I’m Retiring from Full-Time Climate Change Blogging


# # #

As many of you are aware, I’m a pensioner, a retiree…or had been.  Sales of my ebooks and the occasional tip/donation (many thanks to all who have donated over the years) have helped to pay the bills, but they haven’t covered them. So I’ve been forced to find another source of income.

The good news: I start a new job on January 6th.  The bad news: I have been spending 8 to 16 hours-per-day blogging, writing books and producing videos over the past few years, so my new focus will obviously cut into my time for climate change research and reporting.

The new job isn’t anything special.  I could leave it without a second thought if something unusual happened—like my ebook sales skyrocketed or I found funding for my research.  But as we well know, skeptics are not on the receiving end of billions of dollars in funding, so it may be a few years before I can afford to go back to blogging full time again.   I’m already going through blogger withdrawals.

I hope to continue to produce the monthly sea surface temperature and global land+sea surface temperature updates, but it’s unlikely that I will be able to continue to pump out other data-supported blog posts that illustrate the failings in climate models, that expose the flaws in the hypothesis of human-induced global warming and that the present the faults in the studies that support it.

I did start writing a new book back in October and I hope to complete it in the first half 2014. The working title is The Oceans Ate My Global Warming (Subtitle: And other nonsense from climate scientists.)   With the new book I’ve been trying to reduce the complexity of my presentations, by limiting my discussions to one topic per short (4-5 page) chapter (lots of short single-topic chapters).  Unfortunately, as all but a few best-selling writers know, it’s damn near impossible to support oneself on book sales.

I have really enjoyed my research and sharing what I’ve found. There is much more to be discovered. And it will be found through data analysis, not climate models.

I hope I’ve contributed to the climate change debate by illustrating and discussing many of the flaws in the hypothesis of human-induced global warming and by presenting the long-term effects of El Niño and La Niña events.  My thanks go out to everyone who has added to those conversations with questions and comments over the past five years—here and at WattsUpWithThat. I’ve learned a tremendous amount from you, thank you.  It’s hard to believe it’s been five years since my first posts about the long-term aftereffects of strong El Niño events.  (See the posts here and here and the cross posts at WUWT here and here.)  Together we have increased our understandings about the coupled ocean-atmosphere processes that portray themselves as El Niños and La Niñas.

For now, I’ll leave comments on, so that avenue is there if you have questions or comments…or if you’ve got a gazillion dollars you want to toss at me but you have questions about my donation/tip link.  The sidebar also includes “Categories”, which lists the topics I’ve covered, and, of course, there’s always my ebooks if you don’t want to search through almost 800 posts.  My cross posts at WattsUpWithThat can be found in two ways.  The link here brings you to the list of my WUWT posts starting in March 2013.  For earlier posts, you’d have to use my name in the search feature at WUWT.

A special thanks goes out to Anthony Watts for cross posting hundreds of my posts at WattsUpWithThat.  Through Anthony’s hard work, he’s turned WUWT into a marvelous, well-respected science blog.



# # #


I came back inside from Round 2 of shoveling snow a few minutes ago and I’ve got more comments than I normally get in a month here.  And my traffic is through the roof.  There was only one explanation—Anthony Watts had found and linked this post.  (Thanks, Anthony, for everything.  It has been a distinct pleasure working with you.)

Something else that was stated in the article Anthony quoted that needs to be addressed.  They falsely claimed that skeptics are some part of an organized effort.  Truth be told, Anthony Watts and I have never met. We’ve talked on the phone, maybe, 3 times. And our email exchanges have been about blog posts.   Someday, it will be my pleasure to meet and shake hands with Anthony Watts, but that time has not come yet

There doesn’t need to be any organization behind climate skeptics. Responding to the nonsense from the climate science community, and from their alarmist parrots, is enough to keep any group of people with common sense busy for years.

Thanks to all who have visited and commented on this thread.  All of the kind words are very much appreciated.  And a special heart-felt thank you for all of the donations/tips today.

Best regards.

# # #

UPDATE 2:  Thank you all for the send-off.  Remarkably, with all of the referrals from WUWT, this post made the Top 10 post on the WordPress What’s Hot list.

WordPress What's Hot 1-3-14

Thank you all very much.

# # #

UPDATE 3 (January 4, 2014):  Thank you to all the visitors from around the globe.  The remarkably high traffic for this post continues. It’s still in the WordPress Top 10 What’s Hot list.  Most of the visitors continue to come from WattsUpWithThat, but many are also coming from a post at SmallDeadAnimals (thanks, Kate) which is also a marvelous, award-winning blog if you’ve never visited.  Many thanks to Judith Curry for including this post in her “Week In Review” and to Tallbloke for the repost.

Thank you again very much for your very generous contributions/donations/tips—and for the renewed interest in my ebooks.

About Bob Tisdale

Research interest: the long-term aftereffects of El Niño and La Nina events on global sea surface temperature and ocean heat content. Author of the ebook Who Turned on the Heat? and regular contributor at WattsUpWithThat.
This entry was posted in About The Blog. Bookmark the permalink.

192 Responses to I’m Retiring from Full-Time Climate Change Blogging

  1. All the best and thanks for all your very informative articles Bob.

  2. Tried postin £50 thru but it is lost in translation. Thanks for keeping the candle burning for ‘true science’. My research shows human CC is 100% real, but I have had more respect for the ‘sceptics’ than for the emissions fraudsters. Have a meeting soon with one of the UK leading meterologists and Dr McGinness at the parlimantry science and technology committee – there is a whif of progress in the air that hopefully will allow for funding on the precursors to easterly wave formation – their (relative) absence is key to the ocean warming thus CC and the change to ev and air pressure in the E Mediterranean is the dominating factor. Many thanks again. Conor.

  3. Re:

    …as all but a few best-selling writers know, it’s damn near impossible to support oneself on book sales.

    This is, indeed, the sad state of affairs. The skeptic book-buying community is not as large as some of us suppose. It also appears to have been shrinking recently. More people are getting on with their lives, convinced by the hard work of people such as yourself that there’s no compelling reason for alarm.

    Kind regards, Bob.

  4. Craig King says:

    Well Bob that seriously sucks. You are my, and many many others, go to guy for information on the fascinating oceans. I look forward to your updates and you need to know that you have taught me a lot about oceans the climate and just how mendacious so many main stream scientists have been.


  5. Brent Buckner says:

    Thank you for having shared so much!

  6. Marcel Crok says:

    Thanks Bob, I really enjoyed reading your blogs and books. It’s a pity it didn’t generate more financial support. In Europe we tend to think that private funding is far more easy in the US but apparently this is not always the case.
    Could you share with us how many copies of each book you have sold?

    All the best and I do hope to see you back with another book soon,


  7. Bob Tisdale says:

    Marcel, thanks for the kind words.

    I would prefer not to list my book sales. But I will say that they dropped in November and December to about 10% of what they had been. Curiously, during that time, my blog traffic increased about 30%. So interest in my blog posts increased but book sales declined. Go figure.

  8. Brad says:


    But you are funded by big oil?

    Anyway, I rely on your analysis quite a bit and read your blog whenever there is something new. I also appreciate your videos. My hope is to continue to see your work from time to time on WUWT or here. It brought great insight into Sea Surface Temps. Thank you for all your hard work and I wish you much success in the future.


  9. Jim the bird says:

    This is truly sad. I do not believe there has been a better source for ocean temperature records and theory than your work.

  10. Anthony Watts says:

    As the saying goes, you are a “gentleman and a scholar”.

    My sincerest thanks for all you have done, and we all owe you a debt of gratitude.

  11. Pingback: For all you idiots that think climate skeptics are lavishly funded by ‘Big Oil’, read this | Watts Up With That?

  12. denniswingo says:

    Bob, I have greatly enjoyed your work and thank you very kindly for your diligence and care in research and presentation.

  13. Steve says:

    Thanks for your tireless exploration and sharing of the topic. I look forward to “The Oceans Ate My Global Warming”.

  14. John Shade says:

    You have made a tremendous contribution to climate analysis and theory. It is one which will continue for some time thanks to your ebooks and blog contributions here and on WUWT. I hope the job goes well and that once you’ve got the hang of it, you’ll be able to find more time and peace of mind to return to climate debate with more of your insightful analyses and suggestions.

  15. P Gosselin says:

    Sad news.
    But can certainly understand it. I’ve been blogging on the side with zero donations. Though blogging is fun, my family would be much happier if I returned to the normal life – just letting the fools and shameless liars run the world unhindered. Luckily I’ve managed to juggle everything so far but not sure if it’s worth keeping it up.
    Well Bob, hope you do keep contributing at least from time to time.

  16. Tim Ball says:

    Thanks for all your work Bob.

    It is a comment on the upside down world that traditionally young people entered academia and challenged the prevailing wisdoms. Now the challenges come from the older generation who recognize the problems for science and society. The young come already indoctrinated and believing the science is settled.

    You have done much to show the science, especially of climate change, is far from settled.

    From another unfunded and never received a penny of oil or energy company money senior, with thanks.

  17. wayne says:

    That pretty much sums up my situation too Bob (minus the new job starting Jan. 6th 😉 ). I’ve now spent about four years full time+ investigating this “global warming” situation in science. Since I have stayed close to physics and astronomy over the decades it led me to find the answers to my questions, wish other skeptical minds would also listen to what I too have found.

    We all appreciate your clear articles and efforts and hope you keep visiting here regularly.

    On money: I too can say that I have received ZERO cents from any funding sources at all, including “Big Oil” but I do wish that was not the case. It was always a gift from me to those that may listen and that seems to apply to you Bob also. Much appreciated.

  18. G. Karst says:

    The constant grind of putting meals on the table does tend to interfere with higher purposed labor. Perhaps the new job will lead you to additional contact networking which will enable you to find a position that allows for suitable exploitation of your many considerable talents. Any enterprise is extremely lucky to have you. Good luck and best wishes. GK

  19. Steve Keohane says:

    Bob, I want to thank you for your years of data collection, graphs and writing, blog posts, and methodology. I have learned a lot from you, not just the science, but how you handle yourself. You are an asset to humankind.

  20. jeremyp99 says:

    Cheers Bob and good luck. Your YouTube presentations on the oceans hugely illuminated this lay person.

  21. Eyal Porat says:

    As a representative of Big Oil (I heat my house with kerosin) I donated some petrol money AND purchased your latest book (which I intended doing anyway).
    I wish you all the best and hope reading much more from you, or alternatively that you will not NEED to write about climate science follies because the science will return to its senses (Yes.. as if…).

  22. Gary says:

    Bob, in the future when a science historian examines this era you will get more than a footnote for understanding and explaining the effects of ENSO more clearly than the professionals. If it’s time now to concentrate your energies on focused targets and at a slower pace, the so be it. Thanks for all of the enlightenment you have freely given away.

  23. Sad news Bob.

    I have written some dozen major articles all of which-like your work-takes up a vast amount of time in researching and writing. I have received not one penny piece.

    I’m inclined to agree with Pierre, I’m not sure its worth keeping up. So much effort for so little reward. How does one actually get hold of the funding that it is claimed that sceptics receive?


  24. Eric Anderson says:

    Thanks, Bob, for the hard work. Best wishes going forward.

  25. Gail Combs says:

    Thank you Bob,
    Being a retiree on limited funds sucks!

    I am glad you found a source of income. As others have said, history will treat you kindly.

  26. Nik says:

    And why is it that nearly 100% of all pro AGW (Nuccitelli’s, Trenberth’s, Mann’s, Sherwood’s etc) papers are all paywalled whereas non AGW (Spencer’s, Christy’s, etc) are NOT.

  27. John F. Hultquist says:

    We got DSL in Sept. of 2008 I then spent many hours trying to catch up with this “climate scare” thing, although I don’t remember when I first encountered your posts. While you haven’t made much money, your contribution has been monumental. If you never post again your legacy will be in the annals of scientific controversies.
    I’ve given up on Big Oil and the Koch Brothers but when my lotto winnings arrive I will share with you (and Donna at 7:31 above) and several others that will soon comment here, or have while I’m typing.

    I’ve learned much from you. Thank you.

  28. meltemian says:

    All the best for the new job.
    Don’t go far, we’ll need you to keep us educated.

  29. Slacko says:

    Good on you, Bob. Without your work I would probably have no understanding of ENSO whatsoever.

  30. philjourdan says:

    Thanks Bob. For all you have contributed. Best of luck with your new book.

  31. G. Watkins says:

    Very sad news indeed.Thanks for all your hard work.
    I feel slightly guilty, as I suspect do many readers, that I am unable to financially support you and the many other tireless bloggers. I am retired now with two dependent children at university and funds are tight. Only in the last few years have I had time to follow and understand the machinations of the CAGW alarmists and the political corruption which is rife in several western governments.
    You have been an inspiration, I have learned so much. Thank you and good luck.

  32. CRS, DrPH says:

    I’d like to a add my sincere thanks, Bob! Blogging does suck up the time, we all understand your situation. Please make a visit to WUWT as the situation vis a vis “global warming” continues to unravel, and best wishes with your new venture. You’ve made an impact and we all know it. Cheers, Charles the Dr.P.H.,

  33. John Whitman says:

    Bob Tisdale,

    Good luck in whatever your decisions are.

    Goals like yours and many independent sceptic thinkers can be achieved by non-direct means.

    Indirectly charted courses do arrive at intended destinations. Sailboat people always use this principle well. Powerboat people not so much.

    You are the sailboat equivalent of a skeptical intellect. Me too. : )

    Happy intellectual sailing to you in 2014.


  34. Bob:

    Thankyou for all your excellent work over the years. I and others are truly grateful.


  35. Gary Pearse says:

    Hello Bob. Sad to hear you are giving up something that you delight in and excel in. I’m much in your debt for the wonderful analyses you have presented. I’ve sent a donation that looks pitifully small in comparison to goods received. I suspect you will make your new job into something creative. I hope they pay enough to meet requirements.

  36. Matthew R Marler says:

    I shall miss your posts at WUWT. They were all worth reading and thinking about.

  37. Stephen Richards says:

    Bob, thanks for your efforts which have been much appreciated (but not enough I guess). I guess the next next trick is not to publish all your work on your blog and hold some back for your books. Many thanks and I hope your work is satisfying. From another old pensioner.

  38. Mike Bromley the Kurd says:

    Thanks for your tireless service to the sceptic community at large, Bob. It must be difficult to step back, especially with that gloating mob of bitter-faced hooligans pressing their attack.

  39. james griffin says:

    Thanks Bob….I have learnt a lot from people like you. Around this time last year there was heavy snowfall along the East Coast of America that the AGW mob claimed was caused by a warming of the Atlantic. You very promptly posted a graph showing no temp change in that sea area for 150 years.
    Game set and match, brilliant.
    Best of luck.


  40. ATheoK says:

    We’ll miss you Bob! Please do not be a stranger. Your work has gone far against the darkness and brought light to many.

    As a disabled pensioner myself, I certainly understand the need for employment, so enjoy your work!

  41. Old'un says:

    Bob – it is a very sad start to my (and I believe many others’) New Year to learn that you are being forced to give up the better part of your invaluable contribution to our understanding of the oceans’ influence on climate, free of the dogma promulgated by Dana et.al. elswhere in the blogosphere.

    I truly hope that we will hear from you again, in addition to your temperature trend updates, as you are one of a very thin red line countering the nonsense of CAGW by rational data analysis. I am sure however, that your good friend Mother Nature will continue to carry on its work in your absence and steadily demonstrate the poverty of the alarmists arguments.

  42. Bob Many thanks for your tremendously well researched posts – you have made a very valuable contribution to the climate conversation over the years. No one has ever pushed the donate button at http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com and like you I’m also retired so I understand your situation entirely.
    However I’m sure that you will not be able to refrain from posting from time to time when, as it inevitably will, some particularly egregious distortion of the data appears in the main stream journals.

  43. rpielke says:

    Hi Bob – Best wishes! I hope you do keep active to the extent you can as you have made very major contributions to climate research. Your work really should be funded by the NSF or other such grant awarding organizations. I suggest giving that some thought! 🙂

    With Warm Regards

    Roger Sr.

  44. Robert A. Taylor says:

    Limited income retiree – my situation as well. I can’t even keep up with the “climate change” situation, much less turn out good work in the field. You have amazed me by your productivity and good sense.
    Wouldn’t it be nice if just one multimillionaire or billionaire would fund actual science in the field.
    Thank you.

  45. I like to think that the winds of change will favor your future climate research and writings, Bob. It has been fun being acquainted, and you have helped my understanding of the science plenty. Re the never-ending accusations of big money/big oil fueling climate skepticism: Some of the people who believe we’re all being funded on our side ought to take a ride in either of my wife and my two vehicles, whose average age is 11.5 years, average mileage is 152,000, average list of recommended repairs too lengthy to go into. This is all part of the conspiracy, of course, by which I cloak my oily millions and — by extension — yours.

  46. Crispin in Waterloo says:

    Bob, your articles are some of the best material available on the subject of oceans and heat flow, bar none. What a major contribution. I for one read everything your blog on WUWT which remains my major starting point for any scientific investigation.

