Mud Wrestling with Climategate Pigs

This article started out as an addendum to my recent tale of woe in which I got banned from Anthony Watts eponymous website just as Willis Eschenbach had published an article about Arctic sea ice inspired by yours truly!

I’ll get back to that in a moment, but earlier today this happened over on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/1402641031804473347

In case you haven’t heard the shock news already, earlier today Climategate was featured on BBC News once again:

Needless to say this news caused much excitement amongst both climate scientists and the cryodenialosphere! However getting back to where I was when I went to bed yesterday, I recently had the good fortune to bump into Willis once again, only this time it was on Judith Curry’s “Climate Etc.” blog rather than WUWT. I eagerly sought to reopen our Arctic discussion, and this is how the conversation went:


Us:

Evenin’ Willis (UTC),

“The MSU Arctic Data shows only about 1°C of warming.”

Since when? And can you by any chance provide a link to the data you’re referring to?

TIA

Them:

Jim, the UAH lower troposphere data is below.

https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt

Us:

Afternoon CK (and Willis?),

Here’s the hastily constructed first draft of the UAH “North Pole” data that I promised you:

What do you suppose it “proves”?

Them:

Jim Hunt | June 6, 2021 at 9:43 am |

“Afternoon CK (and Willis?),

Here’s the hastily constructed first draft of the UAH “North Pole” data that I promised you:
….
What do you suppose it “proves”?”

Jim, my comment related to Tyson’s claim that the Mobil analysis was accurate, viz:

These statements from Exxon’s introductory remarks have been borne out by 40 years of observations:

The Exxon statement claimed a 10°C polar rise would occur from a doubling of CO2. I pointed out that a) Antarctica hasn’t warmed in 7 decades and b) the Arctic, rather than warming 4° as per the Mobil predictions, has only warmed 1°C.

You were dubious about the 1°C, saying:

“Since when? And can you by any chance provide a link to the data you’re referring to?”

… so now you’ve graphed it for yourself and indeed, it’s 1°C.

Which shows that I was correct, that the Mobil prediction was way out and not “borne out by observations” as had been incorrectly claimed.

Us:

However in one of my numerous critiques of Professor Koonin’s recent magnum opus I discussed Arctic temperature:

https://GreatWhiteCon.info/2021/05/steve-koonins-unsettled-arctic-science/

I included this graph of surface temperature derived from ERA5 data:

That shows a much greater temperature rise over a significantly shorter timeframe, does it not?

Them:

Jim, the ERA5 is the output of a climate model that is nudged periodically so it doesn’t run off the rails. You can go with that … or with the observational data I provided. Your choice.

Us:

Evenin’ Willis,

I think the word you’re looking for is “reanalysis”?

What’s more your alleged “observational data” is nothing of the sort. It’s almost literally “pie in the sky”. This is the sort of observational data I prefer:

Do you have any idea where that is?

Them:

Jim Hunt | June 6, 2021 at 6:04 pm |

“Evenin’ Willis,

I think the word you’re looking for is “reanalysis”?”

Nope. I say exactly what I mean. I said:

The ERA5 is the output of a climate model that is nudged periodically so it doesn’t run off the rails.

The fact that you have issues with that 100% accurate description is … well … interesting.

Us:

Mornin’ Willis,

I’ll take that as a “I’ve no idea where that is!” then shall I?

No doubt you also have no idea of its current significance?

Perhaps if the powers that be hadn’t so brutally curtailed our “polariced” conversation you might have learned a thing or two?

https://GreatWhiteCon.info/2021/05/watts-up-with-polariced-mysteries/

Them:

Jim Hunt | June 7, 2021 at 4:08 am |

“Mornin’ Willis,

I’ll take that as a “I’ve no idea where that is!” then shall I?”

Nope. Take it EXACTLY as I said it, and please, stop trying to put your nonsensical bogus “I can read Willis’s mind” interpretations on it. You can’t. Stop it.

Us:

Evenin’ Willis,

I suffixed my remark with a question mark, since I am no mind reader.

It would be so much easier if you simply answered my questions, would it not?

Then I wouldn’t need to speculate!

Them:

Jim Hunt | June 7, 2021 at 3:39 pm |

“Evenin’ Willis,

I suffixed my remark with a question mark, since I am no mind reader.”

Oh, please, stop with the pedantry.

“It would be so much easier if you simply answered my questions, would it not?”

