Skip to content

Booker Exposes Wadhams’ Crackpot Theories

October 2, 2016

Booker in the Telegraph today:

 

 

 

I know it is only two weeks since I last reported on Arctic ice, but the latest news from that front is even more remarkable. My theme then was those sad climate activists who regularly venture into the polar regions because they have been fooled into thinking that the ice is vanishing but find it so thick that they have to be rushed back to safety. But this week’s focus is on those responsible for fooling them.

For nine years, two professors – Wieslaw Maslowski from California and Peter Wadhams from Cambridge – have been in the forefront of warning that, thanks to runaway global warming, the Arctic will soon be “ice-free”. Their every dire prediction has been eagerly reported by the warmist media, led by the BBC, In 2007 they said this would happen “by 2013”.

In July 2008 The Independent even devoted its entire front page to announcing that the ice could have gone by that September, only to find that it had by then begun a marked recovery. By 2012, when this dreadful event still hadn’t happened, Wadhams was making headlines by predicting that it would all be gone “by 2016” (only for its thickness to increase in 2013 and 2014 by 33 per cent). By June 2016, with Wadhams due to publish a book called Farewell To Ice, he was being quoted, under such headlines as “Arctic could be ice-free for first time in 100,000 years claims leading scientist”, again predicting that by this September it could have shrunk to “an area less than one million square kilometres” and by next year could be all gone.

So, with September now over, what happened? By Sept 10 the ice had reached its lowest extent, 4.1 million sq km, four times more than Wadhams predicted. But this was its earliest date of refreezing for 19 years. And what has happened since, is even more startling, The Danish Meteorological Institute reports that, since that date, it has been refreezing at its fastest rate since daily records began in 1987.

In a note for the Global Warming Policy Forum, Dr David Whitehouse, formerly science editor for the BBC website, shows how,  ever since  those scary predictions began in  2007, the trend of summer melting has been completely flat. Shouldn’t all those climate zealots be wondering whether Prof Wadhams is really the most reliable “leading scientist” they should be quoting on this particular story?

30 Comments leave one →
  1. October 2, 2016 11:39 am

    Ice free for the first time in 100,000 years? That’s sensational. Good to see the Earth and many multitudes of species survived that.

    • October 2, 2016 1:10 pm

      Since the polar bear, as a species, is judged to be more than a million years old, methinks they’ve “been there, done that” several times. In botany, we speak of species as “pre-disposed” when they have survived several glacial/inter-glacial (or other) episodes. In plain speak: “if you’ve survived it once, you’ve the genetic make-up to survive it again, and again, and…..”

      • October 2, 2016 1:16 pm

        By my reckoning, the polar has gone extinct three times already.

  2. October 2, 2016 11:41 am

    The only thing about to vanish is the credibility of Professor Wadhams and his Arctic ice claims.

    • David Richardson permalink
      October 2, 2016 3:09 pm

      In absolute terms you are right oldbrew BUT when the guy who told us 15 years back that children wouldn’t know what snow was like, can still get a shed load of cash for more steer droppings it makes you wonder.

      Just look at all the failed stuff from Paul Ehrlick over the last 40 years and he gets RS honours and people go on believing him. It is a case of fool me once etc. ………………

      Anyway – get off on holiday Homewood!!!!!

      • JuergenK permalink
        October 3, 2016 8:32 pm

        Despite his name (ehrlich=german: honest) Paul Ehrlich seems to be a rather dishonest guy …

    • RAH permalink
      October 2, 2016 4:55 pm

      oldbrew
      I would think that not only Wadhams but the institution which continues his tenure despite his paranoid ravings, that being the Physics department of Cambridge, would have it’s credibility suffer also. I know they have in my eyes.

      • Graeme No.3 permalink
        October 2, 2016 9:37 pm

        Physics department???? I thought all physicists had to know mathematics, or at least arithmetic.

      • Nigel permalink
        October 3, 2016 8:57 am

        As a former Major Scholar (elected 1961) of a Cambridge College when there was some intellect in the University, I have considered sending back my degree certificates. Instead, when asked for money I say “You ‘re kidding!”

    • Gerry, England permalink
      October 3, 2016 1:00 pm

      Even the warmists are wary of Wadham and think he is not helping the cause with his predictions that don’t come true. Don’t forget he also suggested that there were Big Oil funded assassins going round bumping off the climate change crew after 3 deaths in London.

  3. October 2, 2016 11:43 am

    Yes, the Sept. Monthly result beat even the rational expectations.

    https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2016/10/01/sept-arctic-ice-beats-expectations/

  4. October 2, 2016 12:59 pm

    See my public bet with Wadhams.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/07/22/professor-peter-wadhams-will-not-bet-on-his-own-sea-ice-predictions/

    I have since emailed the good professor offering him a £2000 bet on Arctic sea ice extent not falling below 1 Wadham (defined as 1 million km2) by next September.
    Strangely I have not had a reply….

  5. Bloke down the pub permalink
    October 2, 2016 1:08 pm

    OT but have you seen current news item, about presumably one of the new hybrid buses in London? http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/london-double-decker-bus-bursts-into-flames-outside-liverpool-street-station/ar-BBwTwrB#image=1?OCID=ansmsnnews11

  6. CheshireRed permalink
    October 2, 2016 1:09 pm

    Just the latest in an ever-extending series of climate lies. Make a claim, when it fails simply push back the date and repeat. Is there a more egregious set of liars than climate scientists and environmentalists? I can’t think of any in the public domain.

    • October 2, 2016 1:15 pm

      Politicians could be in the frame – some of them anyway. But we digress.

  7. Reasonable Skeptic permalink
    October 2, 2016 1:35 pm

    Wadhams is a denier, but the right kind of denier, so instead of having the herd cast him out, the herd raises his status to Lead Bull.

    It pays to be the right kind of denier.

  8. Edmonton Al permalink
    October 2, 2016 2:09 pm

    Prof Wadhams is like an arrogant old fart.
    I had a professor at University just like him.
    I was taking Electronics [BSc.EE] and he had his 30 year old lecture notes covering vacuum tubes. We were in the age of transistors and he was teaching us about triodes, and pentodes etc. We had to do calculations on plate volteges etc,, etc..
    Good grief,,, what a waste of time. All because he was too lazy, stubborn or what-have-you to make up some new lecture notes.
    How can anyone respect or admire a person like that?
    Those types are typical “Professor Wadhams” that have tenure.

    • mrmethane permalink
      October 3, 2016 1:40 pm

      Edmonton Al, me too, same place, ’68 Who was that? /mark fraser

  9. NeilC permalink
    October 2, 2016 3:32 pm

    And he is paid from the public purse, our taxes – he should be sacked for such low level knowledge of his subject. Like many others in the climate scam.

    • Billy Liar permalink
      October 2, 2016 7:16 pm

      Not any more. His lavish stipend no doubt comes from the £9,000+pa your children pay for the dubious pleasure of attending a few lectures from the failed prognosticator.

      One can only hope the rest of his expertise isn’t as lamentably bad as his Arctic weather forecasting.

  10. tom0mason permalink
    October 3, 2016 5:18 am

    IMO watching the North pole’s size wax and wane shows very little.
    However watching the accumulation, and loss, of ice and snow over the land areas around the pole would indicate more of the trend in the climate.

    • Nigel permalink
      October 3, 2016 9:04 am

      The main effect of snow on land in the winter is to keep the land warm. An atmospheric warming effect which resulted in a loss of snow cover would provoke a powerful cooling feed-back .

      • tom0mason permalink
        October 3, 2016 9:15 am

        So would you agree with me?
        Snow on the land is a better indicator of what the atmosphere is doing than the polar ice floating in the variable temperature water.

  11. October 3, 2016 9:32 am

    Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop and commented:
    Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

    Arctic ice scare merchants are fast running out of credibility in the face of the inconvenient – for them – facts.

  12. October 3, 2016 9:38 am

    Interesting. In fact, something like this made me change my mind on the anthropological global warming many years ago. My reasoning was something like: “hey, 100 000 years is too short a period, geologically speaking… and modern technological civilization was not around by then, but they are saying that 100 001 years ago (or something like that) it was hotter than now. What caused that warming, then? And why the same natural causes could be doing the same work today? In fact, what were those natural causes? And so, just thinking and wondering a little, suddenly I became an AGW sceptic…

  13. October 3, 2016 1:41 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

  14. Gamecock permalink
    October 3, 2016 2:40 pm

    An ice-free Arctic is desirable.

  15. JohnM permalink
    October 3, 2016 9:10 pm

    I can see the expression “doing a Wadhams” creeping into English, meaning of course to persist with making wild predictions while the situation goes further and further from the predicted state.

  16. gallopingcamel permalink
    October 4, 2016 3:48 am

    @Nigel, October 3, 2016 8:57 am
    “As a former Major Scholar (elected 1961) of a Cambridge College when there was some intellect in the University, I have considered sending back my degree certificates. Instead, when asked for money I say “You ‘re kidding!”

    Wow! I thought I was the only one. I won the major scholarship in physics at Pembroke College Cambridge in 1956 and am appalled to find the university pandering for funding in via political correctness in general and “Climate Science” in particular.

    If you are interested in working together to make some kind of protest please email me at info(at)gallopingcamel.info

  17. October 4, 2016 6:37 am

    Wadhams,made this thumper so dumb,that I wonder if he a phony:

    “By June 2016, with Wadhams due to publish a book called Farewell To Ice, he was being quoted, under such headlines as “Arctic could be ice-free for first time in 100,000 years claims leading scientist”, again predicting that by this September it could have shrunk to “an area less than one million square kilometres” and by next year could be all gone.

    There are a few published science papers showing, that it has been little to no summer ice for around 4,000 years during the Holocene Climate Optimism time.

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

%d bloggers like this: