Watch the video, and note that at the 7-minute mark (from 7:00 to 7:15) Senator Whitehouse, on the senate floor, quotes me:
Getting through to senator Whitehouse was probably not the problem. Whitehouse getting through to some kind of conscience in the congress republicans seems to be much harder.
Pretty cool! Actually it looks like you could have said a lot of things in that video. Here is a Washington Post article that has the quote:
It looks like the Slowdown Skeptic post was something of a dry run for the paper he references.
So when are we going to see you on CSPAN explaining this to congress?
[Response: It was the “slowdown skeptic” post which motivated my co-author John Abraham to suggest that it should be published.]
Right on, Tamino-sama!
I’m a big fan of Senator Whitehouse, but he was a bit confused, I think, about an alleged cherry-pick which ignored the ocean temperature trend, somehow.
But the land-only trend is something on the order of twice the global trend. Likely that wasn’t what he meant…
OK, 11:08, he’s going to clarify–yeah, ocean heat content is what he’s talking about. But of course, that’s different than surface trend, and the surface data *do* include SSTs. A tad ironically, those SSTs *lower* the trend relative to land-only data, as noted above.
Of course, his main point stands: we’re inundated by ‘cheesy fossil-fuel PR dressed up in a lab coat, masquerading as science.’
[Response: I too noticed the confusion about SST vs OHC. But we’ll cut him some slack. And the quote you include, was great.]
Why doesn’t he just say “bullshit”…
Thanks Tamino, after watching Cruz still spouting off his RSS satellite cherry picked pause, Senator Whitehouse is great.
At a Tuesday hearing on how government regulations harm minorities, Cruz asked Aaron Mair (Sierra Club) if he would issue a retraction “if the data are contrary to your testimony.” Cruz then pressed Mair on satellite data which shows there’s been no statistically significant warming for the last 18 years.
The tide has turned, and fewer people are paying attention to the denialati any more. I cycled with a friend today who has a list of climate “skeptics” friends and acquaintances who he intends to button hole over the next few years, and rub their noses in their wrongnesses.
Some years ago, in comments at places like RealClimate, DotEarth, and maybe here, I used to reply to silly temperature predictions with a quick outline of a bet. I assert that each decade will be warmer than the last. You, whom I won’t call “denier”, because this will be a public, very courteous bet, say the contrary. I proposed $1K on adjacent decades, $10K on pairs 20 years apart, and $100K on 30. All decades from 1970-1979 onward are on offer, but I’ll understand if you want to start with the current decade.
This was before discussion of any “pause” got really noisy.
Needless to say, I never got a nibble. It’s almost as if those folks didn’t actually believe what they were saying. And doggone if 2010-2019 so far isn’t warmer than 2000-2009.
Now you folks are totally ruining it. Who is going to take my bet now?
In case any suckers, er, gentlepersons with a differing opinion, are still out there, the offer is still good.