Brill’s Quadrant rant: a snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings

by Gareth on March 28, 2013

Barry Brill, the superannuated politician and lack-lustre lawyer1 who rejoices in the position of chairman of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, has been given room for a rant by right wing Aussie magazine Quadrant, and — surprise, surprise — he uses it to air the climate crank cliché du jour: The science is settled: no warming. Here’s Brill’s conclusion:

The statistical fact is that the late 20th century warming trend is history. It is over. It is so yeterday (sic). As Monty Python’s immortal “Dead Parrot” sketch illustrates so vividly, there is a vast gulf between “resting” and “dead”.

Unfortunately for Brill, and to borrow a line from a somewhat more apposite Monty Python sketch, he’s clearly suffering from “grievous mental confusion”, and an inability to construct an proper argument. As the script has it: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.

Brill is happy to contradict the evidence, by ignoring the great scads of the stuff that show warming continues. Global surface temperatures are not the only index of warming, nor do they reflect any standstill. Ice melts and oceans continue to warm, as Jeff Masters points out today — and as numerous others have pointed out since the crank echo chamber decided it was time to push this stupid meme.

Warming will stop only when atmospheric CO2 stabilises and the oceans reach thermal equilibrium, which isn’t going to happen any time soon. In the meantime Brill and his band of cranks, by propagandising for inaction are stealing all our futures. The world will be a much worse place than it need be, and Brill will have to take his share of the blame.

  1. He prepared the case for the NZ CSET’s attempt to sue NIWA, famously described by the judge as “prolix”. []

{ 30 comments… read them below or add one }

CTG March 28, 2013 at 12:44 pm

“Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.”

No it’s not.

Brill and the rest of the C”S”C wouldn’t know what statistical significance was if it hit them in the face. Which it will do fairly soon.

Gareth March 28, 2013 at 1:26 pm

Yes it is.

Macro March 28, 2013 at 5:02 pm

No it’s not :)

mustakissa March 29, 2013 at 7:21 am

‘Contradiction’ is ‘gainsaying’ in Moncktonian

bill April 2, 2013 at 3:51 pm

Is this just the 5 minute argument or the full half-hour?

Macro March 28, 2013 at 5:12 pm

“Brill and the rest of the C”S”C wouldn’t know what statistical significance was if it hit them in the face. Which it will do fairly soon.”

Just as you say – on reading the latest Post on the conversation re the chances of a hot summer increasing.

https://theconversation.com/more-angry-more-often-march-heatwave-signals-a-new-normal-13068

The VERY first comment rather ‘amusingly’ was -“What does, ‘ virtually certain’ mean in scientific terms? Does it mean the the authors are certain or uncertain.”

You can’t make this stuff up!

Rob Painting March 28, 2013 at 6:30 pm

Yes you can.

CTG March 28, 2013 at 7:04 pm

No, you can’t ;-)

mustakissa March 29, 2013 at 7:23 am

Don’t gainsay poor Rob or I’ll contradict you

Rob Taylor March 28, 2013 at 9:52 pm

Poor old Barry Brill is just miffed that Justice Venning has given him another serving and awarded NIWA $90 K costs against NZCSET, with the option of seeking the monies directly from Brill and Dunleavy…

Here are the highlights:

[34] Having reviewed the matter carefully in light of the matters raised by the Trust, I am satisfied there can be no reasonable basis upon which it could be said that I had a direct pecuniary interest in the outcome of the proceedings before the Court. Any connection between my interest in the forest investment including its NZU’s and the effect of the decision on the issues in this case is so remote as to properly be described as fanciful.

[39] For the above reasons I decline the Trust’s application to recuse myself from dealing further with this case.

[40] Before leaving this issue, I note that in his submissions Mr Brill renewed his request that I respond to further questions regarding the forestry investment. It is not for parties to proceedings to seek to interrogate the Court.

[47] For a number of years the Coalition, which established the Trust, has challenged NIWA’s records in a variety of ways and forums. These review proceedings were just the latest attempt by the Coalition, through the Court and using the vehicle of the Trust, to pursue its challenge to NIWA. I do not accept the submission these were public interest proceedings. They were pursued by the Trust to advance its own interests.

[48] The Trust has made it clear that it does not and will not accept NIWA’s temperature series. The appropriate place for the Trust to challenge NIWA’s science is not the Court. Having chosen to bring the matter to Court for its benefit rather than any wider benefit, the Trust should pay the cost consequences.

[52] I do not accept those criticisms of NIWA’s actions. NIWA’s pleadings were focused and coherent. To the extent they were detailed that was because NIWA was required to respond to the Trust’s prolix pleadings. Dr Wratt’s affidavit was detailed but it was the substantive response on behalf of NIWA. I do not consider there has been any disentitling conduct on behalf of NIWA that would support any reduction in the costs otherwise claimable by it.

