Categories
catastrophism Climate Change Omniclimate Omnologos UN

(Blurred) Visions of a Sustainable UN

Following up on a side note on WUWT…this is what the UN means by “sustainability”. To be kept in mind as Rio+20 approaches.

VISIONS OF A SUSTAINABLE UN

If you fancy yourself as a photographer and believe in the power of images to change the way we think and feel, then why not try your hand at capturing an image which describes a sustainable UN? […] All entries must speak to the theme, Visions of a Sustainable UN.

PHOTO COMPETITION WINNERS ANNOUNCED

SUN, 05/06/11

A team from Cyprus have been announced as the winners of 2011 Greening the Blue Photo Competition which has been run in collaboration with the UN Photographic Society to celebrate World Environment Day 2011.

Here’s the winner: “The judges felt the winning entry managed to capture several important elements of how the UN can become a more sustainable organisation” such as recycling itself and the fears it keeps spreading presumably

Recycling the UN

 

Runner-up: “…on a technology that is truly sustainable“, i.e. somebody is dreaming we all get on our bikes really, no matter if it’s the middle of the winter and there’s no baobab trees around

Biking around your baobab

Runner-up: “…bringing your own mug…” right before not flushing the toilet I suspect

Sustainable mugging

Runner-up: “sustainability is a part of UN’s key mandates in many ways: food, youth, and the environment in the developing world” starting from making sure it remains developING forever.

Make sure she never sees a book

In summary, if we all felt like rubbish and pedalled with our own mug to work by tilling the soil somewhere, the UN will have reached its goal by making our lives unsustainable.

Categories
Twitter

Omnologos – Twitter Updates for 2012-04-28

  • Monti sempre a spasso per l'Europa. Preoccuparsi solo se, nottetempo, lascia Roma per Brindisi. #
  • Only thing that won't ever be doomed is the "We're doomed" industry @leohickman @keithkloor @NatGeoChannel in reply to leohickman #
  • If skeptics are on the pay of Big Oil, does that mean #climate change alarmists are on the pay of Big Doom? #
  • Ennó, @Corriereit …Vanessa è stata strangolata perché viveva con un cretino. #
  • Al primo segno di gelosia anche lontanamente esagerata, il genero/cognato andrebbe subito ammazzato (di botte, la prima volta). #
  • Visto l'aspetto, non penso ci sia bisogno di maledire quel cretino di Lo Presti. Ha fatto già tutto da solo. #
  • Please help @readfearn explain why Big Oil's money would be good at Guardian/WWF but not at @ClimateDepot. 24hrs later, he still can't say. in reply to readfearn #
Categories
AGW Climate Change Global Warming Omniclimate Omnologos

Is anybody reading Real Climate any longer?

An interesting side-story about HadCRUT4. Look at RealClimate, March 20, 2012 “Updating the CRU and HadCRUT temperature data” by gavin:

the difference between 1998 and 2010 is in the hundredths of a degree, and most of the attribution work on recent climate changes is looking at longer term trends, not year to year variability. However, there is now consistency across the data sets that 2005 and 2010 likely topped 1998 as the warmest years in the instrumental record

Compare that now to Skeptical Science, April 18, 2012 “First Look at HadCRUT4” by dana1981:

In HadCRUT4, the hottest years on record are 2010 and 2005, with 1998 right behind in a statistical tie.

From the quotes above, it is difficult to ascertain if Gavin Schmidt has any understanding of the meaning of a difference “in the hundredths of a degree” (hint: for all scientific intents and purposes, it’s a difference of zero). The point that “there is now consistency across the data sets” seems to indicate an obsession with numbers and a forgetfulness of the underlying physical aspects of climate.

Even Dana Nuccitelli, amid the usually flurry of anti-skeptic rants and dubious interpretations passed as Truth, appears to have a better grasp on science itself.

Note that among the scarce number of comments (83), a couple of people try to make this simple point, only to be told by the likes of tamino that it doesn’t matter because of evil skeptics of course. As if surgeons would regularly use subpar anaesthesia justifying themselves by saying there are evil doctors out there doing far worse.