Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumThe 1st And 2nd Laws Of Monckton; Denialsphere Melts Down Into Cannibalism, Hilarity Ensues!
EDIT
Our story begins with Dr. David Evans, an electrical engineer who goes about inexplicably calling himself a Rocket Scientist, and a conspiracy theorist who makes Jews uncomfortable by going on and on about an international banking conspiracy involving the Rothschilds. Evans is in the running for the Next Climate Galileo for his new theory, which posits a mysterious Force X from the Sun that influences the Earths climate with an 11-year delay. And it involves math. Jo Nova, Lord Monckton, and some other prominent contrarians immediately jumped on the bandwagon, but others (i.e., the ones who dont think the Sun can possibly the culprit for recent warming) werent so sure. Among them were Willis Eschenbach and Leif Svalgaard. Svalgaard appears to be a solar physicist, and doesnt buy the idea that the Sun explains everything, but Ive heard he is some kind of lukewarmer. He comments regularly at WUWT, to the extent that Anthony Watts calls him WUWTs resident solar expert.
The usual protocol at WUWT is that Anthony will put up a guest post by some wing nut, even if he knows it is utter nonsense. (Check out some of my favorite examples here.) Some commenters will jump right on the bandwagon, but others will disagree. A few hardy souls from Reality might pop in to take a swipe at it, and will get dog-piled. Watts and all the regulars will pat themselves on the back for being so open-minded, in contrast to the alarmists who are always trying to stifle such scintillating intellectual exchanges. Its all good, as long as the conclusion to any argument (no matter how ridiculous) is that the scientific consensus on climate change is wrong, or doesnt exist, etc.
The problem is that some of the contrarianseven the sort who hang about WUWTstill have some minimal intellectual standards. Both Eschenbach and Svalgaard were able to recognize that much of Evanss work relied on a bizarre hodgepodge of solar data sets that was apparently corrupted by some improper data processing techniques. They spoke up, and lots of angry back-and-forth ensued, most notably with the following comment by Svalgaard.
It is worse than I thought. The TSI used by Evans is totally wrong
Apart from the use of the obsolete Lean TSI for the early years, the most blatant error is the statement that TSI has had a sharp unprecedented drop starting in 2003-2005 to now. This is complete nonsense. Here is TSI since 2003
There is no such drop. If anything TSI is now higher than it were in 2003. As far as I am concerned, the model is already falsified. Not by the observations but by the [almost fraudulent - as there clearly is an agenda here] use of invalid input to begin with. This concludes my comments as the prediction is worthless on its face.
Monckton Escalates
The almost fraudulent comment angered His Lordship, who called it libelous. Svalgaard returned fire, calling one of Moncktons comments outright stupid, and advising, You do yourself no favours by pretending to be so dumb. Monckton insisted he was right, and pronounced Svalgaards scientific career to be over.
EDIT
http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2014/07/barry-bickmores-hilarious-takedown-of.html