[57] The end result is that NIWA is to have costs against the Trust in the sum of $85,091.00 together with disbursements of $4,147.90, in total $89,238.90

[58] As I previously indicated, if NIWA wishes to pursue its application for non-party costs against Mr Dunleavy and Mr Brill personally, that is a quite separate issue. Mr Dunleavy and Mr Brill would be entitled to be heard. If NIWA is to pursue its claim against Messrs Dunleavy and Brill it should do so by way of a formal application. A memorandum is not sufficient. As the basis for NIWA’s application appears to be that the Trust is or will be unable to pay the costs, perhaps that matter should be clarified first. However, those are matters for NIWA and its advisers to consider further.

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=14&Itemid=47

Beaker March 28, 2013 at 11:29 pm
CTG March 29, 2013 at 7:47 am

Time for these people to put their money where their oversized mouths are.

Rob Painting March 29, 2013 at 11:45 am

No it’s not.

Rob Taylor March 29, 2013 at 4:26 pm

Yes it bloody well is, and I’ll passively resist anyone who says otherwise.

Rob Painting March 29, 2013 at 6:53 pm

No you won’t.

Rob Taylor March 29, 2013 at 7:25 pm

Aha, I already am, so there!

Rob Painting March 29, 2013 at 8:03 pm

No you’re not.

Rob Taylor March 30, 2013 at 9:38 am

OK, prove it…

noelfuller March 31, 2013 at 7:02 pm

If we must chirp about bird droppings I report our parrots were reduced to awed silence half an hour back with the noise of this years first heavy shower :)
All pigeon poops have been washed off the roof.

Australis April 1, 2013 at 3:00 am

“Ice melts and oceans continue to warm”

How can this be, if the Earth’s surface has experienced no heating for many years?

If the temperature stays the same then aggregate ice melt will be unchanged. There may be regional variations but you can’t increase melting without increasing heat.

I thought ARGO showed there had been no acceleration of the gradual ocean warming which has occurred for centuries. Anyhow, there has been no sea surface warming this century and its hard to see how the subsurface would get warm while the surface does not. Does warm water sink in the model you are using?

CTG April 1, 2013 at 8:00 am

There is a cure for ignorance, you know, Australis. If you want to be cured, we can point you to several references for all this stuff. But I suspect you actually prefer to remain ignorant.

Ian Forrester April 1, 2013 at 2:41 pm

Australis, there are two factors which determine the density of sea water. One is obviously temperature, warm water is less dense than cooler water. However, a second factor, which the average person tends to overlook, is salinity. The more saline the sea water the more dense it is.

Water is constantly evaporating from the surface and shallow surface layers. The warmer the water and the warmer the air temperature the more water will be evaporated. Over a considerable period of time the evaporation will have caused an increase in the salinity of that water. At some point in time that warmer water will be more dense than the cooler, less saline water underneath and it will sink, thus causing the deeper water to warm.

noelfuller April 1, 2013 at 8:11 am

Australis

Warm water rises if it is warmer than the water above it in everyone’s models. If you distinguish between heat and temperature you may get on the way to answers.

However, you quoted a phrase from the article but had you followed the link immediately following those words you would not have retained the other beliefs you have stated. From that article you can follow other references – a cure as CTG puts it.

noelfuller April 1, 2013 at 10:18 pm
RW April 3, 2013 at 4:09 pm

Perhaps Bill has some background on this uber-denier:

http://www.therealworldweatherforum.com/alarmism-thread-cockheads-are-highlighted-here-t4-70.html

Judging by his rants, Violi is a pretty extreme case of a foul-mouthed thuggish troll of the worst kind.

bill April 3, 2013 at 10:34 pm

Ah, no, new one to me! Unfortunately The Last Continent is full of these types, and they’re just about to be given the reins in Canberra…

Rob Taylor April 4, 2013 at 9:30 am
bill April 4, 2013 at 5:00 pm

Ah, Gareth, this one featuring one of our old friends is rather interesting…

bill April 4, 2013 at 7:12 pm

And, speaking of prats, and routine purveyors of pratdom.

Let’s face it; Denial has gone feral. Pick your own historical precedent for a nation’s major newspaper allowing itself to publish this kind of toxic garbage.

Thomas April 4, 2013 at 9:04 pm

Uh, Delingpole looks rather gaunt on that picture. Wonder if the stress of complete mental disconnect between his abstruse ideas and reality is getting to him lately. Surely being a complete f…wit and probably knowing it too must eventually leave a mark on a man. He looks like one of his soldiers from his wicket war phantasy books that jumped 10 years after the war was over from one of his beloved foxholes with nothing but rats tails for food for a decade… goodness… and the Australian… well… living in NZ its a source of many good jokes… sorry….. ;-)

Previous post:

Next post: