Jul 11, 2017

How denialists Kenny and Bolt royally screwed up reporting of climate paper

Wrong again, fellas. Master's student in sustainability Tom Allen helps Andrew Bolt and Chris Kenny understand basic climate science.

Last week, Chris Kenny and Andrew Bolt broke a story that Kenny said deserved to be on front pages everywhere. But the story didn’t make a front page anywhere. Because the story didn’t exist.

With knowing nods, winks and half smiles, Kenny told his exclusive band of viewers of his “Heads Up” segment on Sky News to prepare for something momentous. This was, he told us breathlessly, a “very, very dramatic story” about “serious science”.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

9 thoughts on “How denialists Kenny and Bolt royally screwed up reporting of climate paper

  1. Roger Clifton

    A common delusion among the non-modellers is the pervasive belief that there is some sort of restoring force, some mechanism that would somehow bring the excess of CO2 back to the preceding long-term level. Sadly, there is no such force. The past few million years have been remarkably similar because there has been no major perturbations to shift the concentration to some other level. Short term, yes, such as the buffering action of the ocean surface damping out swings in the atmosphere concentration. However, for long-term restoration there is only the slow weathering of rock to be accelerated by the increased heat and CO2. In the absence of grand acts of Nature, into the intervening hundred thousand years or so, we are just going to bake. And even then, we don’t know what the new level would be.

    1. Tony Syad

      “pervasive belief that there is some sort of restoring force”
      Most statistical techniques are based on assuming Gaussian distributions and they do revert to the mean. Reversion to the mean is not nearly so common in nature.

  2. John Newton

    The first sentence of Chris Kenny’s column in the corral for loonies (AKA Inquirer in the Weekend Australian):
    ‘If there is one economic issue where the ideological prancing and post-material indulgence of the media/political class clashes violently with the daily priorities and pragmatic common sense of the mainstream, it is energy policy.’
    How can this man be taken seriously by anyone?

    1. mike westerman

      Easy – by mainstream he actually means Bolt, Abbott, himself and others of their kind ie rusted on ideologues. Meanwhile middle Australia rushes on with rooftop solar at a pace faster than that when they took up color TV, and soon will follow up with battery storage and EVs with similar gusto.

  3. klewso

    I find it incomprehensible why such people with such a demonstrative dearth of comprehension skills are paid to fill such positions of influence – unless they’re there to nurture and cultivate ignorance (remembering that Limited News has a ‘Professional Code of Conduct’).
    Blot (perhaps?) watched Monty Python’s The Life of Brian and came out with the perception that “The Life of Brian is a film that mocks Christ as “just a naughty boy””?
    He’s a clown – Kenny his apprentice.

  4. AR

    “Wait a moment, I here you say, there was a…” SpellChecker but, alas, not a human subbie who might recognise a homophone.
    One wonders what exactly Blot & his ilk are going to do when, not if, their unceasing rearguard actions in favour of neolib pollution & profligacy are finally shown to be utterly meretricious mendacity.
    The prerogative of the courtesan throughout the ages, power without responsibility, cushioned by a big pile of filthy lucre.

  5. 2bobsworth

    These two professional sycophants are just doing what they are paid to do, pleasing their lord and master by asking “what would Rupert say”

  6. Peter Hamilton

    Dolt? Inaccurate? Say it isn’t so!

  7. John Kotsopoulos

    But what about rising sea temperatures which have lead to more extreme weather events. Is the modelling allowing enough for this?

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details