“There’s a great deal of stupidity and superstition behind it all”

NEWS8 in Connecticut says there is a great deal of science behind their claim that sea level rise is caused by carbon emissions.

2015-11-11-06-34-092015-11-11-06-32-20

Report: threat of coastal flooding from Global Warming | WTNH Connecticut News

What they mean by “a great deal of science” is “a great deal of stupidity.” Sea level in the region has been rising at basically the same rate since the Civil War.

8518750 (2)

Sea Level Trends – State Selection

And the peak sea level rise rates actually occurred just after WWII.

8518750

Sea Level Trends – Variation of 50-year Mean Sea Level Trends

Sea level rise in Connecticut shows zero evidence of a correlation with carbon emissions, and zero evidence that it can be altered. Peak rise rates occurred when CO2 was below 320 PPM. Reducing CO2 would not slow sea level rise.

There is not one smidgen of science behind the NEWS8 claims. Just stupidity and superstition.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to “There’s a great deal of stupidity and superstition behind it all”

  1. Crashx says:

    “There’s a great deal of science behind it, but basically…”

    Translation: I don’t understand any of the details on this, and you shouldn’t worry about that either. Here are the key things we are supposed to believe.

  2. Bill Junga says:

    WTNH 8 of Connecticut once employed the late Dr Mel Goldstein as a meteorologist. I can say beyond a doubt he would have called this report: NONSENSE!

  3. Add in data showing Plate reduction.
    State became famous for fraudsters selling local Red Cedar to rural folks as super expensive Nutmeg only grown in Tropical climate area.
    Entire DC delegation have entire careers based on green lemming vote with “friendly law suit” revune recipients donations.
    Perfected by current Hillary Yale fail classmate Senator Suethemall whilst he was AG for 25 years. Current head of WPA was co -con artist supplicant.
    Nutmeg sales are soaring with giant circle of circle jerks to descend on PARIS …..to redistribute same world wide.

  4. Chaam Jamal says:

    “there is a great deal of science behind it all” kind of gives away the intellectual level of this discussion.

  5. Anthony S says:

    Welcome to my local news.

    • Gail Combs says:

      You poor thing having this as a Congress Critter:

      The Wicked Witch of the East

      • Anthony S says:

        And Blumenthal too.

      • PeterK says:

        Gail: I don’t recognize this woman or is it a man? Could you tell me who it is?

        • Gail Combs says:

          The real question is, is it human?

          And it is Rosa DeLauro. Her Husband is Stan Greenberg.

          Weathiest Members Of Congress

          …the entry that really sent my Democratic strategist friend ballistic was the one for Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the Connecticut Democrat. La Rosa–tied for #48 on the Richest list–gets the lion’s share of her wealth from her husband–Clintonista pollster and campaign strategist Stan Greenberg. Says Roll Call, “DeLauro’s primary asset is a 67-percent stake in Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research Inc., a Washington-based firm run by her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. Her share in the company nets the Representative $5 million to $25 million. She has a partial stake in two other polling/consulting firms. The first is Greenberg Research, of which she and her husband own 100 percent, and Sun Surveys, in which she owns a 60 percent stake. Neither of these is as lucrative as Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, however.”

          My bud the political warhorse snorted, “Hell, she first ran for Congress she didn’t have a dime–I was one of her biggest contributors. And Stan Greenberg, who worked for me back when he was starting out, used to have holes in his socks!” Noting that Congressional wealth is usually closer to the higher than to the lower estimates on the disclosure forms, my dour Democrat gasped, “That means they’re making around $50 million! These people shouldn’t be running Democratic campaigns!”

          So, if you want to know why the national Democrats seem, in this campaign, to have a tin ear where touching the hearts and minds of the working stiffs is concerned, think about this: the three partners in the Democracy Corps–Greenberg, James Carville, and Kerry’s chief message-shaper Bob Shrum–are all multimillionaires. And yet their counsel–proferred in an endless series of free Democracy Corps memos distributed to the party elite well before and during the presidential primaries, whose content (or lack of it) they helped shape–is taken as gospel by Democratic liberals feverish for victory. Well, as the old Texas populist Maury Maverick Jr. used to say, “a liberal is a power junkie without the power.” 
          http://www.mlive.com/forums/farmington/index.ssf?artid=624

          I wonder where those millions amassed “during public service” came from, don’t you??? 