It would be so much easier if you noticed that you are a most unpleasant individual, and that I have absolutely no interest in engaging in a discussion with you. I don’t wrestle with pigs—they enjoy it, and I just get dirty.

Go sell your line of patter to someone else. Not interested in the slightest.

Us:

Here’s an ancient pig wrestling contest for your information Willis:

https://GreatWhiteCon.info/2014/04/debating-skeptics-is-like-mud-wrestling-with-pigs/


Notwithstanding Willis’s stated lack of interest in evidence for Arctic sea ice decline, I did make one more attempt to enlighten him about recent Arctic events this morning, viz:


Us:

Mornin’ Willis (et al.),

Here’s another Rorschach test for you. Do you have any idea where this is?


“No answer!” came the stern reply from Willis Eschenbach, the rest of Judith Curry’s denizens, and indeed Judith herself. All of which reminds me:

Moving on to today’s even bigger “Shock News!”. It seems as though the British Broadcasting Corporation has commissioned a “thriller” entitled “The Trick“, which is based on the events in 2009 and thereafter popularly referred to as “Climategate”:

The “Climategate” computer hacking scandal that rocked the scientific world is to be made into a BBC film.

Hackers stole thousands of emails and documents from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in Norwich in 2009.

Line of Duty actor Jason Watkins is to star in The Trick playing climate change scientist Prof Philip Jones.

Watkins said it was a “privilege to play the brilliant scientist… whose own world was so threatened”.

The Trick will tell the story of the professor, who was director of the Climatic Research Unit.

Prof Jones became the victim of cyber terrorism with stolen emails used by human-induced climate change deniers to promote their view of global warming ahead of an international conference.

An independent inquiry was held after the false claims circulated that the unit’s scientists had manipulated data to exaggerate evidence of human-induced climate change.

The claims that the unit acted dishonestly were dismissed, but the scientists were criticised for a lack of openness.

Which brings us back full circle to my Twitter conversation with Stephen McIntyre and Ken Rice, who is Professor of Computational Astrophysics at Edinburgh University. Here is a brief extract:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/1402731843263336451

At the time of writing Stephen has still not provided any evidence for his scurrilous allegation against Prof. Rice. Please feel free to trawl through the exchange on Twitter and point me to the part where Ken called Stephen any “names”, other than “Stephen” I suppose?

It’s nearly midnight now, and I still have the rest of a bottle of beer to finish:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/1402756276908703746

Hence further analysis of the above will have to wait until tomorrow. However here is an exercise for any interested readers out there. Can you see any similarities between the techniques used by Willis and Stephen to avoid giving a straight answer to a straight question?

Note that many moons ago I was criticised for my use of the us/them format, but it seems to me to be entirely appropriate in the context of this article.

P.S. I returned to my keyboard after thoroughly brushing my teeth following a midnight feast of dark chocolate, only to discover this missive waiting for me on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/1402773109304971267

6 thoughts on “Mud Wrestling with Climategate Pigs

  1. “Can you see any similarities between the techniques used by Willis and Stephen to avoid giving a straight answer to a straight question?”

    Yes, people frantically waving their “I’m offended” false flag is a common tactic employed by those caught with their facts down, so to speak. In my experience it only serves to further harm their credibility.

    1. That’s certainly the way I view such behaviour David. Plus we can now add Jonathan Jones to our handy list of false flag wavers.

      In all likelihood Mr. McIntyre has “muted” me as well. Needless to say he has yet to justify his “name caller” accusation against Prof. Rice. Certainly not anywhere that I can see it at least.

  2. Jonathan Jones has publicly pointed out that he muted me on Twitter yesterday:

    As Willis Eschenbach would no doubt put it, stop trying to put your nonsensical bogus “I can read Jim’s mind” interpretations on it Jonathan. You can’t. Stop it.

    I’ve never seen 1812.txt before today. I don’t know that it’s genuine. I don’t know your interpretation of it either. I guess I’ll just have to come to my own conclusions. Which given all the circumstances will doubtless not coincide with yours.

  3. This is no way to conduct a honest debate – you post questions on twitter only to describe people who dare to answer as “pigs” in your blog. Your losership potential is obviously fully expressed.

    1. Welcome Maurizio,

      Did you read the quote from Judith Curry’s blog above, penned by that well known “skeptical” fellow Willis Eschenbach? To save you the bother of scrolling up:

      I don’t wrestle with pigs—they enjoy it, and I just get dirty.

      Presumably IYHO that is no way to conduct an honest debate?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 8 MB. You can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.