    The cold winds of reality blow hard these days. The idea of retiring is a distant dream – I never think of it save to put it off.

    A sub-topic I wish someone with a better pen that I have would pick up is the impact on atmospheric CO2 of melt water (absorbing it). I only ever got traction once and it was from someone who was very interested in finding out what I was up to in order to deflect attention from it because the implications are huge.

    Your circulation models link well to it: if oceans are rising from melt water, then each cubic kilometer of ‘new water’ will be taking CO2 out of the atmosphere, and the quantity involved is large. Assuming we are lucky and the world continues to slowly warm instead of rapidly freeze, you might consider (during coffee breaks of course) the disappearance of CO2 into the briny deep(er) for centuries at a time.

    I view you as yet another under-valued Canadian asset who should be employed on CBC’s Quirks and Quarks, unlike that clown who was on today telling us that “cold is weather, not climate; you gotta consider it is pretty hot in Australia and South Africa…’ and other baseless drivel. He managed to avoid mentioning all that melting ice around Antarctica. 🙂

    Stay well.
    I know you are coming back!

  47. fhhaynie says:

    I think us old retirees have a better understanding of how the earth works than many younger scientist who have been so influenced by politically motivated subjective research. I believe we are obligated to show them the error of their ways. Like you, I am convinced by my analysis of data that climate change is natural with little if any effect from burning fossil fuels. Unlike you, I have a comfortable retirement income but not from “big oil”. The federal goverment pays most of my bills. I retired from EPA, the Navy, and social security. CO2 is not a pollutant, and I will continue to analyze data to reveal to others this truth. I hope you will be able to find time to continue your research.

  48. jorgekafkazar says:

    Sad news, indeed, Bob. Your posts are among the very best on the subject, anywhere, and I’ve enjoyed commenting on them. I hope you can keep the blog going, even if at a comfortably small level. We are all in your debt, and you won’t be forgotten.

    Ich bin immer noch ein Slosher!

  49. wrecktafire says:

    Thank you, Bob. I hope the new job works out well, and that you can occasionally find the time to comment on topics related to your past researches.
    I’m sure I speak for many when I say you will be missed here at WUWT.

  50. TL Walker says:

    Thanks for your time and efforts. Sorry you are forced to get a job. I have appreciated your posts and will look forward to those you have time for. Good luck on your ebook sales.

  51. RonSin says:

    Thanks so much for all you have contributed to our climate knowledge over the years. I have enjoyed reading your material and learning from your research. Good luck in your future endeavors.
    Ron Sinclair

  52. herkimer says:


    This blog wil miss your invaluable input. I know I make a lot of use of your superb material. All the best from another retiree.

  53. wrecktafire says:

    Slightly off-topic: we should never tire of pointing out that the “funded by bad guy X” is a fallacy of irrelevance:

    “B. Attacking the Motive: This fallacy occurs when an arguer criticizes a person’s motivation for offering a particular argument or claim, rather than examining the worth of the argument or claim itself. Attacking the Motive follows the pattern:
    1. X is biased or has questionable motives.
    2. X’s argument or claim should be rejected.”


    Cynicism is not critical thinking–it takes no work at all, and contributes nothing to understanding.

  54. tomwys says:

    Good Grief!!! Its almost like a cylinder in the engine of realists began misfiring!!! Though we’ll be running rough in your absence, please consider a weekly or monthly update which I hope Anthony can post, and others will cross-post in turn.

    Your impact has been ENORMOUS, as is the debt of gratitude the intelligent and un-agenda driven World owes you!!!

  55. JWhelan says:

    Thanks for all the hard and many hours, days and years of work you have done. Your books were very informative to me. It helped to explain to me the ENSO/PDO/ADO cycles. I do pass this information along to my students. I am an adjunct at a local college and teach general geography. I have to convert these indoctrinated students into thinking critically for themselves. It does work! I will miss your comments on WUWT. Hopefully you will have the time to clarify the science in WUWT sometimes.

    I understand about retiring and needing funds. I also understood what you went through when you were the caregiver to your parents (I too am doing that now…along with retirement).

    Best of luck with your new job. I am sure that you will exceed their expectations of your work.

  56. rogerknights says:

    Here’s a link to my WUWT guest-thread, “Notes from Skull Island”, on the absurdity of the big oil / Contrarians connection:


  57. I couldn’t agree more with Roger Sr. I go to your site for anything sea ocean temp related, and have learned a great deal from your work. I hope you have time to continue your updates.

    Too bad all that Big Oil money didn’t pan out, but like you said, it isn’t hard to find volunteers to do the real research when the the “experts” have turned out to be professional Climatortionists whose results simply don’t make sense compared with the data.

    Thanks again,

    Mike Smith

  58. What, people who have skepticism about man-made global warming don’t have conferences in Tahiti paid for by “big oil?” Shocking, I was pretty sure I read about “climate” conferences in exotic locations, and it cannot be our poorly paid scientists and climate change activists, it must be you “skeptics” funded by big oil, right? 😉

  59. JC says:

    Just bought a book to add to the cause. The only Big Oil money I deal with is at the gas pump. Thanks so much for your informative posting, you, Anthony,Steve McIntyre and Lord Monckton converted me. Follow the science, not the politics. Best to you Bob.

  60. Janice Moore says:

    Dear Dr.* Tisdale,

    And so, you will soon turn the page and begin a new chapter. As Ms. LaFramboise said, you have worked your way out of your Science Warrior job (at least to the extent of it being a full time one). AGW is over. The enemies of truth have been reduced to fighting on the farthest borderlands, constantly on the defense. For some of our warriors, it is time to go back to civilian life. And that is not easy for you, I know. As you walk aboard to sail off on your new adventure on Monday, we will all be on shore, cheering you on. We all owe you so much. May you be in your new position as respected and valued as you are in the veritas in science community. You can know with 100% confidence that whoever will be benefitting from your intelligence, knowledge, and gracious manner will be blessed, indeed.

    Do come back and visit — often. We’ll leave the light on for you.

    Your grateful student,


    *You are a Ph. D. de facto; Einstein’s doctorate from Oxford was “honorary.”

    P.S. And…. a video (of course!)
    Yes, indeed, AGW is over (the con artists are being exposed and run out of town, heh, heh). The End. And some of the band members will lay their instruments aside to go off to other jobs. Some will remain to keep the tramps and no-goods at bay. And some, YOU, when they happen to be in town, will step back into place and blow the trumpet of truth. We are counting on that, Bob. Your place, front row, third from the right, will be there, waiting for you.

    And when you come back into town, with all of us townspeople cheering you on, you and all the Science Giants with all your skillful sounding of the truth, know that we are so proud of you and that you are loved.


    The best is yet to come.

  61. Clyde says:

    I’m going to miss your posts. They are written in easy to understand words. When I hit the lottery you can go back to blogging…I promise.

  62. A.D. Everard says:

    There will be many souls who will miss you, Bob. I think all book sales are down – I’m trying to make a living as an author of fiction and going nowhere (two books out and haven’t even covered my own costs for the book covers, so I’ll be back to work too in a year or so when the finances run out). I think it’s a general world-wide thing rather than an assessment of sceptical books, people have to eat or heat or in some other way look to their needs first. As and when the world recovers its senses, hopefully things like books sales will pick up.

    Thank you for all you have done. You have taught me a lot over the years and I have always enjoyed your posts.

    The very best to you and your family. I so hope things improve for you and that one day we’ll see you back again, full time and happy to help sweep up what’s left of the mess that was CAGW – it won’t disappear overnight.

    Cheers to you, mate,

    Allyson Everard

  63. > rpielke says: Your work really should be funded by the NSF or other such grant awarding organizations

    ROTFL. That made my day.

  64. catweazle666 says:

    That’s a shame, Bob.

    But best of luck, whatever you decide to do.

  65. johnbuk says:

    Bob, I bought your latest book (Climate Models Fail) and am always grateful for your blog posts from which I learnt a great deal. I do hope you find time to keep this ignorant UK taxpayer appraised of the real world and not the “model” one and in the meantime I wish you all the very best of luck in the coming years – you have earned our respect and gratitude.

  66. John West says:

    I, too, will miss your posts at WUWT. Good luck with your new job.

  67. David, UK says:

    I wouldn’t worry too much, Bob. All the negative efforts of the alarmists who tell us sceptics – in so many words – to “go forth and multiply” have had the desired effect; for multiplying is what we have been doing!

    Keep up the good fight as and when you can. Thank you, sincerely.

