Climate contrarians/deniers are cherry picking again

By Ken Perrott 25/03/2013

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

The comment further:

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

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

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

Even so, they still keep their blinkers firmly aligned.

Similar articles

0 Responses to “Climate contrarians/deniers are cherry picking again”

  • On topic: “Yeah right”.

    Another of your favorite topics :
    How is it that Thomas Nagel( a respected scientist and academic )is now called ( by the cult of neodarwinism) an idiot just for changing his mind about darwinism. How is that possible, to respect a mind one day then disrespect it if it doesn’t believe what you believe .

    • Yes, is is well off topic. But briefly I think you are making a mountain out if a molehill.

      Thomas Nagel is not a scientist, not a biologist, but a philosopher. His recent book, which I have read in part and really must finish, makes some fundamental philosophical attacks on scientific method. I would at some stage like to review it in more depth (because his mistakes are interesting), but let me just say he makes a fundamental mistake when he thinks that just because science has not yet solved many problems, like the nature of consciousness, so called non-naturalist explanations “win by default.” Seems to me this is why he favours intelligent design (although not believing in a designer). The intelligent design people of course love him because that is the very way they try to distort science.

      Yes, a number of philosophers and scientists have reviewed his book and been quite critical. He has got some support from theologians and religious philosophers (no surprise there). In general I think his critics are right, and his supporters are ideologically motivated. While silly ideas have been called silly, I don’t see any evidence of disrespect for the man.

      I have not seen anywhere him described as an idiot (please provide a reference) and I am not sure he has “changed his mind about Darwinism” as he has written along these lines previously. Please provide a reference if you think he really has changed his mind.

      As for this “cult of neodarwinism” – never heard of it. What religious tradition does it belong to? Who are the leaders? Etc.

      Disagreement amongst philosophers is not unusual (because there are differences in philosophy) nor are disagreements between scientists and philosophers.

      Why do you think he issue is so important?

  • I’m amazed at the number of biologists creationists can find as authorities on intelligent design, who have no qualifications in biology whatsoever.