Skip to content

A Wadhams

October 2, 2016

By Paul Homewood  




A new term has entered the lexicon of measurements, the Wadhams.

One Wadhams equals 1 million sq km, although at times it can also equal zero or 4.1 million sq km. (It is believed this may have something to do with the space and time continuum).

Some have suggested that, to make it shorter and more succinct, the Wadhams be renamed the Prat. 


However, we also need subdivisions of the Wadhams, so suggestions are invited. For instance, ten Smegheads could equal one Wadhams. You get the idea. 


There are, of course, many other areas where rapid technological developments require new terms of their own.

For instance, the constantly changing historical temperature record needs a scale in addition to Fahrenheit and Centigrade. This is to be known as the “Tampered” scale. (Many think this process of change, called Karlisation, has something to do with black holes, but others believe it is a simple function of money)


Other terms have entered the wacky world of climate science. For instance, there is a new calendar, the Hayhoe, which began in 1970. Years pre Hayhoe, or pH, are ignored for climatological purposes.


A new verb has also entered circulation – to Cox. This means going on TV, holding up a bit of paper, and pretending you know all about a subject which you have not got a clue about. (Note that a “Cox” is also a monetary value, equivalent to £10000, and refers to the money paid for aforesaid activities. Also “Hypocoxry” means flying half way round the world to warn people about the dangers of burning fossil fuels). 


Then we have a Slingo – meaning almighty cockup. An example is forecasting a dry winter just a week before the wettest one on record.


To Harrabin is to constantly publish misleading and one-sided propaganda. (To McGrath is to attempt to Harrabin, but get your facts desperately wrong).


Other words now have alternative meanings. For example, “Concerned” can now also mean “Socialist”, as in the Union of Concerned Scientists. (Note also the alternative definition of “Scientist” here!)



All other suggestions welcome!!

  1. October 2, 2016 10:47 am

    There is the “Lew Paper”, which is an academic document whose value can only be appreciated post relieving oneself.

    • AlecM permalink
      October 2, 2016 10:55 am

      And the pre-operative statement: ‘I’m just off for a Lewinsky’.

      • AlecM permalink
        October 2, 2016 10:59 am

        Sorry, a Lewindowsky

      • Joe Public permalink
        October 2, 2016 11:03 am

        Close, but no cigar.

        Freudian slip of the month!

      • TinyCO2 permalink
        October 2, 2016 11:16 am


        I’m not sure it was a Freudian slip she was wearing.

      • AlecM permalink
        October 2, 2016 11:31 am

        Whatever the Monicker!

  2. AlecM permalink
    October 2, 2016 10:53 am

    How about ‘to Lovelock’, to slap one’s forehead and shout ‘I wuz bloody wrong’!

  3. Joe Public permalink
    October 2, 2016 11:02 am

    The corollary to the Wadhams [which will forever be associated with an area of ice-melt (or not)], should be the ‘Moore’ named in honor of CO2-appreciator Patrick Moore* (the Canadian former president of Greenpeace).

    One ‘Moore’ should also represent an area of 1 million sq km, but in the context of additional planet greening.

    *Not to be confused with Britain’s favourite & best-known astronomer Sir Patrick Alfred Caldwell-Moore

  4. October 2, 2016 11:19 am

    Suggestions? Go holiday. (As much as it inconveniences NALOPKT readers to say that!)

    • David Richardson permalink
      October 2, 2016 2:58 pm

      Agreed – my thoughts entirely get a rest Paul – you deserve it and will need strength for the coming months.

  5. October 2, 2016 12:22 pm

    I suggest making mean
    That would make double sense of the sentence “I don’t believe in Clegg”

  6. October 2, 2016 12:24 pm

    What I meant to say, but changed by the system:
    I suggest making “Clegg” mean “AGW”
    That would make double sense of the sentence “I don’t believe in Clegg”

  7. Broadlands permalink
    October 2, 2016 12:24 pm

    How about a “Hansen”? One ppm CO2 = 2 billion metric tons. 50 Hansens will take us back to 350 ppm CO2. The space required to bury 100 billion tons of carbon can be in Wadhams?

  8. Bloke down the pub permalink
    October 2, 2016 1:01 pm

    How about a Homewood, the amount that a weather station’s temperature reading needs to be reduced to take into account UHI etc.

