about the relative importance of CO2 as an influence on climate..


According to the source:
Leighton Steward is a geologist, environmentalist, author and retired energy industry executive. He currently heads up the organization Plants Need CO2 and is a veteran of television and talk radio where he helps educate the public and politicians about the benefits of CO2 as it relates to the plant and animal ecosystems.

Happy Head, Chilly Children, Troubled Teachers, Perplexed Parents, Riled Readers - an example of authoritarian eco-arrogance at work

First the Head:

Quote from article 'The school's headmaster, Rob Benzie, shut down the radiators as an experiment to show students how the school could cut its carbon footprint.

''We turned off the heating as an experiment to see if we can lower our carbon footprint,' he said.

'We allowed pupils to wear as many jumpers as they liked and everyone seemed to be happy enough although it did get pretty chilly."


Then the children:
'Pupils at Ansford Academy in Castle Cary, Somerset, were forced to grip their pens through thick gloves and wear their coats and hats in class as temperatures dropped to 1C.'

And the teachers:
'One teacher said: 'It was absolutely ridiculous I have never experienced working in such cold conditions.
'I am all for saving the environment but to conduct an "experiment" as the head calls it on such a cold day is beyond stupid.
'The kids were complaining, no one was working properly some of them could not even write because they could not grip a pen through woolly gloves.
'We have a number of pupils with mental and physical disabilities here and they really struggled with the cold.
'It was unnecessary and in my opinion barbaric.' 

And the parents:
' mother, whose 12-year-old daughter goes to the school, said: 'My daughter was physically shaking when she came home.'When I heard about this eco day I was absolutely furious.
'I wanted to take my daughter out of school but I was worried I'd get into trouble with the authorities.'

and

'One father said: 'I was just shocked when I found out what had happened.
'I have never heard of such a ridiculous idea. Turning off all the heating in December is just mental.

'The kids could get sick I can't believe any of them learnt anything.

'I know when I am cold I can hardly function. I'm absolutely furious with the school.' 


Finally, the readers: 
Here are the currently top-rated comments to the Daily Mail article from which the above quotes are taken:

Another idiot who shouldn't have any contact with impressionable youngsters.

- Tommy Cockles, Liverpool, 6/12/2011 7:18

Yet another eco-loony who thinks he can 'save the planet'. The planet can take care of itself, as it has done for billions of years.

- Owd Tyke, Devon, 6/12/2011 8:20

These are the teachers preparing the next generation for the work-place - Heaven help us! Typical leftie - more obsessed with a trendy ideology than teaching his pupils the three R's. These are the sort of people who ban religious instruction because they consider it superstition yet embrace with boundless enthusaism the new 'religion' of man-made climate change, which is pure fantasy.

- Gibbo, Stansted, Essex, 6/12/2011 7:20

What better way to teach children that climate alarmists are nutty?

- Casey, Maine, US, 6/12/2011 8:07

There is nothing more dangerous in life than a man (or woman) with a cause. Such people lose commonsense and it becomes impossible to reason with them

- Jeremy R, Sheffield, England, 6/12/2011 8:33

he is breaking the HSE rules on heating a work place.

- Geoff , Cleveland, 6/12/2011 9:15

I think I agree with all the top-rated commenters to this article in the Daily Mail.  Here is an example of someone who should not be in a position of such control over the young.  He clearly needs help himself to deal with his neurosis.  Inflicting it on others is not forgiveable unless he has completely lost the plot, in which case the failing lies with the education authority which continues to employ him.  His action does indeed seem to be illegal, as he has some duty of care.  The whole sorry business is a tiny example of the narcissistic inhumane authoritarianism of the 'green movement'.

Note added 7 Dec 2011

And now the blogs.  This story has been picked up quite widely today, and by some widely read, influential sites.  Here are three of them:

(1) Instapundit

‘#GREENFAIL: Children left to freeze in the classrooms after head turns off heating on coldest day of year ‘to show how school can be eco-friendly.’ It’s a valuable lesson: “Eco-Friendly” just means “in the hands of the smug and sadistic.”
UPDATE: Michael Tinkler notes that at least nobody’s blowing them up. So far.'

(2) The Daily Bayonet:

Lessons in Hypothermia

Hippies hate kids. How else to explain their murderous, misanthropic meanness toward moppets?
A headmaster at a British school decided a great lesson in sustainability would be to turn off the heat for a day. In December:

(3) The Register:

Headmaster freezes schoolkids for Gaia

Earth Goddess requires sacrifices

By Andrew Orlowski

Posted in Environment, 7th December 2011 08:02 GMT

Pagan gods traditionally required human sacrifices – preferably of children – and a West Country academy school appears to be leading the way. To give pupils a lesson in "sustainability" they'll never forget, headmaster Rob Benzie of Ansford Academy in Castle Cary, Somerset, ordered a "No Power Day ... as an experiment to see if we can lower our carbon footprint".

Added later still on 7 Dec 2011
WUWT is covering it too.  This sure is catching attention!
'The local school authority and parents should probably teach Mr. Benzie the lesson that freezing children to push a radical green agenda makes his job unsustainable, before he does something really stupid.'

Note added 8 Dec 2011
It can be instructive to look at the data.  Here are the values of Max and Min temp in degC recorded at a Met Office station in the same county as this school.  The data are for Yeovilton, and can be downloaded from here

Whichever bit of 'global warming' was exercising the headmaster, it surely was not in SW England.









Note added 6 Feb 2012: more headmasterly stupidity in the name of Gaia: http://dailybayonet.com/2012/02/green-pee/


Note added 12 Sep 2013: the link to the original article in the Daily Mail seems to be dead.  Here is a much shorter report still up on Fox News: http://nation.foxnews.com/freezing/2011/12/06/kids-freeze-after-school-turns-heating-save-planet

WUWT Exposes Suzuki Foundation Scaring the Kids for Climate Cash

The post at WUWT begins as follows:

'Here’s the popup
message
solicitation you get when you visit the website for the first time:

Climate change is melting the North Pole and it’s no longer safe for Santa and his Workshop. So our dear old friend is packing up the sleigh to find somewhere else to live.

You can help! Move your mouse over this website to find gifts you can buy Santa to help him set up a temporary Workshop and protect the North Pole for his return.

Of course, you’re savvy enough to know we won’t be sending actual gifts to Santa. You will receive a tax receipt for 100% of your purchase and proceeds will be used by the David Suzuki Foundation to support our critical work to protect nature and the environment from threats like climate change.

Buying these green gifts and personalized ecards on behalf of hard-to-buy-for friends or relatives on your holiday list is a great way to show you’re thinking of them — and the planet!

Act now to help Santa!

Sincere thanks,
The David Suzuki Foundation

This is nothing more than a thinly veiled revenue generator for the foundation.
No shame, no scruples, just send money. Is it any wonder informed people are doubting the climate change issue when presented with crap like this?'

I was at the EIKE conference in Munich last week, and it was interesting to note the spontaneous and strong applause for a couple of the speakers when they noted with disdain instances of children being scared by climate propagandising.  Most of us, I suspect, don't like it when people set out to to scare our children.  Or anyone else's children.  So this shoddy advert will probably backfire on Suzuki in his attempts to get more cash and more converts.

Note added later: Suzuki has form on scaring children.  From The Daily Bayonet in September 2008:

'David Suzuki has a new article published on his Foundation web site.  This time, instead of imploring the world to listen to him just because he’s old, he is trying to make children guilt their parents into voting with the environment in mind.
His article is full of scare-mongering language and imagery, but there is not one scientific reference or fact in it.  Suzuki knows the science is far from settled, but he also knows that if it came to a debate, he’s on the losing side.  So he plays on emotions; emotions like fear. To children.'

Note added 1 December 2011.  H/t Climate Depot

This tawdry stuff has happened before.