          She was pushing the Food Safety Modernization Act for over ten years. Ever since the WTO was signed in 1995.

          Then there is Greenberg:
          blockquote>Whether you want to win your election, lead your country, increase your bottom line, or change the world, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner can help you find the answer,” GQRR states on its website http://www.gqrr.com/

          Stanley Greenberg
          Greenberg’s work for private sector organizations – including major corporations, trade associations and public interest organizations – focuses on managing change and reform…. Greenberg has conducted extensive research in Europe (particularly Great Britain, Germany and France), Central and South America (Argentina and Brazil), and Africa (South Africa). He specializes in research on globalization, international trade, corporate consolidation, technology and the Internet. For organizations, Greenberg has helped manage and frame a number of issues – including education, school financing, American identity, the economy, environmental regulation, international trade, managed care, biotechnology, copyrights, privacy and the Internet….

          Greenberg has advised a broad range of political campaigns, including those of President Bill Clinton and Vice-President Al Gore, Senators Chris Dodd, Joe Lieberman and Jeff Bingaman; Governor Jim Florio and gubernatorial candidate, Andy Young; former Vice-President Walter Mondale; and a number of candidates for the U.S. Congress. For many years, he served as principal polling advisor to the Democratic National Committee.

          Greenberg works jointly on private sector projects with prominent Republican pollsters in the United States – including Fred Steeper (pollster to former President Bush), Bill McInturff and Linda DiVall – to bring a bi-partisan focus to public issues….

          From another source:

          Greenberg provides strategic advice and research for leaders, companies, campaigns, and NGOs trying to advance their issues in tumultuous times.

          His political work has included serving as lead pollster and strategist to the campaigns of President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, Bolivian president Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, and South African president Nelson Mandela….

          [Old wording was: “As a hired gun strategist, Greenberg—a seasoned pollster and political consultant—has seen it all. In his memoir, he recounts his work with President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, Bolivian president Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, and South African president Nelson Mandela.” – GC]

          Greenberg has been described as “the father of modern polling techniques,” “the De Niro of all political consultants,” and “an unrivaled international ‘guru’.” Esquire Magazine named him one of the most important people of the 21st century. The New York Times writes that Greenberg “acts as a sort of people’s truth squad,” while Republican pollster Frank Luntz says “Stan Greenberg scares the hell out of me. He doesn’t just have a finger on the people’s pulse; he’s got an IV injected into it. He’s the best.”

          “…He is also a strategic consultant to the Climate Center of the Natural Resources Defense Council on its multi-year campaign on global warming…. http://www.dl21c.org/fbevent/616

          (Links maybe stale since they are several years old.)

      • Ted says:

        I didn’t know Keith Richards was a congressman.

  6. Martin Smith says:

    Steven, the database is back on line now, is it? So it wasn’t removed after all? No apology from you?

    • It has nothing to do with “the database.” Something convinced them to restore their old web page.

      • Martin Smith says:

        No, Steven. It’s pretty obvious they were upgrading their website. During your hissy fit in which you accused them of fraud for removing the page, if you had looked for an answer, you would have seen their warning message that the database from which that page was generated was offline. You owe NOAA an apology.

    • AndyG55 says:

      Martin the Gore bot is a low-end software engineer with ZERO understand of anything to do with climate science.
      He also markets himself as a technical writer.. one can only imagine how un-technical those rants would be !!
      He also thinks the cartoonist site , SkS, actually present something resembling science.. seriously !!!
      He frequents a site run by a Peter Sinclair aka Greenman, who fancies himself as a low-end videographer making propaganda mis-information videos about anyone who questions the AGW meme. Peter was apparently “trained” ie brain-washed, by Al Gore.