  9. October 2, 2016 1:58 pm

    What about the “Flannery Index”? It is an Australian version of the U.S. Palmer Drought Index.However unlike the Palmer index, it is a virtual reality measurement, often used to justify the building of unwanted, or needed desalination plants.
    This article
    shows how the Flannery Index compares with reality.

    • AlecM permalink
      October 2, 2016 3:54 pm

      Hey there mate, my son designed the pipework for some of those plants so Flannery provided the family income.

      PS the Brisbane Desal plant, installed in 2010, was intended to provide from Brisbane pee the boiler water for the Wivenhoe coal fired power station on the Brisbane river. A year later a Greene political directive ordered the dam be kept overfull to provide drinking water because the Climate Models predicted drought.

      Rainfall was so high that the City of Brisbane flooded because the original purpose of the dam, to control flooding, had become subsumed by Greenie propaganda.

      The Desal plant is currently switched off, the same for the plant in Victoria. The WA plant is however operating because that’s the only area where rainfall has remained below normal. The problem is that the dams are inadequate and the main one is too saline.

      (if they had built the Desal plant on that dam, 1/3 ocean salinity would have been much cheaper to run than the coastal site they chose, making their drinking water cost the highest in the developed World.)

      • Graeme No.3 permalink
        October 2, 2016 9:45 pm

        The SA desalination plant runs at a trickle because the water isn’t needed but the terms of the contract make it even more expensive to not run it. After 14 years of (green) Labor SA is bankrupt, so is releasing water from the dams so they can pay a bit less.

    • Hivemind permalink
      October 6, 2016 3:25 am

      How about Flannerys, the length of time between predicting it will never rain, and the start of flooding rainfall.

  10. October 2, 2016 2:16 pm

    Not forgetting the Gore Effect…

    ‘The Gore Effect is an informal and satirical term which alleges a causal relationship between unseasonable cold weather phenomena and global warming activism’

    The lack of severe hurricanes reaching the US since ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ came out may also be related to the Gore Effect.

  11. Coeur de Lion permalink
    October 2, 2016 3:22 pm

    Dammit I thought I’d thought of the harrabin first! It’s a unit of wilfully misleading the public. Harrabin’ s hysterical BBCTV approval of the Obama/Xi sign up to the Paris agreement without mentioning what it actually means to China is one harrabin. That BBC Tv programme “Climate Change By Numbers” is probably about six harrabins. And so forth.

  12. NeilC permalink
    October 2, 2016 3:44 pm

    A Slingo is a positive/negative interchanger; e.g. when anything about climate change is predicted as negative, you know reality is going to be positive and visa versa. Not that there is ever anything positive in their views.

    • AlecM permalink
      October 2, 2016 3:55 pm

      A synonym for ‘boomerang’?

      • NeilC permalink
        October 2, 2016 4:47 pm

        Or ice that keeps coming back too

  13. October 2, 2016 7:33 pm

    While I agree that the idiots who are rewarded well for their outpourings of drivel should be lampooned mercilessly, I must for once disagree with one of your comments: “Concerned Scientists” are rarely if ever socialists. Concerned = Fanatical maybe.

    As a socialist, (rare to unique among the contributors to this site I am sure), I would suggest that the CEGB was much preferable to the privatised businesses that now rob us all, (a Tory innovation), and was far more competent to advise on power strategy than DECC and the like.

    We certainly have our share of idiots, but Wadhams; the clown-prince; Gore; Clinton; Di-Caprio etc etc are certainly not socialists.

  14. October 2, 2016 8:35 pm

    A “Monbiot” (pronounced “Moonbat”) refers to a Climate alarmist/disaster/tipping point article published in “The Gruniad”.

    It is a more polite and scientific way of saying “bulls**t”.

  15. October 2, 2016 8:38 pm

    I’m an Australian journalist (ethical variety). I can’t google up anything about Brian Cox getting paid 10,000pds for going on our ABC TV program. Can someone give me a link or evidence pls?

  16. catweazle666 permalink
    October 2, 2016 9:22 pm

    For instance, the constantly changing historical temperature record needs a scale in addition to Fahrenheit and Centigrade.