July 2010 in the States: http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2010/07/madness-of-joel-rogers.html A foul oaf called Joel Rogers: '“Here is a picture if you want of the polar ice caps melting, Santa Claus is about to drown. You should tell your children uh that uh these people in your state that oppose taking steps in your state on global warming, they are trying to kill Santa Claus. Once you have the kids you know another 14 years and they are going to vote.” Joel Rogers.'

December 2010 in the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/dec/03/children-climate-change-television-santa?  Agitprop at work:
'The new 10-part children's show, Mission: Green Santa, has been licensed to ITV and in each 12-minute episode, climatologist and amateur reporter, Dr Maurice Bergs will tell children about the dangers and global warming and encourage them to log onto the Green Santa website to make an environmental pledge.'

Note added 3 Dec 2011.
'All this may seen merely petty, but it is troublesome nonetheless. What the Suzuki Foundation is doing is sending out a scare notice to children everywhere that Christmas is in jeopardy, Saint Nick adrift and lost, making the fate of both of them dependant on giving to the cause. I'm not saying what the Suzuki Foundation is doing is immoral. I will say they have given new life and vigour to the word "tacky." Scaring kids and guilting parents is monumentally tacky.'
Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/Give+money+Santa+gets/5806726/story.html

Parents, school pupils and teachers sceptical about climate alarmism - a non-random sample, but encouraging nevertheless

From one of those online polls that inevitably suffers from self-selection by respondents, we see these encouraging results about school pupils, parents, and teachers being sceptical about 'climate change' (which I am interpreting as the short-hand used by activists to denote 'OMG we are in trouble, man-made CO2 is going to wreck everything - i.e. climate alarmism' rather than the literal meaning which is no more than a platitude):

Pity about the 'aministrators', but I guess they are just protecting their jobs, or at least their ears from the tirade that any activist teacher het-up about CO2 would probably subject them to.  

The display above is from a post at the USA's National Science Teachers Association site: http://nsta.org/publications/news/story.aspx?id=59035 .  There are no claims there that the results are representative of any more than the opinions of those who chose to respond to their online poll.  That's good.  And I couldn't find any report of how many actually responded, and what fraction they may be of their membership, and that's not so good..  But no matter, this is just a chunk of data that gives a peek into the view of some members of the NSTA.  Since I'd like to stay cheerful, I have picked out and reproduced below those quotes from the examples given which I happen to find unambiguously encouraging.  So this is a chunk of opinion that has been doubly selected!

I believe that “climate change” education is used to indict western civilization of false[ly]-manufactured crimes. Most of what the general news media and the education establishment insist upon as true science is simply not. Also, the numerous incidents of researchers altering data and cherry-picking sensor locations in order to influence data have left the United Nations’ and other groups’ theories and claims discredited and untrustworthy.
—Other, Middle School, High School, Ohio

As an educator in the field of science for 10 years, I am myself still very skeptical...I see too many dollar signs involved in this indoctrination.
—Educator, Middle School, Oklahoma

 I am teaching my students that there is little to no evidence that climate change is [hu]manmade and that the reason that it is such a big deal is because of the money that is being exchanged in order for scientists to support the idea.
—Educator, Middle School, New York

 Poor science on the climate change and obvious falsification of data as shown in the “Climategate” memos...Present side-by-side presentations: Give Al Gore two days, and I do a counterpoint on one day.
—Educator, High School, Kansas

Politically based, not science based…students either believe [humans are] the evil-doer[s] of all that happens in this world, or they disbelieve in global warming.
—Educator, Middle School, California



Sadly, there are at least as many discouraging quotes.  OK, here's just one to show what I mean:


Also there is no debate among scientists about the cause; the only “debate” is among the media and “scientists” working for the oil industry…The media lies.
—Educator, Middle School, Florida

So what is encouraging?  It is merely that there are some teachers, parents, and pupils out there who have not been hoodwinked by the alarmism.  A well-designed sample-survey in this area would be very welcome, but who would do it?  Who would allow it in their school?  Not those 'administrators' I suspect!  After all, perhaps the views now widely labelled 'sceptical' are in fact in a clear majority overall, and would actually deserve the label  'sensible'.

h/t: Tom Nelson