CLOUD results in (haven't read it yet):

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/08/the-cerncloud-results-are-surprisingly-interesting/

Ok, it's a day old.

Very interesting stuff.  Aerosols and other pollutants are more important in cloud formation than cosmic rays.  Who woulda thunk it? 

Oh yeah, that's right, most climate scientists.

Environmental Research Web:

http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/news/46965

Lawrence Solomon in the National Post: Science getting settled

gag

Good christ Andy. Reading climate denier pieces like that still shock me, somehow I <i>still<i> feel very uncomfortable when I read such blatant lies.

From the comments:

"Have you read about the theory? Have you read about the experiment? Go over to Watts Up With That. It's all there for your viewing pleasure."

Why not try Answers in Genesis for your science whilst you're at it?

I've been thinking for a while that perhaps a series which compares "skeptic" reactions with the real science would be interesting.

Lots of news sources routinely report 'THE FINAL NAIL IN THE GLOBAL WARMING COFFIN' or whatever, but in every case so far they've been wrong. They claim to be 'skeptical', but the second something supporting their opinion or the ideas they've been paid to push comes up it's 'proof'.

This is a good example. Also the Damon & Laut results, the series of joke papers published by (apparently) physics freshmen 'disproving' the greenhouse effect, Energy & Environment papers (Beck, Soares...), claims CO2 rise isn't human caused, the Spencer satellite blunder, 'climategate', Phil Jones interview, tropospheric hot spot, Monckton's IPCC vs reality, Lindzen & Choi, Soon & Baliunas, Soon's polar bear thing, McLean/deFrietas/Carter...

That FP 'comment' is complete garbage.
The guy is using an online medium to publish his comment and then saying that unless something is published in print, then it is hidden away!

Plus now CERN is evil, along with numerous other organisations??

Also, the FP is yet another site now that forces you to join something (Facebook etc.) in order to make a comment. If you sign up for an FP account it doesn't allow you to comment.

Maybe an interesting series (kind of a re-packaging of existing material, in some cases) would a packet of Final Nails in the Coffin of AGW.

Kind of similar to the rebuttals, but focused on specific papers instead of on particular arguments. Part of the idea would be to develop an allergy to the phrase "final nail in the coffin."

I'm sure someone could design a great visual: maybe a series of rusty nails; ending with the AGW zombie pushing open the coffin lid.

It would give us a humor-break - rare enough in the garbage disposal business!

Bent and rusty nails in - and scattered around - a battered and scratched coffin would be a first-rate image. 

Even people who tend to believe all that guff couldn't resist it coming to mind.  We might think that the concept is old-hat, but we often see site visitors dredge up these antique news items and blog posts.   An irresistible contrary image might prompt further thought.

 (And if you're into the multi-paragraph-manifesto style of presentation at art galleries, the implication of the illustration is that this particular coffin is unsaleable.  It's been in stock for ever and despite being shoved in front of every prospective buyer - no-one wants it.)

Got this email suggestion:

It would be good to have a mini-blog post that just uses this quote from the paper's author. Maybe a "simple" tab, to go w/the intermediate http://www.skepticalscience.com/ConCERN-Trolling-on-Cosmic-Rays-Clouds-and-Climate-Change.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cloud-formation-may-be-linked-to-cosmic-rays

"it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate."

I like the 'nail in the coffin' idea, but I thought abut it for a while and ended up going more with the idea of being really skeptical about what blogs/the news tell you.

Quite often they don't say last nail in the coffin. I imagined it something like the normal rebuttals, but aimed at specific blog and news stories and highlighting the specific tricks the deniers use to mislead the public. WUWT and the Daily Mail are chock full of excellent examples.

How about a two-panel cartoon? First panel: several denialists enthusiastically nailing each of their last nails into the coffin.  Second panel: they've picked up the coffin and are shown carrying it off to the grave, but the bottom of the coffin, now revealing the label "scientific basis" or "scientific foundation" is still firmly on the ground, with an AGW character (looking a bit like Earth) sitting up and musing "They should have nailed the bottom first"

I think using the "nail in the coffin" image would be funny.

We could use some funny: It's sticky (in JC's phrase), and it gets people on your side.

If you want to start cranking out original cartoons, I can post them (once they're "peer reviewed" and blessed by the SkS author team) as the "Toon of the Week" in the "SkS Weekly Review" series. 

jg,

Can you modify it so that it can be used as a "framing" format, for the projected series of last-nail articles?

Just how many times has "final nail in the coffin" been used in a way that we can debunk it? It feels like the phrase comes up all the time but is there specific examples? I'd like to see quotes and links before designing a button :-)

Does it matter really if the phrase is used literally?

Papers that come to mind, where the deniers jumped the shark:

Miskolczi

Gin & Tonic (I've forgotten the real names)

I think there are at least 3 others, including the current nail.

You could start here. (1,000,000+ hits!)

Delingpole

McIntyre

McIntyre

Joe Romm

I don't think we necessarily need the exact phrase, like Solomon said that CERN had "settled" that the AGW theory is wrong.  Same intent despite different phrasing.  But of course it would be ideal if the deniers used the exact phrase.

WUWT commenter Scarface called it the final nail in the coffin.  Does that count? :-)

Also this blogger, and this one, and this one.

Gin & Tonic => Gerlich, G. and R. Tscheuschner

are hammering on this issue in the comment thread to "Elected Officials Deny Climate Science as Climate-Related Losses Grow" posted on The Hufficngton Post.

Please chime in. After all, I can only use the word "poppycock" so many times on a given thread.

This is to let you know that I'm working on the illustration. Here's my start. Adding the figures and showing them nailing will take some work. Will add that when I can. Suggestions are always welcome.

jg

I have a concept of using nails to frame the refutation:

1) Bright shiny nail: Next to the statement of the "fatal" problem with AGW

2) Nail being hammered into the coffin: Next to the refutation of the argument

3) Nail in pretty bad shape: Next to the summary of the situation

4) The evil zombie of AGW pushing open the coffin again

Something like that ...

Neal, Let me see if I understand. You want four small graphics that would be in the article, like graphics accompanying each subtitled section of the blog post? Number 1 would be just the shiny nail graphic and the "fatal" problem is text, not a graphic? Same with 2, 3 and 4.

Have I restated what you meant? Should be pretty easy to do. (A lot easier than the cartoon)

jg

jg,

Yes, and this could be re-used for each rebuttal.

You could do the cartoon for the next issue of the Weekly Digest,

Does anyone have a copy of the CERN paper that just published in Nature?

Like the 4 coffins image - not so sure about the zombie.

Doesn't have to be a very gruesome zombie; just something that you have a hard time killing.

The point is that they're going to have to try a lot harder to kill the GHE theory than they've been able to show so far: Silver bullets or at least shotgun blasts. These wimpy pseudoscience papers are not very effective!

Great idea: What about an animation with the zombie shoving off the coffin lid as you scroll past the last line of the summary?

(Not too fast: Don't want to give our readers heart attacks.)

I still think the coffin itself needs to look not-fit-for-use.   Dust, dirt, scratches, dents.   

How mean and miserable would you need to be to buy that horrible thing for your dear departed relative? 

Well, nobody spends a lot of money decorating a coffin for a zombie.

In my head I have an image of a scientist working hard with a laser and some test tubes whilst in the background some angry looking skeptics are hammering bent, rusting nails into an empty coffin.

Rob,

Did you find a copy of the CERN paper in Nature?

I strongly suggest that questions regarding copies of articles be handled elsewhere: off-site.

Basic CERN rebuttal using the 'final nail in the coffin' language is up for review.

Give us a heads-up when you've got those nails graphics ready to go jg, and we'll add them to the post.

Hi Dana, When do you plan to post this? I'll try to finish the pictures tonight. Or can I string it out to Saturday?

I'll have a something similar to the 1-4 steps suggested by Neal.

jg

Are you interested in producing original cartoons for the SkS Weeekly Digest?

Hi Badger. Yes. I'd like to contribute. It just takes a little quality time to get one done. I need this weekend to finish the coffin two-parter that I described above. I forgot to answer your last inquiry in this thread, so sorry about that.

I drew another one on coal aerosols that might qualify for the weekly digest: http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/LookingCool_1024w.jpg This one has the advantage of being finished, or quickly embellished.

jg

No specific timeline on the post, jg.  The schedule's a bit funky right now because we have a bunch of posts in progress, but nothing's quite ready to publish.  But don't kill yourself working on this, Saturday is fine.

I like to share what I have in order to get comments early. Here's what I have for the Nail In Coffin post section title graphics (1: problem, 2: refutation; 3: summary; 4-not done). I can change direction, do simpler, or whatever. I pictured the fourth image would allude to a smashed finger, with perhaps Mr. Global Warming reaching out of the coffin to offer some of it's last ice shown melting and falling off his head, saying "you better ice that (while you can)."

I like it.

I'm waiting for the zombie.

Maybe add a sore tip to the thumb...