      He is base-level troll, nothing more and has yet to produce one iota of evidence countering anything SG has put forward.

    • No there isn’t. You are parroting propaganda.

      • oppti says:

        Correlation is no explanation.
        I was hinting on the period 1900-1950.

        • Gail Combs says:

          However NO correlation is a killer…. Unless you are talking CAGW.

        • My point is that your post-1950 claim is based on bogus temperature data

        • Martin Smith says:

          Steven, if you have any evidence that any adjustment to any dataset is incorrect, post your evidence. You have never posted any such evidence. Your claims are completely unsupported.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Steven has posted plenty of evidence. You are just too lazy to go look for it.

        • Martin Smith says:

          Gail, Steven has posted plenty of evidence that data has been adjusted, a fact that is not in dispute. He has posted no evidence that any adjustment is incorrect, and he has posted no evidence of fraud.

        • Gail Combs says:

          WRONG!

          Steven has posted the evidence. You have not bothered to LOOK.

          I have been on this site for years and have many such bookmarked but I will not do your legwork for you.

          So just keep making a fool of yourself and we will continue to laugh.

        • Martin Smith says:

          Gail, I know he hasn’t posted any evidence that adjustments are incorrect during my presence here, and he has made the same accusation of fraud many times during that period, in each case, without any supporting evidence. And none of you minions has yet posted any such evidence from the past, although you and a few others have tried to obfuscate further by posting even more evidence that data has been adjusted.

        • gator69 says:

          So? Alarmists blame man for changing global climate with zero evidence. I’d say we’re even.

        • Gail Combs says:

          You have been here for about a month and done nothing but call Steven a liar. Why should he respond to you and why should we do your legwork for you?

          If this was SkS you would have been banned long, long ago and all your comments removed. Here we just laugh at you instead because your attempts are so pathetic.

          Now again GO DO YOUR LEGWORK.

        • Jason Calley says:

          “Gail, Steven has posted plenty of evidence that data has been adjusted, a fact that is not in dispute. He has posted no evidence that any adjustment is incorrect, and he has posted no evidence of fraud.”

          When data is “adjusted” far beyond its original error bars that is clear evidence that it is incorrect. The fact that they have refused to justify and explain their adjustments is clear evidence that it is fraud, or, at the very least, no longer science.

          And no, your simple repetition that “they have explained all their adjustments” is not even evidence. It is simple assertion on your part. When asked to link to their detailed explanations you have failed to do so. When asked to provide an explanation of even a single year’s adjustment (1880) you have admitted that you are unable to do so.

          Martin, your writing is evidence (not proof) that you are a bright person with the capability of thought. I do not understand why you refuse to do so. I can only assume that your purpose here is something other than rational discourse.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Martin the Gore bot is a low-end software engineer with ZERO understand of anything to do with climate science.
          He also markets himself as a technical writer.. one can only imagine how un-technical those rants would be !!
          He also thinks the cartoonist site , SkS, actually present something resembling science.. seriously !!!
          He frequents a site run by a Peter Sinclair aka Greenman, who fancies himself as a low-end videographer making propaganda mis-information videos about anyone who questions the AGW meme. Peter was apparently “trained” ie brain-washed, by Al Gore.

          He is base-level troll, nothing more and has yet to produce one iota of evidence countering anything SG has put forward.

          He is a waste of time and space, mostly his own… but is just too dumb to realise it.

  7. Of course the temp corrections have been explained. Try opening your…oh you are ALEC Anti-GCC Parrot assholes, so of course you cannot open your eyes. Anyway, for those that actually WANT to hear the rationale for the correction it can be found in the youtube series by Potholer54
    http://www.tinyurl.com/youtubegcc
    Have fun moron anti-science cretins.

    • gator69 says:

      (Yawn)

      Please do me two favors.

      1- List all climate forcings, order them from most to least effectual, and then quantify them all.

      2- Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.

      There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or how we got here. For 4,500,000,000 years climates have always changed, naturally. This means there has been a set precedent, and the burden of proof falls on natural climate change deniers like yourself.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s