    This procedure is called Mannipulation, and is carried out using computer games climate models based on AlGoreithms.

    • 1saveenergy permalink
      October 3, 2016 6:49 am

      “This procedure is called Mannipulation, and is carried out using computer games climate models based on AlGoreithms. ”

      (in recognition of the contributions of Michael Mann & Albert Gore to the world of deception)

    • tom0mason permalink
      October 3, 2016 10:16 pm

      All climate temperatures will now be shown in Fahrengrade and Centiheit which are approximately equal except for the times that climate models indicate that they are not.
      Kelvin is now a deprecated term in ‘climate science™’

  17. dennisambler permalink
    October 3, 2016 2:23 pm

    Here’s a recent Hayhoe:

    “A thermometer is not Democrat or Republican, and when we look around this world, it’s not about trusting what our thirty-year-old satellites say. It’s about looking at 26,500 indicators of a warming planet, many of them we can see in our own backyards,” she said.”

    Hey Ho……….

  18. TonyM permalink
    October 3, 2016 2:26 pm

    One “Crappermelt” = average area of all Arctic melts predicted by Wadhams

  19. tom0mason permalink
    October 3, 2016 10:02 pm

    Thanks for the update Paul but I thought that a Slingo was just a petty bureaucrat offering minimal expertise in sophistry and nothing else.

    Note that a Balls is a high placed but inadequate Slingo.

  20. Broadlands permalink
    October 4, 2016 2:41 am

    denisambler…Good post about Ms. Hayhoe: “The climate models that scientists now use churn out petabytes of data—which is something like, in Hayhoe’s words, “twenty million four-drawer filing cabinets full of text”—that then need to be analyzed to see how these changes will manifest in particular locales.”

    Yes, PETAbytes of data…billions of “data”… on temperatures and rainfall etc., much of which has been adjusted if not destroyed…especially the older values having been systematically lowered. Presumably these are included in those filing cabinets?

    But the amounts of data on CO2 are much smaller and more to the point…

    The US CDIAC says that just one ppm of CO2 is two PETAgrams of CO2. That’s two BILLION metric tons. NASA’s James Hansen’s “plan” is to get us back to a safe 350 ppm… “sequester” the 50 ppm there today. What will Ms. Hayhoe recommend we do with those 100 BILLION tons of “stored” CO2 required to save us from a cataclysmic future of droughts? or floods?…or extreme “hot spells” or extreme “cold snaps”? And, which of these will we be saved from… even if she and NASA can pull it off?

    Then…Is our weather simply supposed to “settle down” because the climate has been “settled science”? If we return to the “safe” 350 ppm, that’s back to 1987. Is that the place to be? There are two billion more of us now. Are seven billion of us supposed to help remove three tons of CO2 each into our backyards.. to go back to 1987 and use “alternative energy” on the way…zero emissions?

    In fact, which technology will Ms. Hayhoe support to actually capture all this CO2, never mind what to do with it all? The CSS technology is improving but it doesn’t yet exist on a global scale. Even the IPCC mitigation experts agree…

    IPCC: “Carbon dioxide capture and storage could be used to reduce emissions of fossil-fuel power plants. The technology could be important for ambitious mitigation targets, but it’s not yet been demonstrated at large scale.”

    What will CO2 be if and when the technology does finally exist? Will we have even more to capture…more than 50 ppm?

    Ms. Hayhoe and other similar “activists” are well-intentioned people, but they need to examine the reality and stop blaming others. All of us are responsible for using oxidized carbon to create the best standard of living more humans than ever before have experienced. If it is really true that our added CO2 will cause more extreme heat and cold and cause whole countries or cities to disappear under rising seas then we should start carefully adapting instead of trying to “stop” it with a totally impossible goal of hiding billions of tons of CO2 safely. That is the definition of quixotic… “adjective: exceedingly idealistic; unrealistic and impractical”.

    That’s my “soap box” opinion and I’m sticking to it. I welcome debating those who want to continue “playing ostrich” with “climate change” to our collective social and economic disadvantage and with unintended consequences?

  21. Swisspeasant permalink
    October 6, 2016 2:44 pm

    How about a Di Crappo. The amount ofor CO2 5000 ordinary world citizens are responsible for emitting in one year?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: