Climate Purge in Paris in Advance of COP 21

Now, where did they store those guillotines?

Exécution_de_Marie_Antoinette_le_16_octobre_1793

Philippe Verdier is a veteran meteorologist with a Masters in sustainable development. He has been bringing weather news to France for years on the television channel France 2. He has impeccable credentials (very important in France), and has covered previous COP gatherings in Bali, Copenhagen and Cancun. He has been actively studying climate change since 1997.

And he just got yanked off the air. The reason? He has written a book called ‘Climate Investigation‘ where he claims “that leading climatologists and political leaders have “taken the world hostage” with misleading data. He now calls himself the ‘Snowden’ of climate change. I hope that doesn’t mean he has to move to Russia…

In a promotional video for the book, Mr Verdier said: “Every night I address five million French people to talk to you about the wind, the clouds and the sun. And yet there is something important, very important that I haven’t been able to tell you, because it’s neither the time nor the place to do so.”

He added: “We are hostage to a planetary scandal over climate change – a war machine whose aim is to keep us in fear.”

For this scandalous utterance the former French Minister of Ecology, Natalie Kosciusko Morizet, called him and other skeptics ‘assholes.’ On national television. I guess when you’re hosting 40,000 of the Climate Elect you want to keep the story simple, if not straight.

Verdier is not a kook, not an extremist. His doctoral thesis is about the role of media in the current debate on climate change. He sounds very much like a Lukewarmer, and his book sounds similar to some of what I have written in my recently published book, ‘The Lukewarmer’s Way–Climate Change For The Rest Of Us.

But his book is twice as expensive as mine🙂 And it’s in French…

Verdier said “said he decided to write the book in June 2014 when Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister, summoned the country’s main weather presenters and urged them to mention “climate chaos” in their forecasts.

“I was horrified by this discourse,” Mr Verdier told Les Inrockuptibles magazine. Eight days later, Mr Fabius appeared on the front cover of a magazine posing as a weatherman above the headline: “500 days to save the planet.”

Mr Verdier said: “If a minister decides he is Mr Weatherman, then Mr Weatherman can also express himself on the subject in a lucid manner.

“What’s shameful is this pressure placed on us to say that if we don’t hurry, it’ll be the apocalypse,” he added, saying that “climate diplomacy” means leaders are seeking to force changes to suit their own political timetables.“”

Shameful, yes. But certainly not limited to France.

15 responses to “Climate Purge in Paris in Advance of COP 21

  1. A Le Monde “fact-checker” examined four of M. Verdier’s claims here, rating three of them “false” and the fourth “mostly false”.

    • It’ll take me a while to translate. I’ll be back…

    • The Le Monde article is an almost Clintonesque (sorry Tom) parsing of language.

      On the first question. Le Monde conflates questioning the IPCC’s understatement of uncertainty as “denial”.

      On the second question, they go all out Orwellian. Verdier states that most climate scientists are government funded, an undeniable assertion, yet Le Monde tries to game the question by shuffling the shells. Instead of following the peanut of climate science funding, they try to fool us into tracking the funding of the IPCC itself.

      On the third question: who cares about winters in France anyway…. I’d never go there in winter. The French are cold enough as it it.

      On the fourth question, Le Monde truncates their climate model/Observation comparison graph at the year 2000. Does the phrase, “hide the decline” come to mind?

      • I read elsewhere that the graph wasn’t truncated, it was taken from AR3.

      • “I read elsewhere that the graph wasn’t truncated, it was taken from AR3.”

        I fail to see how that lets Le Monde off the hook. It is still a deliberate deception, done to hide the [pause] decline and make the models appear more reliable than they are.

    • So a media outlet committed to climate hype is credible exactly how in fact checking?

    • I guess this means we can’t trust Lemonde “fact checkers”. I keep seeing similarities between the global warming propaganda and the Iraq WMD propaganda.

  2. The graph in the fourth section is from the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report. (Figure 4 of WG1 SPM, to be exact.) [It derives from a paper by Stott et al. contrasting HadCM3 runs with natural-only, anthropogenic-only, and combined forcings.] The Le Monde article states [per Google Translate] “Climate scientists were able to verify the accuracy of their models multiple times, such as after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo (the Philippines) in 1991…” but the figure rather clearly shows that this model overstated the effect of Pinatubo by about a factor of 2.

    A more recent comparison of observations to models may be found here.

    • So, typical for climate kook culture, the defenders of the apocalyptic prophecy simply lie about the evidence, confuse the issue and condemn the heretic.

    • Do you have the HadCM3 CMIP5 output for 2007 to 2015? How does it match tropospheric temperatures? Or surface temperatures? If you haven’t seen a comparison, I suggest you visit Berkeley Earth. They should have something you can use. Or do you want me to find it and post it for you?

      • There are some HadCM3 runs in the CMIP3 (AR4) ensemble, but only HadGEM2 in CMIP5 (AR5). The HadCM3 run for the “A1B” scenario matches up reasonably well with HadCRUT4 for the global temperature average. The original paper used a masked average — that is, they only included gridcells which had an observation. I could compare under such a mask but it would take more effort.

      • We started using kriging in the 1990’s, to fill in and “draw” the data gaps. I think it gets overused, and it helps to use multiple realizations. I’m surprised to see its not used in general to avoid that masking technique you use.

        I’m used to dealing with the human factor in kriging. I don’t want to be sexist, but I noticed males have a tendency to “direct” the kriging code to deliver the answer they want. I think guys are more aggressive and push harder to “win”. This means the use of kriging requires policing within the organization.

        My kid sister is a microbiologist, she used to work at a very prestigious research institute, and I heard from her that outfit was riddled with bogus data, cheating, poor quality research. She attributed this to the senior scientist heading the lab, who put pressure on post docs to publish whatever.

        I guess my point is that I sense there are tools available to improve the climate research results, but on second thought I got the feeling it’s too political and under pressure to deliver accepted dogma.

        One other point, when I get a post appraisal of model predictive ability I don’t trust results for a single model picked out if an ensemble. If hadcm3 did well the key is to see why it did so. For example, how close is it to actual temperatures? What’s the polar and mid latitude amplification?

      • Fernando Leanme: “We started using kriging in the 1990’s…”

        Took you a bit to catch on, didn’t it?

        Kriging AKA “Making Stuff Up” was originally devised to peddle dodgy claims to credulous prospectors on the Witwatersrand reef during the South African Gold Rush in the 19th century, and has been going downhill ever since, especially climate “scientists” discovered it and appreciated its unlimited potential for mendacity.

  3. Pingback: Climate Purge in Paris in Advance of COP 21 « How to s..t on humans

  4. Pingback: Climate Purge In Paris In Advance of COP 21 | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

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