  68. Gerry Lightfoot says:

    Sad news indeed. The warmists have to delude themselves into thinking that they are up against a big money sceptic operation because with people like yourself, the sceptics have been so successful at picking apart their flawed work, and they know how many billions they receive to come up with their fraudulent and shoddy work. I declare that I am funded by Big Oil as I am a shareholder of BP and Shell but the dividend payments don’t amount to enough for me not to have to work.

    On the books front, I have recently read Donna excellent book and am currently reading The Cold Sun, and feel that I have enough for the moment to have a good understanding of real climate science. Wattsupwiththat provides ongoing updates on new papers and it would have to be a book that contains a lot of new science to make me buy another for a while. I do have a book on the green energy scam to read but that is slightly different. I am not into e-books really but will have a look at yours.

  69. Thanks for your contributions to the conversation. You will be missed.

  70. Bernd Palmer says:

    Bob, I want to express my sincere gratitude for what you have done over the past years. Not only were your posts the most conclusive, most convincing arguments that climate is about much more than just a greenhouse gas. But above that, you are a very gifted science writer who can explain causes and potential effects in easy to understand terms and always based on solid data. To my knowledge, nobody in the scientific climate sphere has yet been able to falsify your hypotheses.

    I’m sad to hear that you will stop your precious efforts to enlighten the world, but I understand the reasons. If the fossil fuel funds didn’t arrive at your bank account, blame your dog, he might have eaten the checks.
    Fare well and thanks!

  71. Dear Bob,
    I empathise with you in having to give up your full time research.
    I have coincidentally also been working for 5-years to bring an end to the Global Warming Scare Campaign, but putting in only about a quarter of my time.
    I became acquainted with your research only a year ago and I’m pleased you will continue to put our your monthly SST updates.
    You may recall that just prior to Christmas I asked if you could do a post in which you published charts similar to Fig. 2-31 in Supplement – 1 to ‘Climate Models Fail’ for the global oceans, the northern and southern hemisphere oceans, the North and South Pacific, the North and South Atlantic, the Indian Ocean, the Arctic Ocean and the Southern Ocean. Fig. 2-31 is the chart for the North Atlantic.
    I want to use the data from those charts in a letter I am writing to Mr Ian Macfarlane, the Minister in Australia’s Abbott government who has responsibility for the CSIRO.
    I don’t really know how much work would be involved, so please contact me privately to see if we can make arrangements for you to carry out the research for me on a bespoke basis.
    Congratulations on your climate model debunking books and my very best wishes to you for the future.

  72. philjourdan says:

    @Janice Moore – You have an excellent idea. At the very least I think that the readers and editors of WUWT should grant him an honorary Doctorate. It is worth more than the fake things Colleges give out these days.

  73. Bob Tisdale says:

    Laurie, I haven’t forgotten about the post I promised. I’m hoping to have it done before the end of next week.


  74. Keith Minto says:

    Thanks, Bob for your work over the years. It has been good, solid science and your fine contributions will be sorely missed.
    Keep in good health,

  75. Bob (not Tisdale) says:

    William Connelley, “ROTFL. That made my day.” You pernicious, sniveling, mendacious, ungracious, cowardly, pencil-necked progressive dimwit. Shall we mention your Wiki escapades?

  76. Bob Tisdale says:

    Thanks, Bob (not Tisdale). I didn’t feel like getting into it on this thread.

  77. William Connolley:

    re your post at January 3, 2014 at 3:11 pm.

    Thankyou for reminding us of what you are. It is by such comparisons that we can recognise the worth of people such as Bob Tisdale whose shoes you are not worthy to lick clean.


  78. An honours doctorate from the venerable company of real climate scientists and sceptics – I heartily second the motion. Conor

  79. Bob Greene says:

    Excellent work, Bob. I hope your new endeavor goes well.

  80. tallbloke says:

    Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop.

    Thanks, tallbloke.

  81. Jim Steele says:

    Thanks Bob for all your inputs. I have read posts from internet snipers like Sou who try to denigrate your posts as something that has only driven by profit seeking for book-sales. But as I know, more often than not, at most we only recover a fraction of our investment in time and money. A friend who is a professional editor told me that the average total sales for a self published book is 200, and overall if you sell more than 400 you are in the top 20%. Often it is just the editors who profit from a new book. Yet the internet snipers try to create ugly propaganda that we are being funded and perverted with secret wealth. But their fa;se accusations are just another example of the multi-pronged attack to suppress enlightened debate.

    I feel a kindred spirit, And like you, I see a tremendous need to provide the public with a scientific understanding that is too often kept out of sight due to the politics of climate change and fear.Whether we profit or not has never been the issue. I fear the general public will never know what a wonderful contribution you have made. I bought your book “Who Turned the Heat On” and it is a wonderful reference about El Nino and La NIna. I encourage others to buy it. It was worth every penny.

  82. Adios, William. You’re now in the spam filter.

  83. grumpydenier says:

    Shame to hear the news, Bob. It can be a dispiriting thing fighting against the massed ranks of the AGW vested interests.

    I’ll keep an eye out on the WP Reader and continue to add your output to my own newsletter, as and when I can.

    Good luck in the future.

  84. The Galileo Movement says:

    Thanks for all your efforts, hope to see you back again soon.

  85. ntesdorf says:

    Bob, Thank you for all your great work in the past. I am sad to hear that you have been pressed back into work which is not your main interest. We read your work with intense interest everytime that it appears and will continue to do so in the future. Thank you for your work and thank you for your diligence and care in research and clear presentation.

  86. John says:


    You’ll be back. I’m pretty sure you didn’t pick this up to become a millionaire. You did it because
    you didn’t think William Connolley and company were providing accurate answers. I’m pretty sure they will continue on with the same quality standards.

    Best of luck for the interim.

  87. Doug Allen says:

    Thank you Bob,
    When Roger Pielke Sr. says you ought to be funded by NSF- that is an honor. Your climate data output and analysis puts many of those other fundees to shame. Maybe Donna can write a piece. on NSF funding. That would be interesting!
    Looking forward to your future posts and your new book.

  88. Txomin says:

    The counter movement you’ve been part of has been the first and best social response that the Internet age has yielded. It’s history making and will not go unnoticed.

  89. Thanks Bob.

    I am still waiting for my first “big oil cheque” as well!

    Hope I can pick your brain in future again.


  90. hunter says:

    It has been a pleasure to read your posts over the years. I was tardy in the arena of of direct support, and today made a step in the right direction to correct that oversight. Thank you for your rational, well resoned and insightful work. It is my sincere hope that you will continue as you are able. My bet is that the next shoe to drop on the AGW dysfunction will drive your book sales up again. The great thing about having the body of work you have built is that it is durable. It will be there when the serious new skeptics show up to attempt a review of how the obvious problems with the alarmistvision were over looked, when the problems were so well discussed by you and others.
    Respectfully yours,

  91. Gunga Din says:

    William Connolley says:
    January 3, 2014 at 4:34 pm

    Adios, William. You’re now in the spam filter.

    Your time to spend dealing with CAGW online may be lessened but the value of what you’ve contributed (and I suspect from time to time will continue to contribute, as time allows) is priceless.
    There’s no grease on your palm.
    Thank you.

  92. Roy Spencer says:

    Good luck, Bob. You have helped inform many people on what is arguably the single most important mode of natural climate variability — ENSO — and the possibility that it can affect longer time scale climate than is generally accepted.

    But if I would have know you needed money, I would have sent you a few excess boxes of all this Exxon-Mobil money I use to start fires in the fireplace.

    LOL! I crack myself up.

    Thanks, Roy. And you cracked me up.



  93. Gunga Din says:

    I forgot to add, “You are an honest and ethical man. What price tag can be put on that?”

  94. wereatheist says:

    Going against the scientific mainstream needs lotsa evidence. You didn’t have it. Sorry to piss on your carpet.

    You didn’t piss on my carpet, wereatheist. You simply displayed your ignorance of the subject matter.

    Have a nice day.


  95. Janice Moore says:

    Thanks, Phil Jourdan! Glad you (and a couple of others) agree.

    Dear A. D. Everard, I’m sorry to hear that your writing is not selling as you hoped. Be sure to hand-deliver your resume (if you end up hitting the ol’ pavement, again — I hope you wont’ have to). Your exceptionally sweet, generous, personality (and that I can see this about you, based solely on your WUWT writing, is proof of your fine writing ability — whether due to its being a reflection of your genuinely kind, wise, heart or merely a manifestation of a highly creative imagination for fiction (you sure have me convinced, though!)…) will land you a job in no time!

    To you two whom this song by Meatloaf (smile, yes, I remember, PJ, and NO, not THAT one! waaaa!) fits so well, and to Bob,
    “Forever Young”

    The key to never growing old? Never harden your heart. The tender heart is forever young. To have a sharp mind with a hard heart is to be the walking dead …. and what use is money, then? “When God takes the measure of a {person}, He puts a tape measure around the heart.”

    With love,


  96. Eamon Butler says:

    Sorry to hear of your forced retirement, Bob. Many thanks for such a wonderful education over the years. You will be missed here at WUWT, but your work, I’m sure, will be cited often. Best wishes for the future.

  97. gregole says:


    I’ll be looking for your posts, even sporadic, around the blogs! Good luck in your new venture. I have always followed your posts and even read one of your books (I the IPCC Was Selling Global Warming.

    Always a pleasure reading you!

    Again, hope you’ll find some time in the future to keep up the great work!

  98. Ivor Ward (aka Disko Troop) says:

    It may well be that you have already won the battle, Bob. You have punched so many holes in the psycho babble that passes for climate science these days that their ship is trapped in ice, if not already sinking. Thanks to the cracks you have helped open up the general public are becoming wise to the shysters and frauds that are running the alarmist game. The war is shifting away from the science now and more fully into the political arena. Whilst the Gores, Mckibbens, Mandias and Nutticelli’s continue to preach to their hardcore converts the ordinary people now ignore them or treat them with the contempt they so richly deserve. You may not feel victorious but now the heavy mob who run these idiots, Grantham, Suzuki etc, are getting nervous. All their big money has gone in up front so that they can creep around the back like scavenging rats to keep their riches flowing. The people are not buying it anymore and it is now a political task to knock the profiteers out of their power cells. As Greenpeace once said…We know who they are and we know who is paying through the nose for their lavish lifestyles (OK..not quite a quote!)
    So thanks for all your work, and the work to come, (face it ..you are addicted to it !) Without you and Anthony, Steve, Ross, and many others, the harbingers of doom would be running the show at our expense by now.

  99. michael hart says:

    Many thanks, Bob.
    What you can still find time to do, will be appreciated more intensely.

  100. Pingback: I’m Retiring from Full-Time Climate Change Blogging | Bob Tisdale – Climate Observations | Cranky Old Crow

  101. Eli Rabett says:

    Jonice Moore: FWIW Einstein received his doctorate from Zurich in 1905.

  102. Steven Hales says:

    Bob, You will be missed. I always enjoyed reading your posts.

    Best of luck in all your endeavors

  103. Pingback: Week in review | Climate Etc.

  104. Turn to the dark side, announce to all you are a CAGW believer at RealClimate, and you’ll be swimming in Greenpeace/WWF/NRDC money. Me, I’d love to donate to your tip jar, but my GelbspanFiles.com work subsists entirely on a strings-free grant that BARELY pays my living expenses. Had I won – or if I do win – one of the major lotteries, a whole lot of skeptics would be rewarded for their work and I’d repay every penny of my grant.

  105. Thanks Bob for your hard and diligent work. I bought 2 of your e-books and am digesting them with pleasure. I love the way you have cut through the AGW B.S. and just focused on the facts. In fact I think that approach throughout the skeptic blogs is what has given them the credence and integrity to withstand and eventually defeat the un-scientific “alarmist machine”. Your work has played an instrumental and significant part in that victory! You should be proud of that.

  106. Bob Tisdale says:

    Eli Rabett: FWIW your reply to Janice Moore does not refute what she had written. Please go back and read her comment once more.

    Have a nice day.

  107. Andrew Partington says:

    Just bought your books from the Australian kindle store. Good luck. Thanks for all your hard work. I’ve enjoyed reading your posts over the years on WUWT, and I hope you don’t have to go back to work!

  108. cohenite says:

    Bob, your work has been inspirational; you are a true scientist.

  109. David Ball says:

    Mr. Tisdale, I want to say thank for your many years fighting the good fight. You were one of the first to recognize the baloney attempted to be foist upon the unsuspecting. I remain convinced that those like yourself will be vindicated by time and reality. All the best to you, sir.

  110. Janice Moore says:

    Oh, Bob, thank you. Your kind gallantry made my week! Yes, indeed. And, of course, YOU, comprehended what I meant and knew the facts of which that man is apparently unaware. And I was just now debating whether or not to bother… . You did it for me! What a guy.

    “Have a nice day.” LOL. #(:))

  111. Lynn Clark says:

    Janice Moore (and anyone else who cares):

    Thanks for the link to the Meatloaf song on youtube. As a long-time Meatloaf fan I’m always happy to listen to his masterful cover of what is actually a very old Bob Dylan song — performed among other places by Dylan at The Band’s farewell concert (The Last Waltz) on Thanksgiving day 1976 — on his “Couldn’t Have Said It Better” CD in 2003. Meatloaf’s version is one of the songs I’ve requested to be played at my funeral, whenever that time comes.

  112. TRM says:

    If you already own Bob’s books login to your local library and recommend that they buy one or two. My local one has purchased several that I’ve suggested over the years on various topics.

    I like to suggest “Who Turned On The Heat” because that one sounds like it supports CAGW slips by the CAGW filter people who think it supports that point of view. It is a great way to get Bob’s work more exposed as well.

    Thanks for all the work over the years Bob. I’ve learned tons from reading your books and blogs.

  113. E.M.Smith says:


    Sorry to hear it, but I fully understand. Over “several years” my payment from organized interests has been $1000 (entirely for an unbiased bit of data processing / preparation – I had the various GHCN data sets and knew them well enough to write some particular programs to process the data to find out what the data said. It was way less per hour of total programming time than I get from most contracts I do.) As a “contract computer guy” I saw it as no different from any other contract. Frankly, that works out to less total income per year of involvement with this field than my coffee budget for those same years…. (For those who don’t know, the coffee is typically free to the hired hand programmers at a contract site. I had to buy my own since I worked from home.)

    Eventually the retirement money runs thin. So as of last June I took a full time job. It’s nice to be able to eat something other than ham and beans, and be able to buy the occasional book “on a whim”… but I’m now faced with the simple fact that a job takes 8 hours of work time, 2 hours of prep and travel time, and then you tack on dinner and occasional grocery shopping, gassing up the car, or just catching your breath: It’s about 12 to 14 hours. After 8 for sleep, that’s up to 20 to 22 hours. 2 to 4 hours left over per day for EVERYTHING else. Email, phone calls, car maintenance, shopping, laundry, dish washing, etc. etc. There just isn’t much time at all left.

    Despite my best intentions to continue to make blog postings ( I’ve accumulated a dozen great ideas for postings…) I’ve only managed to get about one a week (or two weeks) done. Very frustrating.

    Whenever someone bleats about oil money funding skeptics, I just roll my eyes… The money and power structure is all on the side of the Global Warming Scare fuddites. Oh Well.

    Hopefully you will keep the site up as a reference and keep a place where your books can be bought. (Since I’ve finally got a bit of money I’m planning to buy some of them). Maybe you can win the lottery and get back to work here too 😉

    Thanks for all you have done, and may the wind be always at your back.

  114. bobl says:

    Good Luck Bob, I hope one of your books becomes a best seller and you can return… I know exactly what you mean, retired with kids at University is not a good place financially
    , it’s the same here. Come at least comment from time to time

  115. Janice Moore says:

    You’re welcome. And, thank you, Lynn Clark, it was so nice to know that SOMEONE listened to it (and enjoyed it, too). Thank you for sharing the song’s history. Yeah, that version is the best one I’ve heard (Rod Stewart’s isn’t quite there). That song will bring tears, no doubt, but, you will leave your grieving loved ones with a priceless gift of love from your heart: wisdom.

    I hope, however, that there will be no occasion for it to be played in such a setting for many, many, years to come.

  116. suricat says:

    Forced retirement! I said. Forced retirement!

    Two years ago, when Mum was placed into care due to her senile dementure, ‘I’ was forced into retirement because the ‘government’ didn’t want me on the ‘unemployment’ (no longer a ‘carer’) listing. I still don’t posses a bus pass and I still don’t consider myself a ‘pensioner’ (perhaps this may be seen as a symptom of denial).

    However, I’m ‘mobile’, have issues with ‘untruths’, still have a ‘fairly’ acute mind and an innate sense of ‘fair play’. I’ll always think of you as ‘TB’ (tallbloke [the ‘bigyun’]).

    I’ve shared scarce few e-mails with you and Tim, but feel free to use this method of coms if you need it.

    Good luck with your prospects. 🙂

    Best regards, Ray Dart.

  117. Thanks Bob does not even begin to say how grateful I am for the understanding of ENSO and Earth’s oceans I got from reading your words and studying your graphics. Your posts here get many quotes and links from my climate and weather pages.
    Best of luck! (you deserve it)


  118. Brian H says:

    Only five years? Huge contribution in such a short time.

  119. old engineer says:

    I want to add my thanks as a sometime commentor at WUWT, for your many enlightening posts at WUWT. I bought your book “Who turned on the Heat.” I am still digesting it, and it is my “go to” source for all things concerning the ENSO.
    You have made a difference in the world that will be recognized and applauded as one who helped bring the world to reject CAGW.

    Thanks again, and best wishes for the future.

  120. F. Ross says:

    I hope I’ve contributed to the climate change debate by illustrating and discussing many of the flaws in the hypothesis of human-induced global warming and by presenting the long-term effects of El Niño and La Niña events.

    You have contributed – and with much merit.
    I have enjoyed reading your posts on WUWT though I have usually not felt qualified to comment.
    Hoping all the best for you and that you may find the time to post an occasional article.

  121. Bob, no, you know, I’m not satisfied with this. Not at all! How much would it take to keep you going? If we got 10,000 people to donate $10 a year, would that be enough? What if we made it $1 a month?($120k pa)

    There must be a better way to do this, and we grown-ups need to get serious. It’s crazy that we rely on government-sausage-machine-science, and dutifully pay our taxes of thousands every year but we can’t independently create say 20 full time jobs for people checking and critiquing the government output.

    Yes, I’m as bonkers as you and none of us want to ask for money, but in the end we don’t survive on thanks and praise alone. It’s time to be smart. Science needs truly independent researchers. And those truly independent researchers deserve renumeration that means they can send their kids to decent schools, afford health care, fix the bathroom, and go on the odd holiday. At the moment, they’re self-funding — they raise the money through other work and shares

    If anyone out there knows how to set up tax deductable non-profits (or understands the feasibility of it – is it worth doing?) you could make a big difference by pointing out where we ought to be aiming, and the short-cuts to get there… the independent real science sector would so appreciate legal and accounting advice.

    Greenpeace and WWF can do it. Why are we willing to accept that skeptical scientists can’t?

  122. mitigatedsceptic says:


  123. ozspeaksup says:

    I also will get the local library to buy hard copy and suggest the ebook option as well.
    Jo Novas response is a goodie. as a pensioner, like many its a battle to get by- but for something this important..well maybe about time instead of just reading your posts at wuwt and fowarding em to everyone, I as well as others make the effort to help keep the people who Really DO! know the science- keep doing it.

  124. Bob Tisdale says:

    Jo, I’m not happy about my present situation–having to give up something I truly love–but you’ve raised questions that I can’t answer. It is my intent this year to make a concerted effort to find funding for my research, meaning the new job is just temporary, but your comment adds other dimensions to it.

    It is definitely something that needs to be investigated further, because there are a lot of skeptical researchers who would benefit.

  125. Bob Tisdale says:

    ozspeaksup, thanks for the thought of libraries, but my books are only in ebook form. I looked at the costs of publishing hard copies. Because of the number of color illustrations (hundreds), the cost (not sell price) of hard copies was well over US$100. I couldn’t see more than a handful of people spending that much money for a copy of one of my books.

  126. Bob Tisdale says:

    Jo, further to your thoughts: I had considered a funding drive–the PayPal donation/tip link allows for monthly contributions–but I did not think it would be well received. And finding a job was the realistic temporary action, an option that might last for a couple of years.

  127. Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter) says:

    Thanks for everything you put into the argument, Bob. Sorry to see you go, and hope you may come back some day.

    VERY sorry to see someone like eli rabbit mucking up the comments.

  128. johnmarshall says:

    When your new book appears I will have a copy. Many thanks for your efforts and excellent posts and don’t get too bored by the new work, remember there are hundreds of friends out here who look forward to your posts so please do not feel alone.
    Best of luck, perhaps a philanthropist will come along for extra research that will lighten the darkness of what is now climate science.

  129. Richards in Vancouver says:

    Mr. Tisdale, JoNova is right, mostly.

    Note the last word in my first sentence: mostly. We’re even skeptics about each other! We simply cannot adjust our thoughts in order to partake in GroupThink. Those thoughts have been too hard won to be thus compromised. There is no WWF for us. That is our weakness.

    It is also our strength. We’re a bunch of ornery, cantankerous nuts, and we’re too tough to crack despite the constant hammering by Our Intellectual Superiors.* We’ve come to our conclusions by many separate paths, and we’re really united on only one thing: we all hate shoddy, mendacious, power-grubbing quasi-science. I don’t think we can make a Greenpeace or a Sierra Club from this foundation.

    We’ve all come to the Skeptical view via our own particular paths. For example, Steve MacIntyre hates shoddy statistics. Anthony Watts hates shoddy data. As a quondam historian I hate shoddy history. The only thing we’re a bunch of is a bunch of eccentrics.

    But look! As a cloud of individual buzzing, biting, stinging insects we’re beginning to prevail. No single insecticide can get us all. We drive the True Believers to ever more foolish action, and it shows. It’s being noticed. With the not inconsiderable help from Mother Nature we’re starting to win. This may even be (thank you, Winston) the end of the beginning.

    Mr. Tisdale, you’ve done your bit and much, much more. Be not downcast. You didn’t quit while we were losing. In fact, you haven’t quit at all. Rest. Recharge yourself. Whenever you can contribute, you know how welcome you will be.

    I’ve sent along a bit to help. I figure it like this. 20% as a bucker upper. 20% to an outstanding fellow Canadian. 20% because you’ve pissed off some trolls mightily (there are a few, but they’ll all have to settle for a lousy one-fifth between them). 20% for your fine work. And 20% from Small Oil: until recently I owned a quarter interest in a small gas station in a small town in central British Columbia. And the final 20% because to an historian math is sometimes hard.

    Wayne Richards

    *Thanks to Small Dead Animals for that phrase.

  130. Energetic says:

    Hello Bob,
    everybody who has written comments articles etc knows how much effort has to go in them before You can publish. Your stuff held up remarkably well and the relief of the foolish stoat is just another backing.
    I hope it will be just a pause, because i think you have the problem we all have: can’t stop asking questions…..

    Happy New Year

  131. Jimbo says:

    Good luck and I can understand. It pees me off when I hear “fossil fuel funded”. Oil companies don’t need to fund ANY scepticism as, apart from coal maybe, their interests are maintained no matter what happens this decade. Consumption continues apace! Co2 output continues apace. The execs sleep tight. The well funded denialist machine is a myth as you have highlighted.

    PS My only interest in fossil fuels is that I use them. That’s it.

  132. No good deed goes unrewarded…….thanks Bob
    you have given laymen like myself the truth we
    Need to battle this b.s. /…amazingly with no $

  133. w.w.wygart says:


    Thanks for all of your past efforts; ‘keeping up’ with the science will be a bit more difficult without you. Keep up the good work – when you can.

    Best regards,


  134. jfreed27 says:

    Denial kills. Thanks for dropping out.

    jfreed27, thank you for broadcasting your ignorance. If you understood what I do, you would know that I deny nothing. I present data–and the outputs of climate models. From that I see a very crappy field of science, as does anyone with common sense.

    And thank you displaying your lack of reading comprehension. Go back and read the title of this post. I haven’t dropped out. I’ve simply cut back.

    Have a nice day, now, ya’ hear.


  135. Neville says:

    Hi Bob,
    sorry to hear you’re leaving full-time blogging! I rarely comment on WUWT, but i read it voraciously, and I learn HEAPS – and a great big lot from YOUR work!
    Thank you, thank you, thank you!
    All the best,

  136. What climate models?

  137. Oops. That comment should have been in response to jfreed27

  138. Bob Tisdale says:

    Conor McMenemie says: “What climate models?”

    The models stored in the CMIP3 and CMIP5 archives, which were used by the IPCC for their 4th and 5th Assessment Reports. Their outputs are available to the public in easy-to-use format through the KNMI Climate Explorer. I written dozens of blog posts and two books about how crappy those models are.


  139. John Whitman says:

    Bob Tisdale,

    Do you have a current curriculum vitae that you want to share? Key readership with your permission might spread it around . . .


    PS – I have unretired several times. Currently retired.

  140. Bob Tisdale says:

    John: My CV for climate science is basically this blog.


  141. Peter Taylor says:

    thanks for all your hard work Bob – your material has always been useful for my own research. I too recently took my pension and book sales add just a little to that….I am looking for some funding right now to follow up some ideas that you might like to join in with – if the money manifests, I will make a proposal – I admire your thoroughness.
    with high regard….

  142. CoRev says:

    Bob, gonna miss your insight. I’ve closed down two blogs in my retirement, but luckily didn’t do it for income. I can attest it takes tremendous amounts of time to keep them up and current.

  143. hunter says:

    jfreed represents a great example of how debilitating CO2 obsession can be.

  144. Ricky says:

    This doesn’t exclude the possibility that the big-wigs are paying billions to perpetuate the skeptic movement. After all, somebody could be stealing the dough, and depending on you guys to keep up a good front for peanuts.

    Perhaps we should look into this as a business opportunity. You could write one blog for the big bucks on the alarmist side, and secretly fund 8 or 10 blogs on the skeptic side. It’s win-win!

  145. Sigmunb says:

    Thanks for all your efforts,
    to bad we will be seeing less from you in the future but hopefully you will have the time and energy to post at WUWT from time to time. I always found your posts to be educating and will thank you for all the work you have put in. I assumed you had an academic position that gave you time to promote your research but when that is not the case I see only to well how hard it is to make do as a freelance blogger/author.

  146. Kip Hansen says:

    Bob ==> Thank you for all you’ve done. Blogging at your level can only be a labor of love — God bless you in your future endeavors. Do try to keep at least a finger in the pie. All my best.

    Kip Hansen

  147. jim hogg says:

    Time and time again you brought a powerful and independent intellect combined with balanced judgement to a very complex and emotionally drenched subject, you identified the weaknesses in the mainstream positions, led your evidence, argued logically, concisely and cogently, and you didn’t ever showboat or let ideology degrade your work. You’ve been an inspiration and example to many Mr Tisdale. May you have fair winds and following seas and get safely to harbour – but not for a long time yet . . . You’ve still got too much to do . . . All the best from a sceptical Scotsman.

  148. Re the useless climate models – my submission to the UK parliament energy and climate comiittees AR5 review pointed directly at the met office failures in that area. If we do manage to have a public hearing and am called to give evidence it will be with great pleasure in handing over why their models are faulty. Reduced Easterly Wave cloud mass was, is and always be the issue.

  149. kramer says:

    Thanks Bob for all you’ve done! Good luck!
    – Mark

  150. David Ball says:

    jfreed27 says:
    January 4, 2014 at 9:28 am

    “Denial kills.”

    Just ask Chris Turney.

  151. John F. Hultquist says:

    Bob, Jo & others

    Regarding funding:

    I can only speak for 2 people. We have enough to take care of ourselves. We volunteer a lot of time using skills we have. My wife, Nancy, plays music (fiddle, for her) (old time tunes) with several others at nursing homes and such plus a few community events at the Adult Activity Center and others. I volunteer to work on hiking trails – make new ones and maintain existing ones. I also help my neighbors (one example: cutting, splitting, and hauling firewood for an elderly couple) in our rural area. There is some travel and other costs involved. Such are relatively small.

    I can name a dozen climate skeptics I would like to fund. We can’t do much, although on special occasions I try – like when Climate Audit’s system crashed a few years ago. But, if we liquidated everything and became homeless and split the money to the 5 or 6 or 10 blog authors (many having commented here), the total would be as a rounding error to the balance sheets of those funding the CAGW crowd. Those sources include major governments, especially the USA, major foundations, and very very rich individuals.

    We love you folks, but I don’t think we can fund you.

  152. vigilantfish says:

    Hi Bob,

    I doubt my one-time contribution will make much of a difference – think of it as a late Christmas present in gratitude for all you have taught me about various ocean temperature cycles. You’ve really come a long way from your earliest WUWT posts as your communication and teaching skills have truly blossomed. The information I have learned from your posts has helped me build convincing arguments (judging by the response of students) for natural shorter-term climate cycles, as opposed to ‘global warming’, as the explanation for what is going on in the climate. I look forward to your future occasional posts and hope your new job will give you some degree of personal satisfaction as well as the means to survive.

  153. Pingback: How the GW myth is perpetuated - Page 42

  154. Chad says:

    Bob, thank you very much for the information you have provided us over the years, as it has been very educational and helpful our endeavor to counter the claims by the CAGW crowd.

  155. johanna says:

    Bob, you are a gentleman and a scholar, and your work has added to the sum of human knowledge in the tradition of the Victorians of whom the words above were originally said. However, as in Victorian times, an independent source of income is pretty much a requirement.

    I join with those above in thanking you for your work, which has taught me a great deal. Also, your personal and professional courtesy in dealing with comments and questions (I speak only from reading WUWT) is a lesson that many could learn from.

  156. suyts says:

    Damn. Bob, thanks for the wonderful contributions you’ve given us all over the years. Best wishes for the future. Do pop in from time to time.


  157. Pingback: Oh Damn …. I Missed This …. Bob Tisdale Retiring From Climate Blogging | suyts space

  158. Mac the Knife says:

    I have been a student of yours for the past 4 years, via WUWT. You have greatly aided my feeble attempts to understand the impact of ocean currents and heat transfer on regional and global climates. You have always conducted yourself as a true professional and your presentations have become models of clarity for layman understanding. That is a rare and precious skill! Thank You!
    I have forwarded a contribution, in the hope it (combined with many others) may bring you back to regular blog posts soon.

    Blue Skies!
    Mac the Knife

  159. tango says:

    Bob I am a retired pensioner in Australia together we will beat them, we now have them on the run whatever you are doing in the future look after your health all the best from Australia

  160. Lars P. says:

    Thank you very much for your work! There may be as Tim Ball says:
    January 3, 2014 at 11:35 am
    It is a comment on the upside down world that traditionally young people entered academia and challenged the prevailing wisdoms. Now the challenges come from the older generation who recognize the problems for science and society. The young come already indoctrinated and believing the science is settled.

    But hopefully this work will help the even younger generation to challenge the climate chruch mantra. It is too much indoctrination, too much consensus and not enough science there.

    Also as Jo Nova says:
    joannenovaJo Nova says:
    January 4, 2014 at 4:12 am
    There must be a better way to do this, and we grown-ups need to get serious. It’s crazy that we rely on government-sausage-machine-science, and dutifully pay our taxes of thousands every year but we can’t independently create say 20 full time jobs for people checking and critiquing the government output.

    This may go even deeper. Too much of the science is done by consensus and there is not enough challenge. Consensus thinking was mostly hindering and not allowing for new revolutionary ideas.

    But yes, step by step maybe a first start would be – as Jo says – to get better organised:
    “If anyone out there knows how to set up tax deductable non-profits (or understands the feasibility of it – is it worth doing?) you could make a big difference by pointing out where we ought to be aiming, and the short-cuts to get there… the independent real science sector would so appreciate legal and accounting advice.”

  161. cdquarles says:

    Dag nab it Bob. I’ll miss you. I’ve been remiss in visiting your site since I’ve had to put my custom built computer back together a few times. A good HDD died, but not before I could image it. I bought a replacement … which promptly died (What!). I bought a second … which also died (never happened to me before … I have had equipment fail in the first 30 days, but back-to-back). I am still on the backup system.

  162. That’s sad, but it is life. I’ve always learned something new from your articles and they helped me realize the oceans and their complex behaviour are the key to the climate variability. Thank you and best wishes.

  163. suricat says:

    ‘Bob’ (TB)!

    I’m not proficient on ‘tax issues’, but when I was a Scout Leader (many, many moons ago), ‘Cub Scout/Scout’ parents were given the opportunity to pay ‘subscriptions’ on an annual basis TAX FREE!

    I can’t remember the term, it was something like a ‘concessionary/annuity’ payment???


    The whole point to this is that an individuals ‘taxation rate’ can be lowered to a ‘gross income’ level that endures a lower rate of taxation which releases more tax free income when these payments are made.

    However, you would need to make ‘yourself/website’ a ‘charity’.

    This needs clarification. 🙂

    Best regards, Ray.

  164. Bob MacLean says:

    Sorry to hear this Bob. I was also very disappointed to see the crass comment from William Connolley (Stoat). The recent post on his blog regarding Chris Turney and Cli-Tanic was comparatively balanced and I was beginning to wonder if he’d turned over a new leaf – seems not!

    I’ve bought and enjoyed your books as well as your blog posts. Modest donation from another senior citizen now winging its way by Paypal – wish it could be more. Email from Paypal says it’s gone but the Sendowl confirmation page is still showing “awaiting confirmation”. I hope for your sake there’s no glitch. Let me know if the payment isn’t received at your end.

    I look forward to reading your ongoing occasional posts.

  165. TLMango says:

    The oceans part in climate study is one of the most difficult to get a handle on. You have made it understandable. We will know that you are gone. Good luck in all that you do.

  166. geran says:

    97% of what I know about ENSO I learned from Bob! 🙂

    The books, the posts, and the youtubes are all top notch. With your talent, Bob, I expect we will hear from you again. You have much to contribute.

  167. Espen says:

    Thank you so much for your very valuable contributions. I’m glad you hope to still provide your monthly SST updates which IMHO is the best information source there is for us interested laymen who want to stay updated on SST evolution. If you manage to continue that, you’ll continue doing a better presentation work on SST trends than most well funded climate agencies and research centers provide.

  168. Dave in Canmore says:

    Your contribution to not just the science but our education is not easily measured. Though if it could be measured, it ought to be broken down into its logical subsets! 🙂

    Let me be another voice of grattitude for all your work. I am very grateful for your clear explanations, your data presentations and your patience to answer our questions over the years.

    Thank you so much and good luck in the future.

  169. Pingback: For all you idiots that think climate skeptics are lavishly funded by ‘Big Oil’, read this | CACA

  170. Pingback: Anthropogenic Global Warming–2014.

  171. Dave grogan says:

    Hi Bob I`m no scientist and I don`t always understand what you are talking about but your site has been a regular and enjoyable read for a good few years now. You are very much an international treasure: honest, fair and a climate science chum to thousands (probably millions). Bob, why not just tell your fans how much you need to continue doing your invaluable work. I feel sure that many would chip in a few bob….get the job if we don`t cough up. You`re an invaluable and irreplaceable part of the fight against alarmism and for science. Just put up a thermometer and I`m sure you`ll be surprised how soon you reach your target.

    Best Regards

    Dave Grogan

  172. Brian H says:

    Thermometer! Annual campaign. It will work.

  173. Pingback: RealClimate Co-Founder Exposes His Inability to Grasp Complex Subjects | Watts Up With That?

  174. Pingback: RealClimate Co-Founder Exposes His Inability to Grasp Complex Subjects | Bob Tisdale – Climate Observations

  175. Mario Lento says:

    Bob: I will purchase your next book as I have your last two books. I challenge everyone here to also buy at least “Who Turned Up the Heat”. It’s a fantastic read for both the the technically astute to the technical novice. I wish you luck sir.

  176. son of mulder says:

    Bob, I’ve had a word with Big Oil and the Koch brothers but I’m afraid they are not interested in funding a Climate Sceptic. As I see it Climate Sceptics are dangerous to the Oil Industry because they encourage things like a sensible strategic energy policy such as nuclear power, whereas if governments continue along the track of wind power it is inevitable that premium priced hydrocarbons will be required to fill the gap between fantasy and reality.

    Keep doing what you can because your work is much appreciated.

  177. Ken Stewart says:

    I have been busy the last few days with Australian data and only just this morning checked your blog. Your insights have improved our understanding of ENSO immensely. Who Turned Off the Heat was excellent. Best wishes with the job and I look forward to your occasional posts, and, hopefully, your full time return in the not too distant future. Thank you.

  178. WillR says:


    Best wishes in your new endeavors — wherever they take you.

  179. hswiseman says:

    Amazing how averse the AGW crowd is to research that relies upon scientific observation acquired through reliable instruments.

    Actually, AGW propaganda kills, as any real carbon control instituted in pursuit of this fantasy will only further immiserate the poorest corners of the world.

  180. Pingback: Watt about Bob and William | And Then There's Physics

  181. suricat says:

    suricat says: January 3, 2014 at 11:39 pm

    I can’t apologise enough Bob! I got here via Tallbloke’s site and I’ve wrongly associated you with TB! Rob, Bob, Robby and Bobby begets from Robbert, not Rog, which begets from Rodger. 😦

    The trouble is, you both share the same ‘Surname’ of ‘Tisdale’!

    Best regards, Ray Dart.

  182. David A. Evans says:

    Classy William Connolly,

    Janice. Someone who, as far as I know only has a BA but was a full Professor! Freeman Dyson.

    Bob, sorry to hear of your difficulties, I would help if I could but I’m struggling to pay my energy bills.

    Having said that, during the Summer months, I may be able to stretch to £5/week. Not much I know but as they say, “Every little helps”.


  183. thojak says:

    Big THANKS for all your superb efforts over the time I’ve been thankfully ‘lurking’ your blog, Bob!
    Brgds from Sweden

  184. Kristian says:


    I’m so glad to have found your blog a few years ago. It was what woke me up to the whole ‘global warming’ travesty. It got me addicted. No climate blogging for me as of yet. Still thinking about it, though. Don’t think I’ve got the time.

    Your ‘egg of Columbus’ style findings are undisputable (you’ve simply nailed it! and still, sadly, the world refuses to realise), your way of putting forward your arguments and your analyses of the data are so clear, sound, logical and levelheaded, never drawing conclusions outside what the data allows you to, that it’s always been a pleasure reading and following you. I owe you a lot.

    All the best, many thanks and regards from Norway!


  185. omanuel says:


    I want to express my sincere gratitude for your efforts to confront tyrannical “consensus science,” “post-normal science,” “settled science,” etc. with empirical reality.

    With kind regards,
    – Oliver K. Manuel

  186. DC says:

    Hi Bob,
    Sorry to read you’ve had to curtail the fantastic work but great to see you’re still around!
    A request if I may: within the last week, I believe, you produced a graph showing NA SST over the last decade showing a net cooling. I think it showed -0.01C ;-). Despite checking here and Ant’s place, etc, it remains elusive. Could you provide a link to it?


  187. Bob Tisdale says:

    DC: I also remember including that illustration in a post recently, but I can’t find it either. I may have linked it in the text, which makes it harder to find. Or maybe I added it to a comment. Here’s another one that I prepared for my upcoming book.

    AMO May Have Peaked

  188. DC says:

    Brilliant, Bob. Might help put the clampers on this nonsense at http://caledonianmercury.com/2014/01/21/shrinking-wild-salmon-starve-at-sea-as-north-atlantic-warms/0044512.

    Book purchase and library request for stocking incoming.


  189. Tom Graney says:

    Hi Bob: I’ve been looking for a place to ask you a question and this is the only place I could find. I’ve read a great deal of your writings on WUWT, and I want to thank you for all your good work. Yesterday, I was reading your “Manmade Global Warming Challenge” and I have a question. You attribute the sea surface warming trend in one part or parts of the ocean to El Nino events. Doesn’t the long term effect of these events have to be neutral with respect to global temperature? Otherwise, over the long term, these events would cause a lot of warming. During the charging phase, they are storing heat, which is released during the discharge phase. It seems to me that during the charging phase, it should contribute to cooling if the discharge phase contributes to warming.


    Tom Graney

  190. Bob Tisdale says:

    Hi Tom Graney. Thanks for buying my book. Your explanation is missing a few important points. The La Nina is not sucking heat from the atmosphere, it’s simply releasing less heat than normal from the tropical Pacific to the atmosphere. And the recharge of heat within the tropical Pacific during the La Nina is caused by an increase in solar radiation that warms the tropical Pacific to depth.

  191. Tom Graney says:

    Bob, I’m not trying to explain, only to understand what you’re saying and I probably did not ask my question very well, so I beg your understanding to let me try one more time. I’m specifically referring to the chart on p. 28 titled “With Effects of Strong El Nino Events Removed.” I think I understand how in the short term (a decade or two) the El Nino can cause generalized warming. Is the warming of El Nino events over a longer period of time cumulative? That’s my question.

    I am a retired chem engr.

    Thanks again.

    p.s. I did not purchase your book, I just clicked on a link and there it was. Hope you knew that. I’ll give you a tip though.

  192. Bob Tisdale says:

    My mistake, Tom. You said in your comment that you had downloaded the free essay “The Manmade Global Warming Challenge” and for some reason I replied about my book. There was no reason to tip me for the essay so I’ll refund your tip.

    To answer your question: Yes, the warming is cumulative…with a qualifier. An El Nino releases sufficient warm water from beneath the surface of the western tropical Pacific to “almost” permanently raise the sea surface temperatures of the Atlantic, Indian and West Pacific Oceans. Please scroll ahead to page 68, which is a discussion of the South Atlantic-Indian-West Pacific data. We’ve removed the North Atlantic because it has another mode of natural variability called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation that was adding to the effect of the strong El Ninos. If we remove the North Atlantic data, we can see that the sea surface temperatures of the South Atlantic-Indian-West Pacific subset decays with time, but because the next El Nino occurred before the decay was complete, the 1997/98 El Nino added to the effect of the 1986/87/88 El Nino.

    Sorry about the mix-up about the book. I’m off to PayPal to refund your tip.


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 )

Connecting to %s