I prefer the idea of smacking the thumb with the hammer and letting a rusty nail fall sideways :P

Poor JG, he'll never get it done at this rate!

Then there's no coffin, for this to be the nail in.

I'm actually swatting up for my interview at Nature on Monday (mainly XHTML validation, accessibility and usability etc.), but whilst having a look around the Nature web sites, I noticed the supplementary information for this paper and downloaded it.

The diagram referenced by the Financial Post blog linked by Andy S (4th forum comment on this thread/subject) clearly states that the diagram is a part of a 'typical measurement sequence', so it isn't surprising that it is published as supplementary material. It isn't relevant to any final results.

If you don't have a zombie, no point in the coffin.

If you don't have a coffin, there's no point to have the nail.

The phrase isn't about carpentry.

Nigel Calder is virtually foaming at the mouth over this graph.

I've commented on the multiple problems with the conclusions drawn from the supplemental graph on the ConCERN trolling thread.

Your toon for the Weekly Digest looks great. My only concern is whether or not it will be redable when reduced to the size dictated by the SkS post format. In addition, you'll need to add your signature and a date.   

Like it! One possible suggestion - after the 3 images that are a close up of one nail, the coffin with lots of bent nails, perhaps with more bent nails on the floor around the coffin, and maybe even a couple of broken hammers

I'm reworking the coffin, nail, zombie angle -- literally, it's all about the right angle. Thanks all for feedback.

Badger, the cartoon format is 570 wide? How's this?

The image was inspired by this headline:

Fox News-Inspired Scientist to Study Why Global Warming Has Stopped (5 July 11)
http://nation.foxnews.com/global-warming/2011/07/05/fox-news-inspired-scientist-study-why-global-warming-has-stopped

jg 

Here's two of three to show a different perspective to get the coffin and zombie back into the scene:

If this works, I'll polish them create 3-parts: 1) nail ready, 2) hammer falling/or hitting the finger, and 3) coffin open (w broken hammers and failed nails).

jg 

As the chief zombie fan, I like the concept. But would it be possible to show the zombie pushing up the lid, with his arm?

Also, this looks like more of a mummy than a zombie.

Neal, you're correct. Instead of a fake zombie, I'll draw a real one, with arm lifting the lid.

Do you think it's good messaging to refer to AGW as a zombie?  I get the metaphor but it seems like a conflicting message.  

Rob:

- The end-point/punchline is focused on the "nail in the coffin": That's where we have to end up. The coffin has to fail, because the nails represent their arguments. The failure has to be demonstrated; which doesn't happen unless it's spontaneous.

- AGW is like a zombie, because you can't kill it with stupid arguments.

- It's supposed to be dryly funny.

How about a zombie like this? A bit alarmist, but aren't all zombies alarmist?

It's a bit confusing: Hard to visually parse.

I think a more "stereotypical" zombie with "AGW" written across its forehead would be more immediate and funnier.

Zombie for Neal: 

First frame will be the hand holding the last nail in place, shown above.

Second frame (not drawn yet, but like an earlier image) will show the same view as the first but the hammer will be grazing the nail and hitting the thumb, a bit violent.

Third will be the zombie above.

If you want to use these, let me know and I'll polish them.

jg

Err, but now they will say that we are trying to scare them with 'zombies', although s/he is rather friendly looking zombie ;)  IMHO, the real zombies are the myths and lies from the "skeptics" and deniers that keep resurfacing.

That said, I also get where Neal is coming from, AGW will just not die, so it is zombie-like in that sense.  Maybe a different character/analogy is needed.  I'll think about it. 

Sorry jg, we say "try X" and that probably translates into hours of work for you.

This is pretty good!

But can you make the zombie look a big more harmless? Maybe goofier? or slightly surprised? maybe with a little hair?

Your Weekly Digest toon looks great. I'll include it in the upcoming issue.

Let's run the coffin/zombie toon by our focus group (signficant others) and see how they react.  

Albatross, In fairness, Neal did say "zombie" when he suggested this illustration series, and I ran off in a slightly different direction, but I appreciate your sentiments. Some illustrations take time, others have been lunchtime projects. It helps me to share unpolished sketches early to pre-empt deadends. And creative re-direction on both sides is expected. For example, in Steve Brown's Eemian series, he modified some of his topic based on what I could fit in an illustration. That's rewarding for me. and I'm quite excited about the illustrations I'm working on for his next post in the series.

Neal, I'll try the happier, friendly zombie, but let's also see what the focus group says as I can't return to this project till tomorrow. 

