Haunting the Library – a great idea

18 Jan

Update 01/23/11

Matthew left a comment with this link. It highlights the errors of the claim that the Queensland forecast didn’t mention flooding. In fact the report did mention flooding multiple times, just not in the chapter that the post highlighted. HauntingTheLibrary made a mistake, and I believed them. I still think the concept behind the blog is a good idea, but I will certainly double check any more of their claims in the future. Thanks to Matthew for straightening me out.

A new blog started last month called Haunting the Library. It seems to be dedicated to looking back at past claims of environmentalists and judging their accuracy. As you might guess, they are practically always wrong, and reading about their errors is fascinating.

Some are not so very long ago, such as a recent post about how the “Queensland Gov Global Warming Forecast Didn’t Even Mention Floods” although it mentioned drought 24 times. Or going a bit further back, in 1982 the UN warned that:

by the turn of the century, an ecological catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust

I must have missed that. Anyways, it’s a great blog with lots of good content so go check it out.


Posted by on January 18, 2011 in Uncategorized


4 responses to “Haunting the Library – a great idea

  1. Ed Darrell

    January 22, 2011 at 10:41 am

    Perhaps a better name for the blog would be “spinning the press room.”

    As with far too many blogs who claim to be skeptical of warming claims, it’s an echo chamber for nonscience that censors opposing claims and authors.

  2. Ed Darrell

    January 22, 2011 at 10:43 am

    By the way, the Queensland forecast did mention wilder weather, more severe weather, and unexpected results. I suppose to the politico fact spinners at that blog, hundred-year floods are neither wilder, more severe, nor unexpected.

  3. Sam

    January 22, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    Thanks for the contribution Ed.

    Can you explain how quoting old environmentalist’s claims is ‘spinning the press room’? For example, was the blog lying about the 1982 UN warning? Or did the world suffer a catastrophe worse than nuclear holocaust, and we all just missed it?

    Pointing out that the Queensland forecast called for “wilder weather, more severe weather, and unexpected results” does not negate the fact they they mentioned droughts specifically 24 times but never once mention flooding. I can make the claim that something unexpected will happen in the future, and when that happens, I don’t deserve any credit for making that prediction. It is meaningless. Of course unexpected things happen. Can you explain how increased CO2 makes more unexpected things happen than before?

    Ed, answer me this: how can you quantify an increase in unexpected results? You CAN quantify an increase in drought, or an increase in flooding, but please explain how to quantify an increase in “wilder weather”. The predictions use CYA terminology and are worthless.

  4. Matthew

    January 23, 2011 at 9:11 pm

    Sam, read:

    They did mention flooding. You’re welcome.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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: