One of my sons has begun to refer to ‘social justice warriors’, and the other day I came across the short form: ‘SJW’. The term applies to anyone who thinks he or she, or someone they like, has been hardly done by, and something should be done about it. Exactly what should be done is not always clear, but who should do it is always obvious: ‘they’, usually meaning the government, council, corporation or whatever. Sometimes it is an opportunity for the ceremonial wringing of the hands, as in ‘we ought to be able to do better than this’ and its equivalents. I am not a social justice warrior, partly because I don’t know what social justice would look like if we actually had it, let alone how it might be accomplished. But I enjoy the satirical attacks on it from those of like mind, like me.
The following account, given to me by a brother, manages to cover a wide variety of people troubled by the lack of social justice, and/or who feel offended by the actions or lack of actions of others. Its origin is the United Kingdom.
The Snowman
Last night it snowed.
8.00am: I made a snowman.
8.10am: My feminist neighbour asked why I had not made a snow woman.
8.15am: I gave my snowman a sex change
8.17am: My feminist neighbour then complained about my snow woman’s large bosom, saying that it objectified women everywhere.
8.20am: The lesbian couple living nearby threw a hissy fit, and said that I should have made two snow women, so I made a partner for my snow woman.
8.22am: The transgender man/woman/person asked why I didn’t just make one snow individual with detachable parts.
8.25am: The vegans at the end of the lane complained about the carrot noses, as vegetables are food and should not be wasted in decorating snow figures.
8.28am: Black Lives Matter turned up and called me a racist because both snow figures were white.
8.30am: I used food colouring to make one of the snow couple a different colour to be more racially inclusive.
8.37am: I was then accused of an even worse offence, that of applying black-face to a white individual.
8.39am: The Middle Eastern gent across the road demanded the snow women be dressed in burkas for the sake of their modesty.
8.40am: The police arrived and read out the list of complaints that had been made against me.
8.42am: My feminist neighbour returned to complain that the broom that one snow woman was holding should be removed because it depicted women in a purely domestic role.
8.43am: The local Council’s Equality Officer arrived and threatened me with eviction.
8.45am: A TV news crew turned up. I was asked if I knew the difference between snowmen and snow women. Jokingly, I replied ‘snowballs’. The female news reporter denounced me as a sexist pig.
9.00am: I was on the morning TV news as a suspected terrorist, racist, homophobe and sensibility offender, bent on stirring up trouble during difficult weather.
9.10am: The police asked if I had any accomplices. My children were then taken into care by Social Services.
9.29am: Far-left protesters, offended by everything I’d done, marched down the street demanding my arrest for hate crimes.
9.45am: By now the story was all over social media. My boss called and fired me because of the negative association with his company.
10.00am: I cried into my drink because all I wanted to do was to build a bloody snowman.
Okay, it’s fun, at least in part. But note that as the story gathers force it also gathers pain for the snowman builder. What was wrong with his desire to build a snowman? The critics are pursuing their own individual agendas, as though they have the moral high ground. Do they in fact have such a position? They think so, but should I? Does the builder of the snow man not have an equal right to have his creation recognised for its intent and purpose?
I think he does. A person can reasonably expect to be addressed courteously, but it is not reasonable to dictate what another person should be doing in some kind of creative endeavour. If you don’t like what he is doing with the snow you can just go away. It will melt before long anyway. The snowman builder might well have said that there was plenty of snow (always supposing there were) and that the critic should simply build his or her own. What is being proposed by the critics is that there are only one or two valid, politically correct, versions of a snow person. In extreme cases, only one politically correct snow person.
I think we are getting close to this position in some of our contemporary debate. A couple of months ago I published an essay about passionate demands, and the critics in this humorous piece today are set up as cartoon characters, not as passionate demanders. Yet there’s not much difference, is there. Those who want rainbow signs everywhere are quite close to the lesbian couple who wanted a second snow woman. The Council’s Equality officer has her counterpart in suburban Australia. In fact, if the cartoon characters were not instantly recognisable the jokes wouldn’t work.
Humour is the best defence against extremism, and we should use it as often as we can. A witty sally against the pretentious posturing of some forms of extremism does more good than indignant rebuttals of the extremists’ demands. At least, that’s my position.
You’re correct. Satire is a most effective defense contrary to the woke nonsesne.
It’s hard to satirise wokedom, which always gets ahead of the satire. In any case, the woke are humourless puritans and see satire as a form of hate speech that should be censored.
Yes, since the farm was liberated from the conservative overlords in the 60s, we now have a new moral code to bow down to. In some ways things are worse, transgressors are less forgiven.
It would certainly need high tech satire to come up with a suitable response to a “consent app”.
Your snow story reminded me of the diary of a snow shoveller. Aussies would not realise how close to the Truth this is. Anyone who has lived in teh Rocky Mountains would .
https://www.sunnyskyz.com/blog/2606/The-Diary-Of-A-Snow-Shoveler
You and your brother should be ashamed of yourselves! You’ve just promoted the use of illicit drugs. “Snow” is a synonym for cocaine.
Illicit drugs? That’s old school conservative thinking. If there is any thing wrong with cocaine is that it’s considered a rich man, I mean persons drug. Arty, hipster types excluded of course.
Fudge – this is not funny anymore – if exhausting – the student went in to society with govt jobs and then the internet.
This is the result – good bye manufacturing, good bye building , good bye ag , good bye sports – goodbye sex between man and da woman’s
Yes Don, hard to believe how quickly the world has gone round the twist.
What a wonderful time past comedians would have had with today’s stupidity.
Today, of course, they would just be deplatformed.
Yes, interesting
The business of choosing a partial interpretation of a whole is an interesting thing. The colloquial expression for it is ‘taking things out of context’. The parable shows the ease with which one can take anything apart from partial perspectives. And by implication the BLANDNESS of anything that satisfies all the partial perspectives going at any one time.
Don, humour is indeed a good counter to extremism. And I think so is ridicule at pointing out gaping inconsistencies. Right now, medical experts are reassuring us that there is no causal link between AstraZeneca and blood clotting. They correctly point out that even if this vaccine didn’t exist, just as many people in the population would suffer (even death) from thrombosis. And politicians are reinforcing that same line, and rightly so. So why can they not apply the same logic to climate change? There is no causal link between CO2 and extreme weather. Australia has always had bush fires, droughts, and other weather events over eons, no matter the concentration level of CO2 in the atmosphere. Is this not the same logic? As they say, follow the money trail. So I wouldn’t be surprised if the buckets on money flowing to the renewable energy rent-seekers mirrors the wealth flowing to the vaccine manufacturers.
“There is no causal link between CO2 and extreme weather.”
Do you believe in the moon landing?
Chrissy
Having watched it live, YES. What is the point of your question?
PS, what are your qualifications as a climate scientist?
I wouldn’t be surprised neither ! Nuthing these days can surprise me.
I think that Andrew Bolt and Rowan Dean are spot on the money when they explain the truth about the culture wars and the blatant hypocrisy of the lunatic left.
No doubt about it the new racism and new segregation goes right to the top in Biden’s USA and look out if you have the courage to question these con merchants about their extremist agenda.
Here’s a quote from last night’s Bolt Report and the video link.
“Dr Martin Luther King would be “horrified by the America of today” which practices the “crudest most basic form of Marxism” by dividing people based on colour, according to Sky News host Rowan Dean. “Martin Luther King would be horrified by the America of today, not only because he fought against the very things that are happening, but because he literally did dream of an America which racial differences, sexual differences, tribal differences of any sort, were literally invisible,” Mr Dean said. Mr Dean said the United States and the rest of the western world has departed from the pursuit of what Dr King described as “the brotherhood of man”. “Martin Luther King was very specific in how to achieve that dream, and that was by focusing on character,” he said. “Character must triumph everything, character is ahead of any other definition, so judge every individual by their moral character, their merit as a person”. Mr Dean said the current wave of segregation which sees universities holding different graduation ceremonies based on ethnicity and race, is the “crudest most basic form of Marxism”. “Dividing people into different groups so you can control them, and rule over them,” he said. “This is what we’re seeing the new tyranny where you must belong to that tribe, and it goes right to the top.”
Many SJWs seem to be the modern version of the neighbourhood busybody, with the added urge to rule (in the words of the title of a film about the East German STASI) over The Lives of Others.
If you are going to deliberately misrepresent social phenomena, then you may as well reduce it to a laughing stock.
But the joke may be on you.
Chrissy
Perhaps you could describe where I “deliberately misrepresent social phenomena”?
None of your business – my post was not directed at overly excitable folks such as you.
Feeling a bit touchy this morning?
The SJWs exist everywhere today and their ABC is probably the worst offender in Australia and with an annual budget of 1000+ million $ to support their numerous left wing causes they have very deep taxpayer pockets indeed.
Bruce Pascoe is one of the most pampered of their ABC’s recent causes and his Dark Emu book has found its way into classrooms and its content taught to students as though it is a reasonable and truthful history.
He is regularly promoted by their ABC and is soon to have his own TV show paid for by the taxpayer. Unfortunately for him and their ABC Peter O’Brien and a number of scholarly researchers and our best historian are not impressed at all with Pascoe’s version of Aboriginal history. In fact it is a sick joke and yet lefties everywhere rushed to support Pascoe and even the Labor leader in the Senate Penny Wong has passionately defended him with a recent rousing speech.
Of course these are the same type of LW loonies who tell the world that we are facing a climate crisis and we must spend trillions $ more on unreliable, toxic S&W by 2040 or ’50. And this will ensure we’ll have better weather or slow SLR or save the polar bears or stop the ice from melting or better rainfall or less droughts or less cyclones or tornadoes or etc, etc.
How anyone could believe this idiocy is beyond comprehension, but the SJW con merchants march on regardless while firmly attaching themselves to their taxpayer funded teat, as on and on it goes. Here’s a review of Peter O’Brien’s new book.
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/review/2020/01/dark-emu-skewered-grilled-and-served/
Here’s part of Penny Wong’s speech to the Senate and Warren Mundine’s response to Rowan Dean on Sky News. Fair Dinkum we have wall to wall SJWs in our parliament(s) and yet they are too often so obviously wrong about their so called concerns. And people still vote for these fools?
Here’s part of the Sky News transcript and the video. I must agree with Warren that this is “quite crazy” stuff from Penny Wong. And we have to ask, is this really Labor’s so called leader in the Senate?
“Indigenous leader Warren Mundine says Labor Senator Penny Wong’s statement about Australia’s background of white supremacism and the work she based her speech on is “quite crazy” as they did not provide evidence. Senator Wong last November cited the work of writer Bruce Pascoe and said there were Indigenous cities and towns in Australia separate from what would be considered hunter gatherer and Australia’s history had ignored it due to “white supremacism”. “These people, I don’t know what they’ve done, they haven’t produced any evidence of this stuff, I just find it quite crazy,” Mr Mundine told Sky News host Rowan Dean. Mr Mundine criticised Senator Wong for her comments and said Australia is the “most successful” multicultural nation in world, particularly after World War II and she should not “bag Australia” for its history. “To sit there and sort of bag Australia when she knows that Australia is the most successful multicultural country in the world and there’s no laws that have been discriminatory against Aboriginals in the last fifteen years that I know of, I’d like to see someone point those laws out.”
Neville demonstrates he is a trumpy cry-baby wallowing in Murdoch insanity
Chrissy has no substantive points to make in rebuttal, so resorts to childish insults.
Where was Trump mentioned? Is he (with Murdoch) your version of the boogey man? Just pull the blanket over your head, and everything will be OK.
Boambee demonstrates he is a trumpy troll.
Dry your tears little man, mummy will protect you from the Trumpy boogey man. Just keep your head under the blanket.
Check with your nurse before posting again.
Nursie couldn’t come in today. Said there was a more urgent case. How is the extra assistance going?
More LW nonsense from the SJWs about their so called racism and now a new so called “Truth and Justice commission” in Victoria.
Andrew Bolt checks out some of their claims and easily refutes their silly nonsense. Here’s part of the transcript and the very accurate video and more useful data and evidence.
https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6238453823001
Sorry here’s part of Andrew’s transcript from the above video.
“Victoria’s colonisation commission is ‘so Orwellian’: Andrew Bolt”
10/03/2021|10min
“The Victorian Labor government’s “truth and justice” commission to find and declare the truth about how white colonialists ruined things for Indigenous people is “so Orwellian,” according to Sky News host Andrew Bolt.
“This is not about truth at all, this is about promoting grievances, racial grievances,” Mr Bolt said.
“Well, one truth I don’t think this commission will discuss is that this racial division – this us and them talk – can be dangerous”.
“Some people build their careers on exactly this kind of hard racial division.”
Mr Bolt pointed to Lidia Thorpe, who became a Greens Senator “promoting her Aboriginal ancestry” and today supported the truth-telling commission.
“I think the truth is the last thing that commission will give us,” Mr Bolt said.
“Here are more truths that I doubt this truth commission will preach: For instance Aboriginal children are twice more likely to skip school, Aboriginal families are more likely to live out where there are very few or no jobs”.
“Aboriginal women are 30 times more likely to be hospitalised by family violence … there are some real cultural issues here”.
“We do need the truth, but we won’t get it if activists make people too scared to discuss things openly and honestly.”
What a wonderful world these SJW’s have in store for us.
Their fantasy of carbon offsets.
But good to see some are awoke to it:
https://theconversation.com/carbon-offsets-offer-a-fantasy-of-capitalism-without-crises-155730
Thanks for the link SD and Andrew Bolt had some good articles years ago on these so called Co2 offsets BS and fra-d. And ditto Jo Nova, GWPF, WUWT etc ,but i’m surprised that this source had the brains to allow this to be published.
Neville, and thank you for that Bolt link. He has a great awareness of modern woke stupidity. I particularly like his assessment of the “stolen generations” and how Aboriginals are being short changed by their “Aboriginal” protectors.
He calls out SJWs better than anyone.
SJWs are taking over the world at our expense:
“COVID-19 became an excuse for leaders such as Daniel Andrews to flirt with authoritarianism. He has clearly acquired a taste for it.
The Premier who thought it was OK to handcuff a pregnant woman in her pajamas for something she posted on Facebook has launched a fresh assault on freedoms hitherto thought sacrosanct.
Legislation before the Victorian parliament will make the act of prayer a criminal offence in some circumstances. Yet in an era when it is cool to self-identify as anything but a Christian, hardly anyone is making a fuss.
The pretext for the bill is transphobia, a contagion for which the Andrews government believes the church is a super spreader. It will be illegal to counsel a person to change or suppress their chosen gender identity. Prohibited actions include “carrying out a religious practice, including but not limited to, a prayer-based practice”.
The prohibition applies whether or not the subject consented to the prayer-based activity. The penalty is up to 10 years’ imprisonment or an enormous fine.
Complaints can be made anonymously and come “from any person”, even those not affected. In other words, it is a charter for anti-religious activists to harass and intimidate churches or individuals at no cost to themselves.”
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/worried-about-teen-gender-craze-you-havent-got-a-prayer/news-story/e23b14f3fdafec80a15ba65ebb2606c1
Adding tge word “social” in front of any other word reverses the meaning of the second word.
Social security leads to a life of insecurity. Social justice leads to injustice.
I wonder how SJWs like Tim Flannery are coping with their climate advice:
Flannery says it again: the dams won’t fill
Chief Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery made this bizarre claim while hyping the threat to Australia from global warming:
“Even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and river systems.”
SD as at 4 pm today the Warragamba dam is over 99% and could spill over at anytime.
People have been advised to stay indoors and stay tuned for ongoing flood advice from the media and probably more rain to come.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/australia-weather-live-updates-nsw-qld-prepare-for-weekend-of-dangerous-storms/live-coverage/264d43588c549ab53802f7a93ca00d8a
Neville, I wonder if our Australian of the Year [2007] will leave his water frontage and go and have a look to make sure.
SD
I heard that he lost the water frontage in a divorce. From the news this afternoon, however, the water frontage might come to the home, but he might not be there to see it.
I didn’t know that, BJ. I believe it was only accessible by boat. Maybe he got sea sick.
But any’ow, thar she blows:
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/sydney-s-warragamba-dam-spills-over/ar-BB1eM6vw?ocid=msedgdhp
SJWs don’t debate, they censor:
“Reaching Net Zero may or may not be a worthy cause. But is it really true that suddenly abandoning fossil fuels, on which all modern civilisation has been built, can be achieved with no adverse economic effects? Who is scrutinising these claims if once sceptical papers like the Express are now committed to ‘campaigning’ on the issue and rather than reporting on it?”
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-dangerous-rise-of-climate-censorship/
“ But is it really true that suddenly abandoning fossil fuels, on which all modern civilisation has been built, can be achieved with no adverse economic effects?”. This is typical of the misleading and often false claims made about “net zero”. I guess it depends on how you define “sudden” and “abandon”. And “ on which all modern civilisation has been built” obviously overlooks the much touted do nothing argument that nuclear has done such a great job. Much of the denial/delay/do nothing (it is shifting it’s ground) argument is classic reactionary thinking at work. The “we will be all out of a job” line has been repeated over and over since industrialisation began. The counter argument says “how many jobs of today did not exist thirty years ago” – lots! And never mind the misuse/misunderstanding of the term “net zero”.
Stu
Thanks for reguritating the standard alarmist boilerplate claptrap.
Perhaps for our edification you might define “I guess it depends on how you define “sudden” and “abandon” for our benefit. Then we can judge the likely (or unlikely) validity of your Micawber-like “something will turn up” position.
“ Perhaps for our edification you might define…” etc. No, you define it, you and others in your cult who quote this stuff, have the obligation to define it. If you can read, I left open what the definition might be, I merely said “it depends”, so tell us what Liam Deacon meant with those words. On the basis of the article he seems to imply almost immediate, certainly not an evolving path. And it is interesting how your type (and the author of that article) frequently seem to be in adulation of the “market”, but when it moves you are repelled. Of course you will say it is government policy and not the market shifting our energy mix, so tell us why industry in Australia is calling for some direction by government because a lack of direction is hindering their decision making.
Stu
Since I think that the whole concept of grid scale energy based on solar, wind and batteries in their present state of development is a fantasy, my definition of “sudden” is any reduction in reliable supply before ruinables demonstrate that they are able to provide reliable, continuous, supply at all times and in all weather states – sunny, cloudy, night, day, at all wind states.
For “abandonment”, I would say allowing the current capability to provide reliable, continuous supply to be reduced before solar, wind and batteries demonstrate that capability.
Since the Australian East Coast fossil and hydro grid currently is not fully capable of maintaining supply in the absence of adequate ruinable systems, any further loss before new developments in solar wind and battery technology will constitute such sudden abandonment. Note that a major fossil plant in NSW is expected to close soon, and one in Victoria not long after.
As for you prattle about my “type” and the market, stop smoking that stuff, it isn’t legal. I don’t know about others, but I see nothing resembling a genuine “market” in the present system. In a genuine market, all types of supply would receive identical benefits and penalties from government, and none would receive preferential access. Are you happy for ruinables to have to compete in providing guaranteed supoly with no RET? I suspect not, yet if claims by their proponents are to be believed, ruinables can already do that.
Level the playing field, and let the best and cheapest supplier win.
PS, Spiked Online is run by an avowed Marxist. It is hardly a hotbed of capitalists and free marketeers.
PPS, “why industry in Australia is calling for some direction by government because a lack of direction is hindering their decision making” can be translated as a demand for their share of the grift. There are very few genuine believers in a free market in major Australian industries. Try to move beyond your undergraduate fantasies.
Silly stu thinks the betrayal of science and the acknowledged destruction of western culture by SJWs as confirmed by Christina Figueres is the way economic evolution works:
“We are on the verge of the greatest transformation humanity has ever set itself. We never, as a collective people, all of humanity — we never have decided before with choice and intentionality to do this. We have the chance to re-create the economy, to re-create the world.”
At least those at the top admit that it has nothing to do with “climate”:
“It is way past time to realize that none of this is really about protecting the planet from man-made climate change. It never was.”
It’s just a convenient smoke screen to con the useful idiots.
Like stu.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/03/20/borrow-and-hope-for-the-planet/
“ Silly stu thinks the betrayal of science and the acknowledged destruction of western culture by SJWs as confirmed by Christina Figueres is the way economic evolution works:”. Do I? News to me, just like everything else you write you are big on drawing false conclusions from sparse evidence, and inferring all sorts of unfounded rubbish, but those here are getting used to it, even your fellow travellers.
When you continually embrace evidence-free science, stueyluv, and never give a reason that makes sense, it is quite reasonable to conclude you only use the climate argument as a smokescreen.
When you paint yourself as a green SJW, don’t blame me for seeing you that way.
And even then I’m giving you probably more credit than is really due to you.
As I said before, you present more as simply a useful idiot for these same watermelons.
Michael Mann has been the greatest advocate and SJW for their so called CAGW crisis in the USA and is the leading alarmist for the DEMs at Congressional hearings.
He has now lost his stupid case against the National Review and Mark Steyn. His loss was to be expected and the background of the Penn State lowlifes was disgusting to put it mildly.
I’ll try and find Mark’s article if it is still available and provide a link.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/03/19/national-review-wins-michael-mann-loses/
I’ve found Steyn’s 2011 article and here are some highlights and what scumbags these people really are. Truly evil people involved in this case and thanks again to Mark for exposing them.
I’ve linked to Mark’s update of these evil swines below, but I’m unable to include it and I just get a forbidden 404 screen.
I’ve removed the link and the Steyn highlights because I’ve now received a 403 screen. But just go to the WUWT link above and find Steyn’s Jan 2021 update link.
Truly shocking and evil people, just read it for yourselves.
I’ll try these highlights from you know who again, but go to his blog and read this entire grim story.
“The previous trial judge got to the essence of the case, finding that…
The main idea of Defendant [Steyn]’s article is the inadequate and ineffective investigations conducted by Pennsylvania State University into their employees, including Jerry Sandusky and Plaintiff [Michael E Mann].
Indeed. As our motion puts it on page 24:
“In November 2011, Steyn had published a blistering column about a Penn State faculty member, Mike McQueary, who walked into the locker room and witnessed Sandusky sodomizing a ten-year-old boy, excoriating the “Penn State protection racket” that shielded University officials from consequences in the Sandusky affair. ¶ 216. That evil act was compounded by those of Spanier & Co. as they moved into “brand protection” mode. Steyn’s language—”the Penn State protection racket”—makes clear that Steyn, like [former FBI Director Louis] Freeh, understood that this particular problem arose from the general culture of Penn State—or what Mann in his latest appreciation of [convicted Penn State president Graham] Spanier calls the “supportive environment.” Mann, The New Climate War 270. As the very headline of Steyn’s column puts it: “Penn State’s Institutional Wickedness.” ¶ 216 (emphasis added).
Penn State was a depraved and disgusting place under Mann’s corrupt mentor Spanier”.
Thanks Neville. And these people are the SJWs leading the charge into the current culture cleansing of western history, economic evolution, established lifestyle and modern well being.
Remember Maurice Strong, who organized the first U.N. Earth Climate Summit (1992) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil when he revealed the real goal: “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrialized civilization to collapse.”
And Stephen Schneider, who had previously written a book on global cooling, then later discussed his philosophy about the new global warming:
“We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
At the time we assumed people would be a wake-up but we just didn’t realise how easily the useful idiots would be conned.
Thanks for reminding us SD and what a mob of extremist left wing SJWs they were and I think Flannery would be the best or worst example for Aussies.
Remember when he told Aussies how SLR would be many metres higher if we didn’t take action on his CAGW? Then he bought his property at near SL and got very annoyed when reporters called on him to explain his strange choice.
Of course Gorebull, Obamas etc have forever been asked the same question.
Rowan Dean had a lot of fun yesterday at every ad break on “Outsiders” when he played the Flannery “dams and rivers” quote you linked to previously. Yet some weak minded fools STILL take notice of this donkey and his Climate Council?
Something more for our stu-pid SJWs to think about. One out of 3 cars made every year comes from China and this has increased rapidly since 2006. See OWI data link.
This year the number of new cars will be about 70+ mil and just think of the disaster if this number was transferred to EVs by 2040 or whenever. Each battery would weigh about 0.4 of a tonne and have to be replaced about every 7 years and the disposal of this toxic mess would require enormous destruction of the environment in every country and every year FOREVER.
And of course this changeover to EVs would also require mining for all the rare earth (so far mostly in China) minerals etc and the overall shifting of many more billions of tonnes of the environment to actually find and extract these rare earth minerals. What could possibly go wrong with this new mining scenario? BTW up to 17 different rare earth minerals are required for the batteries etc. And no change for climate or temp by 2100 and beyond, even if we could stop all human co2 emissions today. So therefore the waste of hundreds of trillions $ FOREVER for ZERO change.
https://www.worldometers.info/cars/
Here’s another top scientist calling out the Obama and Biden + DEM donkeys for their BS and fra-d.
This bloke lines up exactly with Shellenberger, Lomborg, GWPF, WUWT, Judith Curry, John Christy, Roy Spencer, Bob Carter, Will Happer, Lindzen, Pielke, McIntyre, McKitrick etc, etc over the last 30 years.
THERE IS NO EXISTENTIAL THREAT AT ALL. JUST LOOK UP THE DATA. Big surprise, NOT.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/03/21/former-obama-biden-federal-scientist-dr-steve-koonin-declares-his-climate-dissent/
Neville
Rat abandoning sinking ship?
When (if ever) will Stu wake up to reality?
BJ, stu couldn’t care less about the science or data or evidence, but just loves the left wing nonsense that will hopefully make us submit to all the rest of the LW idiots forever.
Koonin is just another Scientist who is trying to cover his backside when their disaster nonsense collapses around them. Much the same as Shellenberger, but at least he had the guts and honesty to apologise for his previous decades long BS and fra-d and also with the Obama, Biden donkeys.
Neville
Stu is almost a caricature of an SJW.
Our SJWs are everywhere and even our Charted Accountants have tried their BS and (WEF) nonsense on Josh Friedenberg lately and thanks to Rowan Dean + Outsider’s viewers Josh suddenly seemed to lose interest in their message. Go Rowan.
Prince Charles and all his mates of the “Great Reset” would not be pleased and that should make us all very happy.
https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6237691318001
Sorry Josh spells his name Frydenberg above.
Neville
The correct spelling is Friedeggburger.
Here Rowan Dean tries to explain more about the WEF + UN + Prince Charles etc and the SJWs of their “Great Reset.”
And you “will be happy owning nothing” in their future Marxist/ Fascist world or so they happily warn us. All unbelievable, but true. And our stu-pid LW donkeys can hardly wait for this paradise (????) to engulf them.
Neville is now spreading political filth.
He needs to take a cold shower and stop channeling Mudoch crap.
He needs a dose of science:
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/
That’s not science you’re dosing, blith.
That’s just more SJW Algore-ithyms.
And when your mate Charley believes it too, that should be enough to make any rational thinker think again.
If that’s happening why are the Pacific ocean mean sea levels falling?:
http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70000/IDO70000_60370_SLD.shtml
Chrissy
So repeating announcements made by the WEF now counts as “political filth”? Interesting perspective compared to your usual position, you seem to agree with many so-called “right wingers” on this subject. Have you had a Road to Damascus moment?
I note that Boogey Man Murdoch still features in your ramblings, though Trump seems to have been forgotten for the moment.
PS, you seem to have forgotten to tell everyone what your qualifications as a climate scientist are. Don’t be shy.
Here’s another intrepid SJW and CAGW fantasist and con merchant who purchased this seaside property in Noosa with a lazy 17 mil $ last year.
Amazing how all these donkeys think alike and show their true colours when it suits their purpose and real agenda. So much for their future SLR and more dangerous extreme weather events, like increased CAT 4 and 5 cyclone events.
https://www.realestate.com.au/news/therese-rein-buys-rafters-17m-sunshine-coast-pad/
If blith wants some political filth for his SJW personal files:
“The intense rainfall and floods that have devastated NSW communities are taking place in an atmosphere made warmer and wetter by climate change, which is driven by the burning of coal, oil, and gas,” Climate Council spokesperson Will Steffen said in a statement on Monday.
https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/floods-worsened-climate-change/
SJW Will Steffan needs to read Dorothea Mackellar.
Or Jo Nova:
“The scandal is that in 1865, scientists had a better grip on what caused them. Today “top” climate scientists think your car causes the weather.”
https://joannenova.com.au/2021/03/carbon-dioxide-radically-lower-but-floods-destroy-houses-cover-beaches-in-debris-across-nsw-in-1857/
SD Will Steffen couldn’t be more wrong about NSW rainfall. The actual data shows that the period from about 1950 to 1980 was a very wet period for NSW rainfall and yet co2 levels were well below their so called safe 350 ppm.
Certainly the period from about 1896 to 1949 was a very low rainfall period, but I’m sure farmers would always prefer our post 1980 rainfall compared to the early 54 year drier times.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rranom&area=nsw&season=0112&ave_yr=15
The far left WHO and their present very LW leader must be be very strong contenders for SJWs of the CV-19 year. Here’s a link to Matt Ridley’s latest article about the close links with China and the recent gutless response to the so called Wuhan investigation. Here’s the link and the last few paragraphs.
https://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/who-china-appeasement/
“At the time WHO’s director general was obsessed with a campaign against vaping despite evidence that it was saving lives by helping people to quit smoking. The next year WHO issued a statement that the greatest threat to human health in the 21st century was climate change. At the very least this pattern suggested an organisation not focused on its day job – which is to prevent and halt epidemics. Startlingly, in 2017, the Washington Post discovered that the WHO routinely spent $200m a year on its travel budget, more than it spent on AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined.
The most embarrassing fiasco for the WHO came on 9 February this year when its team of scientific experts, with terms of reference that China had taken six months to agree to, held a press conference in Wuhan to announce the results of a superficial two-week investigation into the origin of the virus. The event turned into a 2-hour Chinese propaganda exercise, entertaining the implausible and evidence-free suggestion that Covid was imported on frozen fish or meat while ruling out even investigating the possibility that it might have leaked from the world’s leading bat coronavirus laboratory, which happens to be in Wuhan.
Afterwards, members of the WHO team backtracked, saying they were still open-minded about the laboratory, that they had only gone along with the frozen-fish theory “to respect, a bit, the findings” of their Chinese colleagues and that the visit had not been an “investigation” after all. But the damage had been done. “I don’t think the press conference was a PR win for China,” muttered their spokesman, forlornly.
It emerged last week that the team had not even asked to see the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s online database, locked since September 2019 and taken down altogether in the spring of 2020. That database is known to contain 22,000 samples, mostly of viruses, 16,000 of them from bats. These include eight viruses very closely related to the virus causing the pandemic but whose genome sequences have not been published. They were collected in 2015 from a disused mineshaft, a thousand miles away, where in 2012 six men fell ill with a disease very like Covid.
Had a western city with a big virus laboratory been the site of origin of a pandemic that killed nearly three million people, it would never be allowed – by the WHO or anybody else – to get away with denying access to such vital resources. The WHO has wasted a year failing to investigate the origin of the virus properly, which has reduced the chances that we will ever know how this pandemic began and therefore increased the probability of another one”.
More problems for Will Steffen and the Climate Council’s SJWs. NSW received the 3rd highest rainfall in 2010 and the lowest in 2019 or just 10 years apart. Check BOM NSW rainfall record 1900 to 2020 and then please start to WAKE UP.
And the MDB had the highest rainfall ever in 2010 and the lowest in 2019 and both NSW and MDB suffered through the long MIL drought period as well. So much for the theory that more co2 causes higher rainfall. Please check it out.
BUT no surprise that lower and higher rainfall events are caused by Pacific ocean temps near Aussie east coast called el nino lower RF and la nina higher rainfall.
But IOD in the Indian ocean has both a neg and pos phase that also changes between more or less rainfall.
It’s good to see a conservative motor manufacturer pointing out the bleedin’ obvious to the crazy world of SJWs:
https://www.msn.com/en-au/motoring/news/toyota-warns-about-rushing-into-electrification/ar-BB1eQMJ1?ocid=msedgdhp
SD, referred to “ Or Jo Nova:
“The scandal is that in 1865, scientists had a better grip on what caused them. Today “top” climate scientists think your car causes the weather.”
The Nova piece he refers to and the string of comments on her web site should give even you delayists reason to laugh at the unscientific arguments on display there. Surely you can do better than that.
Anything specific amongst all that historic detail that you are prepared to contest with your classic SJW “science”, stueyluv???
Or are you just up to your usual messenger-shooting-with-a-scattergun hysteria?
SD, Stu doesn’t care about the science or data. He’s in this for the silly LW arguments and why they should be able to say anything they like and we must always agree with their SJW’s fantasies that are created out of the ether.
They like to frolic with the pixies down in their gardens and dream up endless, delusional nonsense.
Yes, I thought so.
You did not read the comments on Jo’s website did you? Thought not. If you want to be in synch with the thought processes exhibited there, it says it all. Why am I not surprised.
Still incapable of passing on any specific message, hey stu?
Exactly which of the 100 odd messengers you’re shooting, got up your kilt?
And what has that, exactly, to do with Jo’s message?
Do you realise how very obtuse you come across as?
So you admit you support the line of that site and it’s commenters! To summarise the Jo thread, they show the usual misconception of linking particular CO2 levels with recent and current weather events. As with you they show no comprehension of the science in general and trend lines in particular. In very simplistic terms AGW involves a global warming trend with a shift in the “normal curve” of weather measurements to the right, more extreme events on both tails of the curve. But as measurements show, there will be more new high temperatures than low ones, same with wet and dry depending on where it is. And contrary to contrarian thinking the difference between the earth average temperature in an ice age and a hothouse is not many degrees. Our “goldilocks” earth climate resulting from our precious atmosphere is as described “just right’”. We meddle with it at our peril.
Stu, if there is one thing Jo’s thread ever does, it is endlessly pointing out that “particular CO2 levels” have nothing to do with weather or climate whatsoever.
She is trying to get through your thick skull, using the best evidence available [just as I have been since the beginning of the climate debate] that the same [and often much worse] weather and climate has occurred in spades in the past, when “particular CO2 levels” were much lower than we will ever be able to reduce them to even by wiping out half of humanity and impoverishing the remaining half.
The earth has never had enduring “goldilocks” climate. And any short periods of it have never been the result of “particular CO2 levels”.
Not only are you incredibly obtuse not to get this simple fact but you are forever unable to offer any evidence to support your own SJW claims.
And the last time CO2 was as high as it is now? What were conditions like then? You live your fantasy, I will follow the scientists. QED.
Stu
But which scientists will you follow? Flannery who said that the rain would never return, and what we received would not fill the dams? Of Steffen, who now says that “warmer and wetter” would be the result of gerbil worming?
Hot and dry, or warm and wet, choose your future climate. You have two scientists to follow, with wildly differing prognostications.
“And the last time CO2 was as high as it is now? What were conditions like then? You live your fantasy, I will follow the scientists. QED.”
You mean when the planet experienced widespread regions of glaciation during some of those periods of high CO2 levels, stueyluv?
Please demonstrate the “scientists” you follow.
And demonstrate some evidence for the first time in your life.
I follow globally recognised climate scientists plus the scientists studying individual parts of the puzzle such as glaciologists etc that together form a strong case. Flannery is an interesting guy but more of a commentator than a climate scientist, just like yourself perhaps.
Meantime you keep up the references to points in time when “things were different”, and the non climate commentators like Jo, Watts and Shellenberger et al, they make good bedtime reading, but not much else.
The next IPCC report is underway and due in 2022. It should be interesting and will probably give you apoplexy, but never mind.
As usual, stueyluv, with your silly, pointless generalities, the only thing you can demonstrate is how well you can wave a hand prompted by an evidence-free brain.
Standard SJW, culture cancelling practice.
Like your beloved IPCC who conveniently ignore the science realities and just spruik woke conveniencies.
BTW Steffen has more problems with his theory of more extreme rainfall in the modern era. The Ashcroft study of Melb, Syd and Adel rainfall from 1839 to 2017 showed very heavy rainfall events in the earlier part of the record 1840 to 1860 (co2 levels under 300 ppm) and Melb had low rainfall during the most recent Mil drought period. ( co2 levels then about 370 ppm) See the rainfall graph for Melb and Mil drought in the link.
Certainly co2 levels seem to have no correlation with rainfall during this period of 178 years and some very extreme rainfall events occurred in the 19th and 20th centuries. See the study link and their conclusions.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221209471930009X#bib35
4. “Conclusion
“This paper describes rainfall in three of Australia’s largest cities for the last 178 years using several mean and extreme rainfall indices. Combining historical daily observations and summary tables back to 1839 with modern records, we have been able to explore not only mean rainfall, but the occurrence and intensity of the extreme rainfall events for Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. Extreme rainfall events are likely to be associated with flooding and damage, noting that flood risk in cities is largely due to rainfall rather than other factors, such as soil moisture, which are important in other areas.
Issues with data quality and changes in observation location make it difficult in some cases to determine the accuracy of the absolute rainfall totals recorded. For example, the statistical differences between the historical and modern data for Melbourne and Sydney appear to be largely due to several extreme events in 1840–1860 period. Given the good agreement between the instrumental and documentary information, these events are undeniably extreme, but further examination could potentially help determine how accurate the absolute rainfall observations are. Additional synoptic analysis using historical and modern reanalysis might also shed more light on the meteorological conditions associated with the extreme events, and whether they are changing with time.
The extended records for these cities may now provide more information on variations in water availability, as well as the frequency of potentially damaging rainfall events. Information on number of raindays, the occurrence and severity of the wettest day of each month and the total rainfall received may also prove valuable in better understanding the climatology and identifying changes in the weather regimes that affect southeastern Australia. Finally, this study shows that current and future efforts to recover historical daily meteorological records (e.g. Ashcroft et al., 2016b) for other capital cities can offer new contextual insight into some of Australia’s most damaging meteorological events”.
So denialists – explain this
https://web.archive.org/web/20200922013713/https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png
I summer, we can now kayak through the Northern Passage all thanks to melting sea ice.
Chrissy
Don’t let us hold you back. The northern summer approaches, report to us if you return, watch out for orcas.
Poor silly blith is historically challenged awa in so many other ways.
Roald Amundsen did it in 1906.
And people like Frobisher and Davis nearly did it during the LIA.
And many times during the Holocene there has been no ice at all.
Back when there was also no ACO2.
So who’s the denier, blithluv?
“ Back when there was also no ACO2.” So now you are suggesting that natural CO2 has no influence! Fine.
Stueyluv, all the ice cores show us that temperatures affect natural levels of CO2 but perhaps you could detail your “science” and “evidence” showing the effect of natural CO2 on global warming.
But if you are actually aware that current temps, sea levels, climate extremes etc have been much greater, and they have, when ACO2 virtually didn’t exist, what are you on about, for goodness sake?
“ the ice cores show us that temperatures affect natural levels of CO2 ”. Bullshit, try again.
You sound even stu-pider than Al Gore, stu.
http://cdn.antarcticglaciers.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation_to_2004.jpg
Stu
“ the ice cores show us that temperatures affect natural levels of CO2”. Bullshit, try again.”
That response is monumentally stupid even by your admitted low standards.
“ One of the most remarkable aspects of the paleoclimate record is the strong correspondence between temperature and the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere observed during the glacial cycles of the past several hundred thousand years. When the carbon dioxide concentration goes up, temperature goes up. When the carbon dioxide concentration goes down, temperature goes down. A small part of the correspondence is due to the relationship between temperature and the solubility of carbon dioxide in the surface ocean, but the majority of the correspondence is consistent with a feedback between carbon dioxide and climate. These changes are expected if Earth is in radiative balance, and they are consistent with the role of greenhouse gases in climate change. While it might seem simple to determine cause and effect between carbon dioxide and climate from which change occurs first, or from some other means, the determination of cause and effect remains exceedingly difficult. Furthermore, other changes are involved in the glacial climate, including altered vegetation, land surface characteristics, and ice sheet extent.”
NOAA
Stu, all the reliable paleo data [ice cores] show temperature levels ahead of CO2 levels by hundreds of years as supplied in my link above.
Please supply a link to your statement.
Here is the link
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-warming/temperature-change
Stu, that NOAA article is admitting they would love to believe that climate feedbacks as per computer models are positive but while they assume this they just refuse to admit that feedbacks are almost certainly negative:
“While it might seem simple to determine cause and effect between carbon dioxide and climate from which change occurs first, or from some other means, the determination of cause and effect remains exceedingly difficult.”
And here is the science. One of many papers:
“The sequence of events during Termination III suggests that the CO2 increase lagged Antarctic deglacial warming by 800 ± 200 years and preceded the Northern Hemisphere deglaciation.”
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/299/5613/1728
CO2 lagged temps in ALL ice cores.
https://i1.wp.com/wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Vostok-ice-core-temperature-and-CO2-Mearns-1024×6111.png?ssl=1
The bottom line is that rising temperatures cause carbon levels to rise. Carbon may still influence temperatures, but these ice cores are neutral on that. If both factors caused each other to rise significantly, positive feedback would become exponential. We’d see a runaway greenhouse effect. It hasn’t happened. Some other factor is more important than carbon dioxide, or carbon’s role is minor.
SD, regarding the ice core studies you quote, they all refer to a period that is in geological times, fairly recent. Given that and the fact that in the entire period of those core studies CO2 has never been near as high as now, perhaps we could expect different outcomes. Also if you wish to hang your hat on the ~800 year lag for CO2 after temperature, what do you suggest occurred ~800 years ago to cause the uptick of the last 150 years? If your answer is not the CO2 we have created what is it? If it is manmade then we should look to the conclusions of another paper on the subject which suggests
“Although the
recent CO2 increase has clearly been imposed
first, as a result of anthropogenic activities, it
naturally takes, at Termination III, some time
for CO2 to outgas from the ocean once it starts
to react to a climate change that is first felt in the
atmosphere. The sequence of events during this
Termination is fully consistent with CO2 participating
in the latter ~4200 years of the warming.
The radiative forcing due to CO2 may serve
as an amplifier of initial orbital forcing, which is
then further amplified by fast atmospheric feedbacks
(39) that are also at work for the presentday
and future climate.”
https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/Courses/global-change-debates/Sources/Temperature-leads-CO2-in-ice-cores/3-Caillon-2003.pdf
Perhaps you would do better looking at studies which draw together all the threads of the climate field rather than individual point products, the latter are often in conflict with each other and less informative than the conclusions drawn by the experts of the total picture.
Have you noted it is several million years since CO2 levels were at the same high point as now and the climate was very much different. It is agreed by science that changes during the Eocine and later were induced by orbital changes of the earth. We have not discerned any of those in recent centuries.
“In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today during summer in the Northern Hemisphere. In some locations, this could be true for winter as well. Moreover, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and we know without doubt that this proven “astronomical” climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years.” NOAA again
Stu
Woeful even by your low standards. The big fuss, as you might not have noticed, is about the effect of anthropogenic CO2 on the climate.
Do try to keep up!
No kidding!
Stu
Well, you certainly seem to be kidding.
Better to post nothing and be thought to know nothing, than to post idiocy and prove it.
It didn’t take long for the clueless Guardian to jump on board the delusional bandwagon. See my link to 3 OZ cities rainfall from 1839 to 2017 above.
And that dopey Flannery interview is referred to at WUWT and the link contains the 1970s coming Ice Age video and a young Dr Steven Schneider who later became a strong advocate for their CAGW. See SD link above and his Schneider quote.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/03/22/end-of-rain-guardian-blames-nsw-flooding-on-climate-change/
BTW see the young Schneider at about 19+ minutes at the above link.
Thanks Neville.
Stu
Good to see your acceptance of my definitions of “sudden” and “abandonment” yesterday. Clearly, since you had no response to offer, you accept my reasoning.
Similarly for my comments on the WA Labor energy policy on the earlier energy thread.
Congratulations, you might even be starting to learn something.
Here’s a quick summary of a number of Arctic studies about the warmer earlier Holocene period added to the much warmer previous Eemian inter -glacial.
See studies listed and references at the link. Just for our silly SJWs.
http://www.co2science.org/subject/t/summaries/arctictempsinterglacial.php
I find it incredible that otherwise intelligent people are fooled by the fra-dulent carbon offsets market and others involved are in it only for the money. And other scumbags literally laugh about it as they rake in the dough.
Who could forget some of these con merchants who laughed out loud during the Planet of the Humans video? Just fits the old saying “laughing all the way to the bank” and I’m sure China and other developing countries have many belly laughs to share.
Way back I mentioned the Bernie Madoff scandal /fra-d/ponzi scheme that was quickly solved by Maths genius Harry Markopolous, but wasn’t acted on by the US SEC etc for a further 9 years and by then more financial ruin and untold damage to many more people.
But all the different fra-dulent con merchants and schemes involved in their so called Climate crisis are a lot more complicated and involves govts of all persuasions across the globe. Of course today the fra-dulent schemes involve trillions $ and yet we’ve hardly started to have a serious conversation about this in our media.
Here’s a few paragraphs about the carbon offsets BS and fra-d from “The Conversation” article linked to by SD a few days ago. Andrew Bolt covered this topic years ago, but nobody today seems to have the nerve to take this on, although it is just more BS and fra-d and this time literally makes money out of the air we breathe. And much laughter, illusion and fantasies as they sell their con tricks.
“Its failures are already accounted for”
“To help explain the new hype around carbon offsetting and its return to a central position in climate policy, I argue in a new paper in the journal Environmental Politics that one of the reasons carbon offsetting continues is because of fantasy. According to a psychoanalytic approach to the critique of ideology – which has been advanced prominently by the philosopher Slavoj Žižek – fantasy is a means by which ideology takes its failures into account, in advance.
Fantasy helps explain why knowledge about intractable problems may not stop carbon offsetting: its failures are already accounted for within the ideological formation. To research this further, I linked psychoanalytic theory to transcripts of interviews that I conducted with 65 practitioners involved with carbon offset markets. My analysis suggests that many of those involved recognise, at different levels, the gap between the spectacular portrayals of carbon offsetting and its deficiencies in practice. Awareness of this gap is managed through cynical forms of reasoning and knowledge disavowal.
Problems are known – but suppressed
Cynical reasoning involves knowledge that one is perpetuating an illusion or a problem, but doing it anyway. It sometimes involves laughter which mocks the predicament of the self. For example, one person selling offsets told me they only partly believe in carbon offsetting, and then laughed. Knowledge disavowal involves knowing about the existence of problems, but suppressing that knowledge. Those involved in carbon offsetting need not laugh at themselves all the time – disavowal also works for them.
Cynical reasoning and disavowal are not very disruptive to the social fantasy, which circulates through markets populated by experts who proclaim that offsets are genuine and legitimate. Figures of authority in the offset market – people with claims to expertise who talk about “high-quality” offsetting – reinforce fantasy. Doubts about offsetting are calmed, because even if one person does not (fully) believe, someone else will do it for them, in a process that repeats.
Furthermore, fantasy shapes our desires, so this account helps explain the emotions, enthusiasm and hype. On some level, people want to believe in carbon offsetting because it offers to rekindle capitalism’s promise that we can enjoy consumerism without being too concerned about ecological crisis, by delivering a seductive story of power and status in which somebody else cleans up the mess. Even if you are already an offset sceptic, we had better recognise that this fantasy runs deep”.
SD, regarding the ice core studies you quote, they all refer to a period that is in geological times, fairly recent. Given that and the fact that in the entire period of those core studies CO2 has never been near as high as now, perhaps we could expect different outcomes. Also if you wish to hang your hat on the ~800 year lag for CO2 after temperature, what do you suggest occurred ~800 years ago to cause the uptick of the last 150 years? If your answer is not the CO2 we have created what is it? If it is manmade then we should look to the conclusions of another paper on the subject which suggests
“Although the
recent CO2 increase has clearly been imposed
first, as a result of anthropogenic activities, it
naturally takes, at Termination III, some time
for CO2 to outgas from the ocean once it starts
to react to a climate change that is first felt in the
atmosphere. The sequence of events during this
Termination is fully consistent with CO2 participating
in the latter ~4200 years of the warming.
The radiative forcing due to CO2 may serve
as an amplifier of initial orbital forcing, which is
then further amplified by fast atmospheric feedbacks
(39) that are also at work for the presentday
and future climate.”
https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/Courses/global-change-debates/Sources/Temperature-leads-CO2-in-ice-cores/3-Caillon-2003.pdf
Perhaps you would do better looking at studies which draw together all the threads of the climate field rather than individual point products, the latter are often in conflict with each other and less informative than the conclusions drawn by the experts of the total picture.
Have you noted it is several million years since CO2 levels were at the same high point as now and the climate was very much different. It is agreed by science that changes during the Eocine and later were induced by orbital changes of the earth. We have not discerned any of those in recent centuries.
“In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today during summer in the Northern Hemisphere. In some locations, this could be true for winter as well. Moreover, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and we know without doubt that this proven “astronomical” climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years.” NOAA again
Stu, look at the ice cores. Previous interglacials with more warmth and less CO2.
Today we have less warmth and more CO2.
The extra is most likely ACO2 but not as warm.
Also there is no doubt that the MWP is responsible for some of today’s extra CO2.
All very recent (geologically) stuff is proving to be ho hum in the current context. Go back to the PETM “ At the start of the PETM, average global temperatures increased by approximately 6 °C (11 °F) within about 20,000 years. This warming was superimposed on “long-term” early Paleogene warming, and is based on several lines of evidence. There is a prominent (>1‰) negative excursion in the ?18O of foraminifera shells, both those made in surface and deep ocean water. Because there was a paucity of continental ice in the early Paleogene, the shift in ?18O very probably signifies a rise in ocean temperature. The temperature rise is also supported by analyses of fossil assemblages, the Mg/Ca ratios of foraminifera, and the ratios of certain organic compounds, such as TEX86.”
Forget the MWP, it is statistically and scientifically irrelevant to this discussion. You are talking small changes in the current epoch. But we appear to be entering a new one more related to significant change long before your current excuses.
The MWP was warmer than present and neither you nor anyone else knows what caused the PETM but it was most likely a comet:
“This tells us that there was an extraterrestrial impact at the time this sediment was deposited – a space rock hit the planet,” said Morgan Schaller, an assistant professor of earth and environmental sciences at Rensselaer, and corresponding author of the paper. “The coincidence of an impact with a major climate change is nothing short of remarkable.” Schaller is joined in the research by Rensselaer professor Miriam Katz and graduate student Megan Fung, James Wright of Rutgers University, and Dennis Kent of Columbia University.
But in spite of that the real oddity is not the total disruption of the climate system. The critical point is that even with such an extreme disturbance, the pre-impact climate system re-established itself in a geologically short period of time. This is clear evidence of the natural stability of the system.
Here are some very accurate comparable temperatures that rule out changes from natural atmospheric variability:
“In summary, the data we need to reconstruct Holocene, and older temperatures are in the oceans and in ocean sediments. Ocean temperature reconstructions represent much more of Earth’s surface (defined as from the ocean floor to the top of the atmosphere) than any land- or ocean-based measurements in the atmosphere. The atmosphere is too chaotic and unstable to give us representative climatic trends. Ocean temperatures are more stable, usable, and easier to compare to paleo-temperatures.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/03/26/best-climate-change-temperatures/
SD “ Also there is no doubt that the MWP is responsible for some of today’s extra CO2.”
How do you explain that one? It ended in 1300 so what is the link with the 20th and 21st centuries.
Meantime:
“ One of the most often cited arguments of those skeptical of global warming is that the Medieval Warm Period (800-1400 AD) was as warm as or warmer than today. Using this as proof to say that we cannot be causing current warming is a faulty notion based upon rhetoric rather than science. So what are the holes in this line of thinking?
Firstly, evidence suggests that the Medieval Warm Period may have been warmer than today in many parts of the globe such as in the North Atlantic. This warming thereby allowed Vikings to travel further north than had been previously possible because of reductions in sea ice and land ice in the Arctic. However, evidence also suggests that some places were very much cooler than today including the tropical pacific. All in all, when the warm places are averaged out with the cool places, it becomes clear that the overall warmth was likely similar to early to mid 20th century warming.
Since that early century warming, temperatures have risen well-beyond those achieved during the Medieval Warm Period across most of the globe. The National Academy of Sciences Report on Climate Reconstructions in 2006 found it plausible that current temperatures are hotter than during the Medieval Warm Period. Further evidence obtained since 2006 suggests that even in the Northern Hemisphere where the Medieval Warm Period was the most visible, temperatures are now beyond those experienced during Medieval times (Figure 1). This was also confirmed by a major paper from 78 scientists representing 60 scientific institutions around the world in 2013.
Secondly, the Medieval Warm Period has known causes which explain both the scale of the warmth and the pattern. It has now become clear to scientists that the Medieval Warm Period occurred during a time which had higher than average solar radiation and less volcanic activity (both resulting in warming). New evidence is also suggesting that changes in ocean circulation patterns played a very important role in bringing warmer seawater into the North Atlantic. This explains much of the extraordinary warmth in that region. These causes of warming contrast significantly with today’s warming, which we know cannot be caused by the same mechanisms.”
“It ended in 1300 so what is the link with the 20th and 21st centuries.”
I thought even you would get that; 800 +/- 200 year lag as per the paleo data.
And read my link above to get the best CC temps and get your mind right.
I get the lag but what is the mechanism. The lag is merely descriptive not exactly causative. Scientists have not found any such physical connection except for the MWP being set up by solar variations, the likes of which are not happening now. And the LIA raises similar questions.
“I get the lag but what is the mechanism.”
Warming generates CO2, not vicky verka.
If it did both we would have runaway warming which the earth has never had or we wouldn’t be here.
I hear the story but nothing in the whole CO2/temp lag thing and MWP comes close to explaining the rise from a typical high around 280ppm over last 400,000 years to the current 416ppm. Therefore it is down to unnatural sources (fossil fuels) and no precedent for what it might mean for temperatures in a relatively short time. But keep your head in the sand and I am sure you will be ok.
Of course we are producing extra CO2.
There is just no proof that our slight atmospheric warming is the result of that and anything other than the luxury of nat var.
You obviously didn’t check my link above:
“In summary, the data we need to reconstruct Holocene, and older temperatures are in the oceans and in ocean sediments. Ocean temperature reconstructions represent much more of Earth’s surface (defined as from the ocean floor to the top of the atmosphere) than any land- or ocean-based measurements in the atmosphere. The atmosphere is too chaotic and unstable to give us representative climatic trends. Ocean temperatures are more stable, usable, and easier to compare to paleo-temperatures.”
https://i1.wp.com/wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Rosenthal-data-1.jpg?ssl=1