Thanks Badger for the Weekly Toon spot, and a general thanks to all who helped me develop that illustration.

jg

Here's a follow-through of the image sequence suggested by Neal. The images are still rough, but could be quickly dressed up:

1. Statement of the "killer argument" against AGW:

2. Refutation of killer argument:

3. Kinder, gentler zombie, it doesn't go away:

I like the "look & feel", but the shape of the coffin seems like a biscuit box: too square. Where is the foot of the coffin, and how is the zombie's body oriented with respect to it?

IMHO, putting "AGW man" inside a box just doesn't make sense to me. AGW is not a "jack-in-the-box" that pops up every now an then. Just the opposite, AGW is like the genie that has been released by mankind. How to get the genie back into the bottle is our biggest challenge.

How about showing refuted anti-AGW papers as litter along the highway to scientific knowledge? Or as tumbleweeds blowing in the desert of debunked theories? 

B:

It's not supposed to be a box, it's supposed to be a coffin, that these specious "final" final arguments are supposed to be trying to bury - but failing.

The whole gimmick takes off from the phrase, "OK, this is the nail in the coffin for all that global-warming nonsense."

Yeah I think this will work if the box is made more coffin-shaped.

I fully understand what you want to portray. I just do not like the graphic concept for the reasons that I have previously articulated.

In addditon, I bleive the cartoon that you envision also connotes that a "good nail" could eventually be found. It also implies that the "AGW-man" was somehow corraled and put back into the coffin prior to the most recent attempt to nail him in. 

The phrase, "OK, this is the nail in the coffin for all that global-warming nonsense" doesn't seem to translate well into a cartoon graphic -- IMHO. 

B:

I fully disagree with you on this matter.

Regarding the image: the coffin was drawn incorrectly. 1) I made a pentagon instead of a hexagon. Can fix by tweaking the shape and rotation angle of the coffin. 2) the zombie isn't situated correctly. Both can be fixed if you decide to use this metaphor.

I fully expected you would.

I'm holding off on publishing my CERN post until this is finished, so tweaking the coffin and zombie would be good, jg.

Why not just have the letters AGW in the coffin, instead of a zombie.
Most people associate a zombie with something nasty or just plain wrong, you are effectively saying that AGW is evil or wrong by making it a zombie.

BTW I also agree with Badger to a certain extent, the coffin idea is a bit to literal.

It's the sort of thing I would expect the characters from 'The Big Bang Theory' to create.

It's supposed to be funny. A touch of humor in this situation would do us some good: Not only does it break the stereotype that AGWers are humorless fanatics either entranced by their computer models or bent on domination of the economy, but also, it's memorable. "Sticky", in JC's terminology.

I'll work on the sketch tonight. I should have something tomorrow.

For the record, I am not against humor. In fact, the Toon of the Week is the most popular festure of the SkS Wekkly Digest. If you guys can get the "nail in the coffin" concept to work, so much the better.

Here are three images for the nail-in-coffin. They can be resized or given other modifications. There's another cartoon I'd like to do on this theme: Show skeptics hammering nails. then they pick up the coffin, but the bottom, labeled "scientific basis" wasn't nailed and is still on the ground. They run off to bury the empty coffin, oblivious that they left the bottom and contents behind,  while the global warming character points to the foundation he's still resting on and says "they should have nailed the bottom [or science] first". That will take a few days to draw. 

adding an open box of nails labeled "Made in Deniersville" in the upper left-hand corner?

That's looking pretty good!

Box of nails per Badger's suggestion (should I have drawn all the nails without points, as in pointless? Too subtle?):

Nails without points? No need to gild the lily.

I like it.

Dana,

I had intended these to be 400 px wide so as not to overwhelm your article. I reformatted the illustrations above and took out the zombie without the box of nails, but a better result will be from exporting these to the intended pixel size. How would you like them? 570 px (max) or smaller (400?). Would you like a section title as part of each graphic? I'm also going to add the skeptical science URL too.

jg

400 pixels is fine.  No need for the section title in the graphic.

Here's the final versions. Each are 400 px wide, and I included a full size image of the 3rd graphic, in case you want to link to it for those who can't read the text on the box of nails.

This one is full size, but resized to 400 px wide using the html code.

I just realized: It looks like eiither the hands are gigantic, or the zombie & coffin are midgit. Is there anything quick & easy you can do about that?

What do you mean by "zooming out the hands"?

I don't think it's a big deal - I put the graphics in the post as-is.  But if you update them tomorrow, I'll update them in the post.

I like it: The size disparity is not obvious when the pictures are separated by text (which is the expected usage).

jg, thanks for doing the work! "Genius is 90% perspiration."