For deniers, politics beats the science. Handouts beat both | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian

Yes, climate change denial is about politics, but it's more pragmatic than ideological. The politics have been shaped around the demands of industrial lobby groups – which in many cases fund those who articulate them. Rightwingers are making monkeys of themselves not just because their beliefs take precedence over the evidence, but also because their interests often take precedence over their beliefs.

The character of climate change part 4 « Climate Change

We can not pretend that we understand the climate system unless we can explain ENSO, the Arctic Oscillation, put the Antarctic Oscillation in its context of evolving pressure relations as the Southern Annular Mode and explain the PDO and the NAO. When that is accomplished we might ask around as to whether people think the science is settled.

When we understand what determines the emanations from the sun we might hazard a forecast as to the weather to be expected in six months time.

Childish NYT links big storm to global warming

Dr. Martin Hertzberg wrote the following in reply

As expected, the scientific illiteracy of the N. Y. Times journalists was again displayed for all to see in the 8/28/11 article by Justin Gillis trying to link Hurricane Irene to "human-induced (global) climate change" caused by "greenhouse gases trapping extra heat".

Nowhere in the article is the real cause even mentioned: the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (la Nina / El Nino cycles). Our current la Nina phase concentrates warmer surface waters in the western regions of oceans increasing the frequency and intensity of hurricanes and typhoons. For that phenomenon, human CO2 emission is about as significant as a few farts in a hurricane.

Subsidy farmers don’t fare well as subsidies decline (who saw that coming?) | JunkScience Sidebar