Hitchens on Palin: ‘A Disgraceful Opportunist and Real Moral Coward’

Opinion • Views: 26,286

Nobody will ever accuse Christopher Hitchens of being shy about expressing his opinions.

FLV Video

Don’t be too hard on her. She didn’t write that piece and she probably hasn’t read it. I doubt she could either read or write it. Everything she does is for effect, and is always deniable. She could switch back in a minute. At the moment she thinks her tea party crowd wants to hear this kind of thing so she’ll say that. She’s been out to say, ‘well, I don’t know but I think the President ought to produce his birth certificate. I’m not saying it isn’t a good question. Then later, cause she’s got to go to the Gridiron dinner in Washington, and learn how to use a knife and fork and be taught by Fred Malek. She takes it back. She’s a disgraceful opportunist and a real moral coward.

His take on the Obama administration’s Afghanistan “surge” policy is also worth hearing.

Jump to bottom

397 comments
1 Gang of One  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:20:35pm

Well, he certainly has an opinion.

2 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:20:55pm

Hitchens the Elder...

3 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:23:01pm

re: #2 ArchangelMichael

Except that Hitchens loathes organized religion.

I like that Hitchens focuses on Malek here.

4 karmic_inquisitor  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:23:02pm

Almost as harsh as his Bob Hope eulogy.

Way to go Hitch.

5 karmic_inquisitor  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:24:03pm

re: #4 karmic_inquisitor

Hitchens on Hope

6 Sharmuta  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:25:22pm

Christopher's Afghanistan insights were spot on.

7 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:25:54pm

Sorry Hitch... We can't be there forever.

8 Irenicum  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:27:23pm

Spot on Hitch.

9 Sharmuta  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:28:30pm

They were very keen to cut him off. None of them wanted much to do with his comments on Palin.

10 Girth  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:29:15pm

Hitchens on Falwell:

The man does not pull punches.

11 Kragar  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:29:27pm

re: #7 recusancy

Sorry Hitch... We can't be there forever.

Which is why we still have bases in Germany and Japan 60+ years later.

12 Petero1818  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:29:44pm

Well said! I wish more people would be willing to say the tough things that need to be said about her.

13 Glen Davidson  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:30:20pm

Easy hitting Palin, while forgetting his massive shifts over the years.

Nothing really wrong with it, except that he's so clearly playing to an audience who was prejudiced against her from the beginning (I'm not saying she hasn't proven a lightweight), without being in the slightest bothered by their prejudices.

Glen Davidson
[Link: tinyurl.com...]

14 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:30:50pm

re: #6 Sharmuta

Christopher's Afghanistan insights were spot on.

I'm glad he finally mentioned the 2 elephants in the room that Obama (and to some extent Bush) is content to ignore. The very real need for stronger ties and better relations with India, and the fact that the Taliban was originally a Pakistani puppet government for Afghanistan.

15 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:31:38pm

re: #11 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Which is why we still have bases in Germany and Japan 60+ years later.

Those bases had little to nothing to do with nation building, though, after the original occupation. Both Germany and Japan had mature, productive societies that happened to take wrong turns. Democracy and law were not foreign to them.

16 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:33:45pm

re: #7 recusancy

Sorry Hitch... We can't be there forever.

We have a situation where the bad guys take the winter off in Pakistan & then return to fight in the spring... broadcasting a withdrawal date is not smart for anyone in any conflict.

17 Aceofwhat?  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:35:15pm

re: #16 brookly red

We have a situation where the bad guys take the winter off in Pakistan & then return to fight in the spring... broadcasting a withdrawal date is not smart for anyone in any conflict.

Ahhh...wintering in Lahore...soothes the spirit

18 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:36:12pm

re: #17 Aceofwhat?

Ahhh...wintering in Lahore...soothes the spirit

might as well wait there till the Yankees go home...

19 Kragar  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:36:30pm

re: #15 freetoken

Those bases had little to nothing to do with nation building, though, after the original occupation. Both Germany and Japan had mature, productive societies that happened to take wrong turns. Democracy and law were not foreign to them.

And Afghanistan is still a long long way from even being close to post war Japan or Germany. So either let the Armed forces engage the enemy to win or pull out now, but don't set an arbitrary feel good date and leave.

20 KenJen  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:36:32pm

He needs a new doo and some new duds. Come on Hitch don't you look at your own magazine.

21 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:36:55pm

re: #16 brookly red

We have a situation where the bad guys take the winter off in Pakistan & then return to fight in the spring... broadcasting a withdrawal date is not smart for anyone in any conflict.

And if we don't give a deadline then there won't be any urgency for them to get there political shit together. We learned that from Iraq.

22 Kewalo  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:38:29pm

Hitchens always looks to me to have a few scotch under his belt. Whether on early morning or late night TV his hair is never combed and it always distracts me.

I read the Robinson column this morning and it was a real gotcha. And Hitchens comments were a hoot.

23 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:40:32pm

re: #21 recusancy

And if we don't give a deadline then there won't be any urgency for them to get there political shit together. We learned that from Iraq.

and Germany & Japan & Korea & Italy (don't forget Italy). Dude, first you take care of business THEN you pull out...

24 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:40:54pm

Interesting, what does Hitch mean by this... ?

I’m not saying it isn’t a good question.

Interesting... no... ?

25 Irenicum  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:41:36pm

"Dude, first you take care of business THEN you pull out..."
heh.

26 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:42:22pm

Eugene Robinson's column is a must-read, to see how dishonest Palin's latest statements on climate change really are:

[Link: www.washingtonpost.com...]

27 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:42:47pm

re: #25 Irenicum

"Dude, first you take care of business THEN you pull out..."
heh.

what part of that do you need me to explain :)

28 Jeff In Ohio  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:44:46pm

re: #4 karmic_inquisitor

Which doesn't hold a candle to his take on Mother Teresa

29 RogueOne  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:44:49pm

I saw this this morning. Let me just say I'm a huge fan of Hitchens.

30 Irenicum  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:45:28pm

re: #27 brookly red

I'm such a sick, twisted, little puppy.

31 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:45:31pm

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

Interesting, what does Hitch mean by this... ?

Interesting... no... ?

I can't tell by the way the quote above is structured if Palin or Hitch is saying 'I’m not saying it isn’t a good question.'

?

32 What, me worry?  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:46:26pm

re: #13 Glen Davidson

Easy hitting Palin, while forgetting his massive shifts over the years.

Nothing really wrong with it, except that he's so clearly playing to an audience who was prejudiced against her from the beginning (I'm not saying she hasn't proven a lightweight), without being in the slightest bothered by their prejudices.

Glen Davidson
[Link: tinyurl.com...]

Not sure I would say prejudice. I don't think there was a lot of "pre" judging about her. If you're on the Left, than Sarah never had anything to offer. Ever. She's the complete polar opposite of everything the Left believes.

I was heartened during the election (Fall 2008) when some outspoken Republican writers also caught it.

33 KenJen  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:46:44pm

re: #26 Charles

Well at least she's good at pandering.

34 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:48:56pm

re: #23 brookly red

and Germany & Japan & Korea & Italy (don't forget Italy). Dude, first you take care of business THEN you pull out...

In bed.

35 KenJen  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:49:16pm

re: #28 Jeff In Ohio

Which doesn't hold a candle to his take on Mother Teresa

..same thing with Pope John ii.

36 War_Eagle  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:49:32pm

re: #31 Walter L. Newton

That's him quoting her.

37 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:50:18pm

re: #36 War_Eagle

That's him quoting her.

Ok, There's no ending quote mark, so I wasn't sure where she stopped and he started again.

38 middy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:51:40pm

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

He was quoting Palin.

39 What, me worry?  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:51:41pm

re: #28 Jeff In Ohio

Which doesn't hold a candle to his take on Mother Teresa

How odd. I've seen other similar remarks about Mother Theresa.

40 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:52:10pm

/it appearers that the fighting in Washington has spread north quickly... I must now go risk my life to get a six-pack... I will look to Hillary's Yugo experience for guidance.

41 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:52:12pm

re: #22 Kewalo

Hitchens always looks to me to have a few scotch under his belt. Whether on early morning or late night TV his hair is never combed and it always distracts me.

I read the Robinson column this morning and it was a real gotcha. And Hitchens comments were a hoot.

He usually always does have a few scotches under his belt. He drinks during debates and tv appearances and doesn't hide it unless he's told to.

42 What, me worry?  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:54:49pm

re: #26 Charles

Eugene Robinson's column is a must-read, to see how dishonest Palin's latest statements on climate change really are:

[Link: www.washingtonpost.com...]

Well here's to you, Mr. Robinson!! lol

43 Locker  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:59:11pm

re: #26 Charles

Eugene Robinson's column is a must-read, to see how dishonest Palin's latest statements on climate change really are:

[Link: www.washingtonpost.com...]

Yea this was a good one. Read it in the Sacramento Bee this morning.

44 Crimsonfisted  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:59:20pm

re: #5 karmic_inquisitor

That was just cruel. Wow. I guess his mom never taught Chris if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.

45 Teh Flowah  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:59:36pm

DAAAAMN. Hitchens.
Hahaha fuck, he ripped her a new one. I love it.

46 pharmmajor  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 1:59:50pm

Hitchens certainly knows just what to say to cheese off the right and the left. That is talent, my friends.

47 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:02:15pm

It is an inconvenient time for Al Gore to be fudging numbers on global climate change.

With the specter of the "Climategate" e-mails hanging ominously over the Copenhagen climate change summit, the former vice president told a crowd there on Monday that one scientist had predicted the polar ice cap would have no summer ice in five to seven years.

"These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr. Maslowski that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years," Gore told the audience.

But the scientist Gore quoted, Dr. Wieslaw Maslowski of the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterrey, Calif., told the Times of London that he never said such a thing.

"It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at," Maslowski told the Times. "I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this."

SNIP

48 BruceKelly  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:03:09pm
She’s a disgraceful opportunist and a real moral coward.

As a conservative, I could not agree more.

49 Irenicum  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:03:23pm

OT/
Whatever your thoughts on Al Franken, this was great! I like the line "we're not entitled to our own facts" especially.

50 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:04:16pm

The only comment on Palin's facebook page about this that I could find:

Carlton Barnes
Bitter, drunken, slobbering, hog-jawed Britisher Christopher Hitchens ranting against Sarah on lamestream MSNBC today. Will she smack him down on Facebook, or ignore the idiot troll?
2 hours ago

51 War_Eagle  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:05:45pm
52 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:06:51pm

re: #50 freetoken

The only comment on Palin's facebook page about this that I could find:

I keep seeing comments regarding Hitchens being a drunk -- or in a present state of being drunk. Perhaps he drinks as do I but I have yet to have ever seen him drunk. He was quite sober in this video.

53 theheat  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:08:12pm

re: #50 freetoken

Hitchens is a hundred times the intellectual with both hands tied behind his back. I would love to see her try to show Hitchens how intelligent she is, except it would be like watching baby seals (her) being clubbed to death (with her own stupidity.)

Palin has the intellectual agility of a small soap dish. And she can't possibly refute what he says without lying. And that's not very doggone Christian, gosh darn it all.

54 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:08:12pm

re: #52 Gus 802

Speaking as an ex-bartender: You can not tell if a real drunk is sober or completely three sheets overboard. It's a lifestyle for them.

That said, while I wouldn't get into a car with Hitchens, alcohol and rhetoric have a long and storied association.

55 Kragar  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:09:30pm

re: #51 War_Eagle

OT - Sumerians Look On In Confusion As Christian God Creates World

For the Onion fans out there.

Now that is a slice of fried gold.

56 Four More Tears  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:09:55pm

re: #54 Obdicut

I wouldn't get into a car with Hitchens

Updinged for this.

57 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:12:04pm

re: #50 freetoken

Man, is his (Carlton Barnes') assessment off or what? Hitch is an American citizen, not a "Britisher".
/

58 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:12:49pm

OT - Oral Roberts has passed away.

59 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:14:21pm

re: #58 Gus 802

? Why did I think he has been gone for awhile already?

60 tradewind  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:14:49pm

No one would ever accuse Hitchens of having a moral base from which to pontificate.////

61 BruceKelly  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:15:10pm

re: #52 Gus 802

I keep seeing comments regarding Hitchens being a drunk -- or in a present state of being drunk. Perhaps he drinks as do I but I have yet to have ever seen him drunk. He was quite sober in this video.

He does drink often and early, by his own admission, but a "drunk?" - I don't think so. Being a drunk is more about actions, not volume or frequency.

Trust me.

62 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:15:29pm

re: #59 freetoken

? Why did I think he has been gone for awhile already?

Maybe because he was near death not to long ago?

Here's the story from the NY Times.

63 ED 209  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:15:50pm

re: #59 freetoken

? Why did I think he has been gone for awhile already?

He wasn't dead, he just smelled funny.

64 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:16:39pm

re: #60 tradewind

No one would ever accuse Hitchens of having a moral base from which to pontificate.///

Considering the "moral base" of those he often criticizes, I'd say he's better off without it.

65 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:17:10pm

re: #52 Gus 802

I keep seeing comments regarding Hitchens being a drunk -- or in a present state of being drunk. Perhaps he drinks as do I but I have yet to have ever seen him drunk. He was quite sober in this video.

W. C. Fields was drunk quite a bit of the time and he was brilliant....it can be done

66 tradewind  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:17:35pm

re: #61 BruceKelly
Appearing intoxicated on a talk show qualifies as ' a drunk', IMO.
And I've seen him do it more than once.
Maybe he's cleaned up his act since then.

67 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:17:40pm

Hitchens on his drinkin in Wiki:

A profile on Hitchens by NPR stated: "Hitchens is known for his love of cigarettes and alcohol — and his prodigious literary output."[24] However in early 2008 he claimed to have given up smoking, undergoing an epiphany in Madison, Wisconsin.[102] His brother Peter later wrote of his surprise at this decision.[103] Hitchens admits to drinking heavily; in 2003 he wrote that his daily intake of alcohol was enough "to kill or stun the average mule." He noted that many great writers "did some of their finest work when blotto, smashed, polluted, shitfaced, squiffy, whiffled, and three sheets to the wind."[104] George Galloway, on his way to testify in front of a United States Senate subcommittee investigating the scandals in the U.N. Oil for Food program, called Hitchens a "drink-sodden ex-Trotskyist popinjay",[105] to which Hitchens quickly replied, "Only some of which is true."[106] Later, in a column for Slate promoting his debate with Galloway which was to take place on September 14, 2005, he elaborated on his prior response. "He says that I am an ex-Trotskyist (true), a "popinjay" (true enough, since its original Webster's definition means a target for arrows and shots), and that I cannot hold a drink (here I must protest)."[107] Oliver Burkeman writes, "Since the parting of ways on Iraq [...] Hitchens claims to have detected a new, personalised nastiness in the attacks on him, especially over his fabled consumption of alcohol. He welcomes being attacked as a drinker 'because I always think it's a sign of victory when they move on to the ad hominem.' He drinks, he says, 'because it makes other people less boring. I have a great terror of being bored. But I can work with or without it. It takes quite a lot to get me to slur.'"[108]

68 The Shadow Do  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:18:05pm

I couldn't resist popping in here when I saw Hitchins in the headline. The man is a real national treasure. Too bad we have to import wit and intellect along with everything else of value these days.

69 tradewind  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:18:31pm

re: #63 ED 209
Not as funny as Hitch.///

70 BenghaziHoops  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:18:31pm

re: #65 albusteve

W. C. Fields was drunk quite a bit of the time and he was brilliant...it can be done

If only they had Blogs back then

71 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:19:28pm

re: #70 HoosierHoops

If only they had Blogs back then

none of us would be here today... think about it.

72 tradewind  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:19:46pm

re: #70 HoosierHoops
Steven Tyler said after rehab that there's no musician who plays better drunk or stoned.... they just think they do.

73 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:19:49pm

re: #47 MandyManners

It is an inconvenient time for Al Gore to be fudging numbers on global climate change.

SNIP

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.

74 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:19:59pm

re: #65 albusteve

W. C. Fields was drunk quite a bit of the time and he was brilliant...it can be done

Thanks.

I'm fine with his drunkeness then. Not that I idolize him but in a field of dimwitted humans Christopher Hitchens stands out as one of the leading thinkers of our time.

A drink for the Hitchens!

75 BruceKelly  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:20:28pm

re: #67 MandyManners

Thanks for posting that.

76 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:21:19pm

re: #68 The Shadow Do

I consider him as more of a peaceful acquisition than an import.

77 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:22:37pm

re: #66 tradewind

Appearing intoxicated on a talk show qualifies as ' a drunk', IMO.
And I've seen him do it more than once.
Maybe he's cleaned up his act since then.

Yeah, it was almost impossible to tell when Rush Limbaugh was all junked up on Oxycontin and pain killers.

78 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:23:26pm

re: #72 tradewind

Steven Tyler said after rehab that there's no musician who plays better drunk or stoned... they just think they do.

I can say the same thing about posting...in fact I will, right after I fix my cocktail....brb

79 BenghaziHoops  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:24:01pm

re: #71 brookly red

none of us would be here today... think about it.

W.C. Fields was so witty.. Imagine him on a Friday night at LFG...
Burning down the House
W.C. Do you like Children?
Why yes I do..Well done...
/

80 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:24:16pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.

Mandy posted a link to a story. I'm not sure what part of that you thought she actually said - but I didn't see any commentary by Mandy. Just the link.

81 BruceKelly  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:24:21pm

re: #66 tradewind

You're right of course. That would fall under "actions." I just haven't seen it myself so I didn't know. I seen him on C-SPAN's Book TV several times and I've always been impressed.

82 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:24:23pm

re: #47 MandyManners

It is an inconvenient time for Al Gore to be fudging numbers on global climate change.

SNIP

When I pointed out that Gore is a liability and not an asset, I was berated for pointing out this inconvenient truth. His habitual overstatements, distortions and outright falsehoods provide an easy target for those opposed to Gore's position and give them a hook to hang many detractions on.

Gore is the AGW community's crazy nephew that needs to be kept locked in the attic.

Misstatements like this one are fuel for the fire. I'm almost surprised to see anyone attempting to support Gore on this who also claims to support AGW and the position that something ought to be done about it.

Almost.

83 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:25:06pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.

I didn't tell a single lie. I merely linked an article.

84 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:25:46pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.


uhh I think he did already apologize for the inaccuracy...

85 Jeff In Ohio  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:26:07pm

re: #72 tradewind

Steven Tyler said after rehab that there's no musician who plays better drunk or stoned... they just think they do.

He didn't say they played worse.

86 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:26:27pm

re: #82 SixDegrees

When I pointed out that Gore is a liability and not an asset, I was berated for pointing out this inconvenient truth. His habitual overstatements, distortions and outright falsehoods provide an easy target for those opposed to Gore's position and give them a hook to hang many detractions on.

Gore is the AGW community's crazy nephew that needs to be kept locked in the attic.

Misstatements like this one are fuel for the fire. I'm almost surprised to see anyone attempting to support Gore on this who also claims to support AGW and the position that something ought to be done about it.

Almost.

Did you get called a liar?

87 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:26:58pm

re: #28 Jeff In Ohio

Which doesn't hold a candle to his take on Mother Teresa

Thank you for posting that! I enjoyed reading it!

88 The Shadow Do  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:27:34pm

re: #76 Slumbering Behemoth

I consider him as more of a peaceful acquisition than an import.

Spoils of war perhaps? Given the Conservative embrace of Hitchens over the Iraq business...

89 BruceKelly  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:27:42pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Read it myself in the London Times this very morning.

90 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:28:00pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.

wtf?....it's an article

91 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:28:11pm

re: #86 MandyManners

Did you get called a liar?


no, no, it's denier not liar, sheesh...

92 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:29:35pm

My most memorable Hitchens moment was him tearing Falwell apart after news of his death. Boy he hated that guy.

93 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:30:04pm

re: #82 SixDegrees

It was a trivial "misstatement".

Al Gore is a politician and, as is customary with that trade, shows a certain self-absorption with concepts and events. Self promotion is a constant of politicians, regardless of their other beliefs.

Saying that, though, is a long ways from calling him a crazy uncle. A great deal of what Al says is not flaky.

94 Jeff In Ohio  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:30:37pm
95 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:30:47pm

re: #92 WindUpBird

My most memorable Hitchens moment was him tearing Falwell apart after news of his death. Boy he hated that guy.

I have an urge to protect Mother Teresa. None at all for Falwell.

96 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:31:18pm

re: #85 Jeff In Ohio

He didn't say they played worse.

there has been some pretty incredible music recorded over the years under the influence of alcohol and opiates

97 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:31:21pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.

Try reading the passage provided. I know it's difficult for you, so here's a shorter version: the scientist who Gore directly named and claimed to be citing denied ever having said what Gore attributed to him.

What that means has nothing to do with the circumstances you're describing. It has everything to do with Gore - once again - claiming something was said or published that wasn't.

The topic of the issue is Gore's statement. Not climate science. Not polar ice. Not scientific consensus. Gore's statement.

Hallmark of actual scientists: they tend to actually look at data put in front of them, rather than blowing past it in a rush to reach a foregone conclusion.

Oh, but we already know you've abandoned science in favor of zealotry and proselytizing. My bad - never mind. Continue not paying attention to what was actually said.

98 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:31:38pm

re: #93 freetoken

It was a trivial "misstatement".

Al Gore is a politician and, as is customary with that trade, shows a certain self-absorption with concepts and events. Self promotion is a constant of politicians, regardless of their other beliefs.

Saying that, though, is a long ways from calling him a crazy uncle. A great deal of what Al says is not flaky.

"Al Gore makes several misstatements at Copenhagen conference!"

"AGW science canceled!"

//

99 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:32:09pm

re: #83 MandyManners

I didn't tell a single lie. I merely linked an article.

I agree. And I didn't think the article had anything to do at all with...whatever it is Ludwig is babbling incoherently about now.

100 Girth  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:32:12pm

re: #94 Jeff In Ohio

Beck Explains the three-fifths clause

I'm listening to the audio right now, it's not quite as bad as Steve Benen makes it out to be there.

101 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:32:25pm

I don't understand the personal attack for posting a link.

102 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:32:43pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Really, what a fascinating pack of lies you have just told Mandy.

I don't know who this guy is from the Navy, but yeah, pretty much the consensus is that in the next decade the north pole will ice free in the summers.

I mean that is what NASA and NOAA say... So yeah go ahead, make it sound like Gore is fudging... How very honest of you.

From the story - Gore's office itself said:

Gore's office later admitted to the Times that the figures weren't actually all that "fresh," but were instead based on a conversation Gore had had with Maslowski several years ago.

103 simoom  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:32:50pm

I saw this bouncing around Twitter. It's some sort of street theater from todays Tea Party protest:

[Link: twitpic.com...]

^ Teapartiers wearing Obama, Pelosi and Reid masks, shackled in chains and bloodied, being whipped by black robed, hooded figure.

104 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:32:52pm

re: #86 MandyManners

Did you get called a liar?

Worse, I believe.

105 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:33:26pm

re: #99 SixDegrees

I agree. And I didn't think the article had anything to do at all with...whatever it is Ludwig is babbling incoherently about now.

well one should not drink and post, simultaneously that is

106 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:33:36pm

re: #99 SixDegrees

I agree. And I didn't think the article had anything to do at all with...whatever it is Ludwig is babbling incoherently about now.

No kimchi for you.

107 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:33:57pm

re: #101 MandyManners

I don't understand the personal attack for posting a link.

Mandy - I don't either.
It's stunning.
It's as if no one looked at the link, just made an assumptions.

108 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:33:57pm

re: #95 SanFranciscoZionist

I have an urge to protect Mother Teresa. None at all for Falwell.

Yeah, I was not a fan! Especially after the whole Me-and-my-friends-who-like-Rocky-Horror-are-responsible-for-9/11 thing with Pat "The Animal" Robertson. Wow, we did all that? We must be cosmically powerful! I'm going to go to a mountaintop and open a dimensional gate to Melniboné.

109 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:34:00pm

re: #102 reine.de.tout

No kimchi for you.

110 BruceKelly  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:34:12pm

re: #80 reine.de.tout

Thanks for Karma point 100. Think I'll make like Hitchens and pour myself one.

Be back in two and two.

111 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:34:31pm

re: #84 brookly red

uhh I think he did already apologize for the inaccuracy...

You mean...Gore was inaccurate?

[Gasp!]

DENIER!!!

112 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:34:33pm

re: #104 SixDegrees

Worse, I believe.

No kimchi for you.

113 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:34:50pm

re: #105 albusteve

well one should not drink and post, simultaneously that is

No kinchi for you.

114 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:35:01pm

Guess what? Maslowski DID predict that all the Arctic ice could melt by the next decade: Wieslaw Maslowski's research suggests ice-free summers in Arctic by next decade. He's on record in several places making this statement.

Looks like Al Gore wasn't wrong after all.

115 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:35:11pm

re: #107 reine.de.tout

Mandy - I don't either.
It's stunning.
It's as if no one looked at the link, just made an assumptions.

Maybe he needs more kimchi.

116 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:35:29pm

re: #101 MandyManners

I don't understand the personal attack for posting a link.

/deniers must be persecuted!

117 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:35:39pm

re: #98 Gus 802

"Al Gore makes several misstatements at Copenhagen conference!"

"AGW science canceled!"

//

No one here said AGW science was cancelled, did they?

118 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:36:03pm

re: #114 Charles

Guess what? Maslowski DID predict that all the Arctic ice could melt by the next decade: Wieslaw Maslowski's research suggests ice-free summers in Arctic by next decade. He's on record in several places making this statement.

Looks like Al Gore wasn't wrong after all.

So, why did Gore's office apologize?

119 Gus  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:36:11pm

re: #117 reine.de.tout

No one here said AGW science was cancelled, did they?

Not here. I was just being sarcastic.

120 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:36:35pm

re: #116 brookly red

/deniers must be persecuted!

Can I have your kimchi?

121 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:36:52pm

re: #93 freetoken

The theme seems to be that Gore should be some flawless scion. He's not, he's a politician, an imperfect one, but he's doing way more good than harm. No matter what he says, there will be a slice of the AGW right wing that will attack him mercilessly until the day he dies. I particularly like the "AGW is a fraud because Al Gore's daughter's car has too much displacement" angle."

122 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:37:05pm

re: #118 MandyManners

So, why did Gore's office apologize?

Because it wasn't 'fresh'. He did say it, but not recently, and in science you want to represent the most recent research.

Just guessing, but that fits the facts.

123 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:37:15pm

re: #106 MandyManners

No kimchi for you.

But...I like fermented cabbage.

124 MandyManners  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:37:25pm

Gotta' go help The Kid figure out the metric system. bbl

125 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:37:49pm

re: #109 MandyManners

No kimchi for you.

Honestly, that's just fine with me!
(do you know how they make that stuff?)

126 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:37:49pm

re: #120 MandyManners

Can I have your kimchi?

only half comrade.

127 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:37:51pm

re: #123 SixDegrees

Straight out of the jar in the refridge?
*shudders*

128 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:38:03pm

re: #118 MandyManners

So, why did Gore's office apologize?

Uh, politics? Apologize to make the bullshit go away. Even if the bullshit's untrue.

129 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:38:11pm

This is an interview with Maslowski from February of this year: Wieslaw Maslowski's research suggests ice-free summers in Arctic by next decade %P% EarthSky.

Wieslaw Maslowski: We’re suggesting that sometime between 2010 and 2016, we might melt all this multi-year ice cover during summer in the Arctic.

Other estimates have predicted we won’t see ice-free summers for decades yet. But Maslowski said that these estimates don’t account for the loss of ice thickness.

Wieslaw Maslowski: This total volume loss, which is mostly controlled by the ice thickness loss, has been basically twice as fast as the surface loss observed by satellites.

Maslowski said the Arctic ice loss is a continually accelerating cycle that’s being amplified by global warming. When the Arctic sun shines on open water, rather than reflective ice, the ocean absorbs and stores more of the sun’s heat. Warmer ocean temperatures melt the ice from below, while warmer air temperatures melt it from above.

Wieslaw Maslowski: It’s basically a positive feedback loop, which is saying one change leads to even further changes.

130 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:38:23pm

re: #114 Charles

Indeed, IIRC, I even discussed/linked it here when his NPG came out with their estimates at an AGU conference. His original estimation was done before taking into account the large 2007 loss, so also that means that Lindzen was the one misrepresenting the truth in that news article.

131 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:38:44pm

re: #101 MandyManners

I don't understand the personal attack for posting a link.

That's what Ludwig does.

132 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:39:40pm

re: #129 Charles

Huh. Okay, my guess was wrong, too.

Gore was wrong, then-- to apologize.

Everyone can be happy: Gore can still be wrong, which is obviously important for some reason I'm not quite clear on.

133 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:39:50pm

re: #120 MandyManners

Can I have your kimchi?

You can have my kimchi. I have a low kimchi tolerance. Why are we discussing kimchi?

134 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:40:19pm

re: #121 WindUpBird

The theme seems to be that Gore should be some flawless scion.

Expressing hate for Al Gore on his AGW faux pas here and there becomes a proxy for those who don't want to take on the subject head-on.

135 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:40:37pm

re: #73 LudwigVanQuixote

Hahahahahaha...you're a riot.

136 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:40:54pm

re: #125 reine.de.tout

Honestly, that's just fine with me!
(do you know how they make that stuff?)

Remember the MASH episode where Winchester thinks the Koreans are mining a hillside, and it turns out to be a vat of kimchi?

137 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:41:31pm

re: #131 SixDegrees

That's what Ludwig does.

perhaps if he would just keep to his Malkin leather fantasies...

138 Solomon2  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:41:35pm

"Nobody will ever accuse Christopher Hitchens of being shy about expressing his opinions."

Not yet. But how many times can a man be beaten by those who don't like what he writes before he changes his mind?

139 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:41:41pm

re: #103 simoom


When I think of people in politician masks behaving badly:

Save us, Johnny Utah!

140 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:42:10pm

re: #134 freetoken

Expressing hate for Al Gore on his AGW faux pas here and there becomes a proxy for those who don't want to take on the subject head-on.

YESYESYESYESYES

needs more updings

141 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:42:15pm

re: #133 SanFranciscoZionist

You can have my kimchi. I have a low kimchi tolerance. Why are we discussing kimchi?

Mandy was giving & taking away kimchi.

142 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:42:36pm

re: #132 Obdicut

Huh. Okay, my guess was wrong, too.

Gore was wrong, then-- to apologize.

Everyone can be happy: Gore can still be wrong, which is obviously important for some reason I'm not quite clear on.

People hate Al Gore. Lots of people. Some people hate Al Gore so much that they can't bring themselves to really believe in global warming because Al Gore says it's so.

I can sort of see their problem. If Sarah Palin were a big promoter of some scientific truth, I would have trouble with it as well. Luckily, the odds of this happening seem slim.

143 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:42:49pm

re: #93 freetoken

It was a trivial "misstatement".

Al Gore is a politician and, as is customary with that trade, shows a certain self-absorption with concepts and events. Self promotion is a constant of politicians, regardless of their other beliefs.

Saying that, though, is a long ways from calling him a crazy uncle. A great deal of what Al says is not flaky.

Such blatant moral relativism, no matter how floridly expressed, does not become one.

144 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:42:54pm

re: #134 freetoken

Expressing hate for Al Gore on his AGW faux pas here and there becomes a proxy for those who don't want to take on the subject head-on.

there is middle ground between hate and worship, probably where you'll find most people...as for me I really don't care for the guy

145 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:43:02pm

re: #134 freetoken

Expressing hate for Al Gore on his AGW faux pas here and there becomes a proxy for those who don't want to take on the subject head-on.

like Al Gore?

146 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:43:22pm

re: #141 Floral Giraffe

Mandy was giving & taking away kimchi.

If Mandy was going to give me kimchi, I thank her, but someone else can have it. I'm planning to have spaghetti tonight.

147 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:43:23pm

re: #129 Charles

This is an interview with Maslowski from February of this year: Wieslaw Maslowski's research suggests ice-free summers in Arctic by next decade %P% EarthSky.

Pity Ludwig simply attacked, rather than actually researching.

Although I'd like to hear from Maslowski what it was in Gore's statement he's objecting to. He obviously feels his work has been misrepresented.

Given Gore's past misstatements, I'm definitely leaning toward Maslowski's comment over Gore's.

And once again, since so many seem to be missing the point: it's not about climate science, it's about Gore.

148 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:44:02pm

re: #145 brookly red

like Al Gore?

Uh... whatever criticism you could make of Gore, not attacking the issue head on is hardly one of them.

149 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:44:17pm

re: #146 SanFranciscoZionist

Spaghetti sounds MUCH better than kimchi!

150 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:44:22pm

re: #141 Floral Giraffe

Mandy was giving & taking away kimchi.

who fucking died and made her Kommisar?

151 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:45:13pm

re: #148 Obdicut

Uh... whatever criticism you could make of Gore, not attacking the issue head on is hardly one of them.

duh,

152 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:45:20pm

re: #133 SanFranciscoZionist

You can have my kimchi. I have a low kimchi tolerance. Why are we discussing kimchi?

We've been consigned to the next shipping container bound for North Korea for saying something a deranged zealot took as criticism of his faith.

Which is another nasty word I'm not supposed to use, but since I'll be picking lice off other people for sustenance soon, what the hell.

153 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:45:27pm

re: #142 SanFranciscoZionist

Palin owns a Volkswagen TDI Jetta, but that fact is not going to drive me from my beloved turbo GTI. :D

154 BenghaziHoops  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:45:35pm

re: #136 SanFranciscoZionist

Remember the MASH episode where Winchester thinks the Koreans are mining a hillside, and it turns out to be a vat of kimchi?

I just googled kimchi...OMG...It would be my luck to be stranded on a deserted Island with only kimchi on it..Spending my days going through numerous suicide note redrafts..
/

155 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:45:36pm

re: #150 brookly red

Al Gore, or was it Ludwig?

156 ED 209  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:46:02pm

re: #150 brookly red

who fucking died and made her Kommisar?

They didn't die, they just smelled funny. (like kimchi!)

157 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:47:00pm

re: #155 Floral Giraffe

Al Gore, or was it Ludwig?

/damn you for making me choose!

158 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:47:06pm

re: #145 brookly red

like Al Gore?

he seems reluctant to back up his Oscar....makes him seem cowardly, hiding his own ignorance

159 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:47:16pm

re: #147 SixDegrees

Pity Ludwig simply attacked, rather than actually researching.

Although I'd like to hear from Maslowski what it was in Gore's statement he's objecting to. He obviously feels his work has been misrepresented.

Given Gore's past misstatements, I'm definitely leaning toward Maslowski's comment over Gore's.

And once again, since so many seem to be missing the point: it's not about climate science, it's about Gore.

Exactly; it was about Gore and further, about Mandy being attacked as "telling lies" when she posted a link with no personal commentary.

I think most here agree (and I know I do) that the climate is changing, and that mankind is contributing to the changes.

And as for Al Gore, I honestly don't give a fat flip anymore about anything he says.

160 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:47:16pm

re: #145 brookly red

like Al Gore?

Well, if you want the subject of your conversations be "Al Gore" then go right ahead, but IMO it is not a very interesting topic.

Nevertheless, I stand by my claim: hating on Al Gore (wrt AGW) is a substitute for addressing the subject (of AGW, or some aspect of addressing such) head on.

161 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:47:25pm

re: #154 HoosierHoops

We shared a kitchen, with a roommate in college who had gallon jars of it in the refridge. She ate it straight out of the jar, cold. It smelled nasty.

162 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:47:41pm

re: #156 ED 209

They didn't die, they just smelled funny. (like kimchi!)

OK here's an upding... were even.

163 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:48:02pm

re: #150 brookly red

who fucking died and made her Kommisar?

Are you threatening the Commissar, comrade?

164 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:48:19pm

re: #154 HoosierHoops

Am I the only person here who regularly eats korean food? We have a gazillion korean and thai places in Portland. Korean barbecue is AWESOME.

165 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:48:32pm

re: #150 brookly red

who fucking died and made her Kommisar?

Which, by the way, is the word the tea party people can't quite remember, which is what makes them so nervous about 'czar'.

166 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:49:21pm

re: #152 SixDegrees

We've been consigned to the next shipping container bound for North Korea for saying something a deranged zealot took as criticism of his faith.

Which is another nasty word I'm not supposed to use, but since I'll be picking lice off other people for sustenance soon, what the hell.

Pack warm, that's all I'm sayin'.

167 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:49:41pm

re: #165 SanFranciscoZionist

Which, by the way, is the word the tea party people can't quite remember, which is what makes them so nervous about 'czar'.

You mean it's Kommisar not Commie Czar?

/

168 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:49:48pm

re: #154 HoosierHoops

I just googled kimchi...OMG...It would be my luck to be stranded on a deserted Island with only kimchi on it..Spending my days going through numerous suicide note redrafts..
/


dig some clams... good w/kimchi comrade.

169 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:49:57pm

re: #154 HoosierHoops

I just googled kimchi...OMG...It would be my luck to be stranded on a deserted Island with only kimchi on it..Spending my days going through numerous suicide note redrafts..
/

Koreans love the stuff. They also drink a lot. I am not saying the two are related, mind you.

170 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:50:09pm

re: #159 reine.de.tout

Exactly; it was about Gore and further, about Mandy being attacked as "telling lies" when she posted a link with no personal commentary.

I think most here agree (and I know I do) that the climate is changing, and that mankind is contributing to the changes.

And as for Al Gore, I honestly don't give a fat flip anymore about anything he says.

I could add that it's also about Ludwig, who has singlehandedly done more to inflame, divide and push people forcefully away from scientific understanding here than any other poster I can think of.

171 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:50:17pm

re: #142 SanFranciscoZionist

People hate Al Gore. Lots of people. Some people hate Al Gore so much that they can't bring themselves to really believe in global warming because Al Gore says it's so.

I can sort of see their problem. If Sarah Palin were a big promoter of some scientific truth, I would have trouble with it as well. Luckily, the odds of this happening seem slim.

LOL.
I'm one of those who don't like Al Gore.

But Al Gore is not global warming. I can easily ignore Al Gore while paying attention to global warming.

172 Gearhead  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:50:26pm

re: #136 SanFranciscoZionist

Remember the MASH episode where Winchester thinks the Koreans are mining a hillside, and it turns out to be a vat of kimchi?

I learned so much from MASH...

173 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:50:35pm

re: #169 SanFranciscoZionist

Koreans love the stuff. They also drink a lot. I am not saying the two are related, mind you.

You know what I CANNOT do, is Soju. Soju tastes like you could clean wounds with it.

174 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:50:58pm

re: #166 SanFranciscoZionist

Pack warm, that's all I'm sayin'.

It's supposed to be getting warmer, though.

175 Sharmuta  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:51:02pm

re: #134 freetoken

Expressing hate for Al Gore on his AGW faux pas here and there becomes a proxy for those who don't want to take on the subject head-on.

The case for the science isn't helped with distortions and personal attacks. Convincing people to let go of the heated politics around the issue and to look instead at the science requires patience, not more hate.

176 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:51:08pm

re: #164 WindUpBird

Am I the only person here who regularly eats korean food? We have a gazillion korean and thai places in Portland. Korean barbecue is AWESOME.

It's not food I know real well. For one thing, being semi-kosher makes Korean food hard.

Chinese, Thai, Vietnamese...

177 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:51:45pm

re: #160 freetoken

Well, if you want the subject of your conversations be "Al Gore" then go right ahead, but IMO it is not a very interesting topic.

Nevertheless, I stand by my claim: hating on Al Gore (wrt AGW) is a substitute for addressing the subject (of AGW, or some aspect of addressing such) head on.

dude Al Gore does address the subject head on that is my fucking point, how do you duck that?

178 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:51:57pm

re: #170 SixDegrees

I could add that it's also about Ludwig, who has singlehandedly done more to inflame, divide and push people forcefully away from scientific understanding here than any other poster I can think of.

Agreed.
I'm very simple, and I admit it, but I sure don't like it when someone else treats me like a complete idiot. Explain it so I can understand it.

179 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:52:03pm

re: #174 SixDegrees

It's supposed to be getting warmer, though.

LOL!

180 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:52:42pm

re: #163 SanFranciscoZionist

Are you threatening the Commissar, comrade?

never mistress... please do not take my health care away.

181 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:52:43pm

re: #172 Gearhead

I learned so much from MASH...

My father, by the way, has commented that if the crazy right continues to run free, the theme music for the next Republican National Convention should be the theme song from MASH.

182 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:52:44pm

re: #159 reine.de.tout

Exactly; it was about Gore and further, about Mandy being attacked as "telling lies" when she posted a link with no personal commentary.

I think most here agree (and I know I do) that the climate is changing, and that mankind is contributing to the changes.

And as for Al Gore, I honestly don't give a fat flip anymore about anything he says.

You said "contributing to" instead of "primarily responsible for"...for that bit of fudge you must be punished.
/

183 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:53:02pm

re: #174 SixDegrees

It's supposed to be getting warmer, though.

It will take a while for North Korea to get there.

184 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:53:05pm

re: #173 WindUpBird

Wiki likens it to Vodka.

185 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:53:05pm

re: #169 SanFranciscoZionist

Koreans love the stuff. They also drink a lot. I am not saying the two are related, mind you.

Basically, kimchi is sauerkraut. Different spices, but otherwise identical: shredded cabbage fermented in an acid bath and a cool place.

186 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:54:07pm

re: #185 SixDegrees

Basically, kimchi is sauerkraut. Different spices, but otherwise identical: shredded cabbage fermented in an acid bath and a cool place.

Germans also drink a lot, BTW.

187 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:54:18pm

re: #177 brookly red

dude Al Gore does address the subject head on that is my fucking point, how do you duck that?

I gotta say. Your response here seemed like you meant Gore was one who doesn't take the subject head on.

188 BenghaziHoops  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:54:48pm

re: #164 WindUpBird

Am I the only person here who regularly eats korean food? We have a gazillion korean and thai places in Portland. Korean barbecue is AWESOME.

People that know me here understand I hate 90% of all food...I've never held it against people that can eat McDonalds..or Pork or anything...It's my curse in life...I've never eaten Korean food...Or most foods...It's just me..
I also weight 3 1/2 pounds of my playing weight in College.. It's not easy being picky...It may be biological...I could eat veggies and fruits all day...
Don't hate me!

189 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:05pm

re: #182 Spare O'Lake

You said "contributing to" instead of "primarily responsible for"...for that bit of fudge you must be punished.
/

Oh, argh!
20 lashes with a wet noodle for me, then!

190 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:24pm

re: #91 brookly red

re: #147 SixDegrees

re: #102 reine.de.tout

Umm since Charles already linked to the predictions of that very scientist saying that ice free summers in the arctic are real and coming soon, I will just give you this:

[Link: www.youtube.com...]

Every last one of you little denialists - and in particular you six, who is a bright guy and should know better could take the time to know that MSM is not a good source for science and particularly not right wing papers.

So really, you go and you create false controversy and then you claim that you are all being so very reasonabe without looking at a single bit of the actual science.

It frankly is not a good performance.

So yes Mandy, you posted a pack of lies. Technically, you just linked, and technically, the goal of what you linked to was only a political rant made to make the situation less awful than it is - when the actual science says otherwise.

But you should know better.

191 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:32pm

re: #177 brookly red

dude Al Gore does address the subject head on that is my fucking point, how do you duck that?

I think his point is that an AGW denier would often prefer to slam Gore rather than actually attack the science. it's easy to smear and attack Gore. Much harder to actually speak with conviction about the science. One can get a lot of mileage from smearing a politician associated with a cause, much more efficient than attacking the cause itself.

192 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:34pm

re: #170 SixDegrees

I could add that it's also about Ludwig, who has singlehandedly done more to inflame, divide and push people forcefully away from scientific understanding here than any other poster I can think of.

Yeah, he must be a plant...
.
.
(*lobbing one over the plate*)

193 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:37pm

Sorry... had to...

194 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:50pm

re: #164 WindUpBird

Am I the only person here who regularly eats korean food? We have a gazillion korean and thai places in Portland. Korean barbecue is AWESOME.

Most of the Japanese restaurants around here are run by Koreans, and they mostly feature selection of Korean fare on their menus.

195 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:55:56pm

re: #181 SanFranciscoZionist

My father, by the way, has commented that if the crazy right continues to run free, the theme music for the next Republican National Convention should be the theme song from MASH.

Suicide is painful? Was that the name of that tune?

196 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:56:02pm

re: #129 Charles

Thank you for finding that faster than I did.

197 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:56:22pm

re: #184 Floral Giraffe

Wiki likens it to Vodka.

It is worse. :( It tastes sort of like vodka, mixed with bad sake, mixed with kerosene.

198 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:56:45pm

re: #195 reine.de.tout

I think it was painless. At least from what I remember of the original movie.

199 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:57:01pm

re: #190 LudwigVanQuixote

re: #147 SixDegrees

re: #102 reine.de.tout

Umm since Charles already linked to the predictions of that very scientist saying that ice free summers in the arctic are real and coming soon, I will just give you this:

[Link: www.youtube.com...]

Every last one of you little denialists - and in particular you six, who is a bright guy and should know better could take the time to know that MSM is not a good source for science and particularly not right wing papers.

So really, you go and you create false controversy and then you claim that you are all being so very reasonabe without looking at a single bit of the actual science.

It frankly is not a good performance.

So yes Mandy, you posted a pack of lies. Technically, you just linked, and technically, the goal of what you linked to was only a political rant made to make the situation less awful than it is - when the actual science says otherwise.

But you should know better.

Goddam it LVQ - show me where, anywhere, where I have "denied". Just show me. Goddam it.

200 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:57:29pm

re: #187 recusancy

I gotta say. Your response here seemed like you meant Gore was one who doesn't take the subject head on.


then my bad, he does so when he fumbels it counts.

201 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:57:58pm

re: #195 reine.de.tout

Suicide is painful? Was that the name of that tune?

Painless.

Suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please

202 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:58:06pm

re: #131 SixDegrees

That's what Ludwig does.

No six, I post the actual science, you on the other hand say nonsense, get offended and then go on an insult spree. Remember you telling people to toss your salad last night after you wrote all that foolishness about code from CRU as if you knew the first thing about it.

Your standard tactic is to try to make this about others. You do this when you run out of silly things to say about the science.

203 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:59:26pm

re: #147 SixDegrees

Pity Ludwig simply attacked, rather than actually researching.

Although I'd like to hear from Maslowski what it was in Gore's statement he's objecting to. He obviously feels his work has been misrepresented.

Given Gore's past misstatements, I'm definitely leaning toward Maslowski's comment over Gore's.

And once again, since so many seem to be missing the point: it's not about climate science, it's about Gore.

And once again, the physicist who actually works in the field knows what is going on, and you have been shown to be talking out of your ass. But I am sure you are used to that.

204 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 2:59:48pm

re: #191 WindUpBird

I think his point is that an AGW denier would often prefer to slam Gore rather than actually attack the science. it's easy to smear and attack Gore. Much harder to actually speak with conviction about the science. One can get a lot of mileage from smearing a politician associated with a cause, much more efficient than attacking the cause itself.

damn, there I go shooting the messenger again...

205 Gearhead  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:00:16pm

re: #181 SanFranciscoZionist

My father, by the way, has commented that if the crazy right continues to run free, the theme music for the next Republican National Convention should be the theme song from MASH.

I'm afraid I might have to agree. I wish they'd run all the way to their own party. I could tolerate a couple of down election cycles if their leaving would give the GOP a chance to remake itself.

206 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:00:17pm

re: #188 HoosierHoops

I used to be the picky one of my family! Now my family is shocked at the amount of weird food I've inhaled since coming to Portland (which has an unholy number and variety of restaurants for its size)

The only thing I played in college was Shadowrun and Half-Life, but I'm still skinny. I owe it all to my genes, it certainly isn't my active lifestyle.

207 Neutral President  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:01:21pm

re: #199 reine.de.tout

Goddam it LVQ - show me where, anywhere, where I have "denied". Just show me. Goddam it.

I don't think it's even worth it anymore. Everyone here knows you aren't a denier. Just put LudwigVonAdHominem on perma-gaze on this particular subject and move on.

208 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:01:39pm

re: #190 LudwigVanQuixote

Every last one of you little denialists - and in particular you six

Fuck off, asshole. I've never denied anything, and if you would turn off your rage and hate for a few seconds at a time you might have noticed that. In fact, I've been extremely careful not to profess a preference for either side on this issue because both sides are populated with alarming number of flaming, overwrought twits like yourself. My complaints have been centered on the massive departures from science committed by both sides, especially by you. And to comment where my expertise lies, in computer science, both to point out that, for example, the CRU code is some of the sloppiest, most unprofessional code I've ever seen and that their data management practices could be improved by a 12 year old, AND to note that those who claim that a particular snipped of source code is proof of fraud are talking out their ass. I remain the only poster here who has produced a reasonable, innocent explanation of that particular code fragment, too.

Shove your sanctimony up your ass, where you keep the rest of your science.

209 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:02:06pm

re: #199 reine.de.tout

When you hop on a bandwagon making a claim against AGW, without knowing the science yourself, you are being a denier. You could learn the science.

210 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:02:08pm

I deny that anyone here really believes with certainty that the Arctic will be ice free during the summers within 10 years.
I deny it.

211 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:02:22pm

re: #190 LudwigVanQuixote

re: #147 SixDegrees

re: #102 reine.de.tout

Umm since Charles already linked to the predictions of that very scientist saying that ice free summers in the arctic are real and coming soon, I will just give you this:

[Link: www.youtube.com...]

Every last one of you little denialists - and in particular you six, who is a bright guy and should know better could take the time to know that MSM is not a good source for science and particularly not right wing papers.

So really, you go and you create false controversy and then you claim that you are all being so very reasonabe without looking at a single bit of the actual science.

It frankly is not a good performance.

So yes Mandy, you posted a pack of lies. Technically, you just linked, and technically, the goal of what you linked to was only a political rant made to make the situation less awful than it is - when the actual science says otherwise.

But you should know better.

I'm not a 'denialist'....who the fuck are you even talking to?

212 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:02:46pm

re: #199 reine.de.tout

Goddam it LVQ - show me where, anywhere, where I have "denied". Just show me. Goddam it.

Same request here.

213 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:02:53pm

re: #191 WindUpBird

I think his point is that an AGW denier would often prefer to slam Gore rather than actually attack the science. it's easy to smear and attack Gore. Much harder to actually speak with conviction about the science. One can get a lot of mileage from smearing a politician associated with a cause, much more efficient than attacking the cause itself.

rather convenient having a god to stand behind who also fits under the bus... pick one.

214 Jeff In Ohio  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:03:05pm

re: #195 reine.de.tout

Painless - Johnny Mandel, as sang by Loudon Wainwright, if I remember right.

215 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:03:30pm

re: #200 brookly red

then my bad, he does so when he fumbels it counts.

he typically will not allow question and answer sessions at his performances

216 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:03:49pm

I liked the clip, he isn't saying anything about Palin that I disagree with. She is in this for money and fame, she will say anything she thinks might get her face and name back into the limelight for another five minutes. Then if what she said turns out to be controversial or draws too much flak she will just claim that she meant something else or else reverse her stated view without ever acknowledging her prior statements.

How many times does she have to repeat this cycle before her idiot supporters realize that they are being played?

217 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:03:51pm

re: #170 SixDegrees

I could add that it's also about Ludwig, who has singlehandedly done more to inflame, divide and push people forcefully away from scientific understanding here than any other poster I can think of.

I'd say the people who keep talking about the CRU emails and code long past the point of any relevance are doing far more to push people away from scientific understanding, myself.

218 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:04:30pm

re: #212 SixDegrees

Same request here.

I, just for fun, did a quick search of your recent comments and this is the first one I clicked on randomly.

Your looking for already debunked info to try to deny AGW.

219 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:04:52pm

re: #209 LudwigVanQuixote

When you hop on a bandwagon making a claim against AGW, without knowing the science yourself, you are being a denier. You could learn the science.

I hopped on no bandwagon, neither I nor Mandy made any personal comment on the Al Gore story. None.

Show me where I did? Just show me.

You are wrong.
W. R. O. N. G.
Wrong.

The "bandwagon" I hopped on is the one where you twist everybody's statements to what you THINK they are saying, based on your opinion of their political persuasion, rather than what people have ACTUALLY said.

And you do that. And it's wrong.

220 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:04:54pm

re: #217 Obdicut

Of course you do. You're a troll.

221 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:05:31pm

re: #215 albusteve

he typically will not allow question and answer sessions at his performances

and that tells us what?

222 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:05:32pm

re: #215 albusteve

he typically will not allow question and answer sessions at his performances

The shit people say about him, I wouldn't either. It'd be filled with shouty tea-party-esque know-nothings, patting themselves on the back for griefing his events.

223 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:05:38pm

re: #212 SixDegrees

Same request here.

After all of your misguided rants six, get real. You come out and make some crazy claim about the science and start screeching at people who bring the actual science. Shall we review why your rants about CRU are insane or are you going to make gay sexual references again?

224 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:07:29pm

re: #215 albusteve

he typically will not allow question and answer sessions at his performances

maybe his continence is waning...

225 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:07:36pm

re: #218 recusancy

I, just for fun, did a quick search of your recent comments and this is the first one I clicked on randomly.

Your looking for already debunked info to try to deny AGW.

No, I'm not. I was posting about an article I had never run across before that someone else had posted.

Feel free to read through the entire exchange and point me to where I deny - or support - either side.

226 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:07:50pm

re: #210 Spare O'Lake

I deny that anyone here really believes with certainty that the Arctic will be ice free during the summers within 10 years.
I deny it.

You are right, the consensus would be along the lines of almost certain. There is a small chance it takes a little longer.

In the mean time rather than betting against the science, you could learn it.

227 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:08:07pm

re: #220 SixDegrees

Of course you do. You're a troll.

What reason do you have to say that, though? I generally post links to good sites and try to be as polite as possible with everyone, even those who are being rude to me. I can be sarcastic and repetitive-- when someone's dodging a question, for example-- but a troll is someone who doesn't believe what they're saying, and just wants to get into a fight.

I do believe that talking about the CRU emails in the way you do, that talking about the science not being 'settled', bringing up debunked points, etc., are detracting from the scientific understanding of AGW. I'm not sure why you think that makes me qualify as a troll.

Could you explain?

228 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:08:21pm

re: #211 albusteve

I'm not a 'denialist'...who the fuck are you even talking to?

Apparently you added yourself to the bandwagon. You weren't even on the list.

229 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:08:36pm

re: #177 brookly red

dude Al Gore does address the subject head on that is my fucking point, how do you duck that?

Let me re-state: hating-on-Al-Gore is about avoiding discussing AGW and it's aspects directly.

In other words, the obsessive need to express disdain for a single individual (of tangential relevance to a phenomenon) is a substitute for tackling the intricate and often compromising work of coming to grasp with some social reality around us.

We saw this quite a bit with GWB and his response to 9/11, where BDS became the pathology of those who wanted to ignore the truth, ,which is that the world is often an ugly place because of the extreme hatred some have for others to the point of causing mass deaths.

People who want to hate-on-Al-Gore are too often trying to find a way of ignoring how to confront the changes humans are indeed making to the natural world around them (not just the climate, but in this case particularly the climate.)

230 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:08:53pm

re: #209 LudwigVanQuixote

When you hop on a bandwagon making a claim against AGW, without knowing the science yourself, you are being a denier. You could learn the science.

I try to learn the science but the teacher keeps you know, apologizing for his inaccuracies...

231 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:09:00pm

re: #223 LudwigVanQuixote

Hey now. Heterosexuals toss plenty of salad too.

/I had a guy at work who didn't know what the phrase meant, who though it just meant "Pleases me", and he was using it at the worst, worst times. Man, that was almost an HR meltdown.

232 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:09:26pm

re: #208 SixDegrees

Every last one of you little denialists - and in particular you six

Fuck off, asshole. I've never denied anything, and if you would turn off your rage and hate for a few seconds at a time you might have noticed that. In fact, I've been extremely careful not to profess a preference for either side on this issue because both sides are populated with alarming number of flaming, overwrought twits

Sorry, I am not a fan of this false equivalency. One side has no science, the other does. If you hate Ludwig, fine, but it has nothing to do with the science. There is zero equivalency. There are scientists on one side, and craven charlatans on the other. That scientists don't always use best practices doesn't mean the science is wrong. Bad code doesn't mean bad science. I could walk down the aisles of a Gamestop and point out all the games ont he shelf that are riddled with awful, broken code that are selling like hotcakes.

If we're waiting for all scientists to be perfect people with perfect practices before accepting their conclusions, it won't ever happen.

233 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:10:33pm

re: #228 LudwigVanQuixote

Apparently you added yourself to the bandwagon. You weren't even on the list.

read your own post...."every last one of you are denialists"...why would you say such a stupid thing?...you don't use your head

234 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:10:52pm

re: #223 LudwigVanQuixote

After all of your misguided rants six, get real. You come out and make some crazy claim about the science and start screeching at people who bring the actual science. Shall we review why your rants about CRU are insane or are you going to make gay sexual references again?

You know, while you were away, I had managed to pull a couple of posters around to a more reasoned, rational position on climate science than they had previously held - one that acknowledged the science and separated the politics out into another topic.

Then you came back, and in an hour they had dug in their heels once more and all that work had been undone.

Dickhead.

My request stands: show me where I've denied climate science. or supported it. And do the same for the others you've insulted, instead of just running your mouth.

235 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:12:22pm

re: #220 SixDegrees

Of course you do. You're a troll.

What the fuck?

Obdicut is not a fucking troll. Obdicut has patiently been making awesome and reasoned posts here, backed up with links and careful logic.

236 Sharmuta  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:14:26pm

re: #235 WindUpBird

Obdicut is not a fucking troll. Obdicut has patiently been making awesome and reasoned posts here, backed up with links and careful logic.

I agree. It's too bad more people aren't as patient as Obdi has been.

237 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:14:33pm

re: #227 Obdicut

Could you explain?

I've been called a troll here about half a dozen times by long-time commenters here for daring to like certain webcomics or movies, or expressing mainstream political opinion that doesn't match theirs. It means nothing.

238 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:15:02pm

re: #229 freetoken

Let me re-state: hating-on-Al-Gore is about avoiding discussing AGW and it's aspects directly.

In other words, the obsessive need to express disdain for a single individual (of tangential relevance to a phenomenon) is a substitute for tackling the intricate and often compromising work of coming to grasp with some social reality around us.

We saw this quite a bit with GWB and his response to 9/11, where BDS became the pathology of those who wanted to ignore the truth, ,which is that the world is often an ugly place because of the extreme hatred some have for others to the point of causing mass deaths.

People who want to hate-on-Al-Gore are too often trying to find a way of ignoring how to confront the changes humans are indeed making to the natural world around them (not just the climate, but in this case particularly the climate.)

OK I have given that some thought, & I am willing to listen to the science, are you willing to provided a teacher that doess not have a billion dollar conflict of interest? it is all good.

239 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:15:26pm

re: #235 WindUpBird

What the fuck?

Obdicut is not a fucking troll. Obdicut has patiently been making awesome and reasoned posts here, backed up with links and careful logic.

that's rich coming from you

240 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:15:47pm

re: #237 WindUpBird

Well, that sad children webcomic is hellishly weird; I wouldn't spring it on people randomly.

But it's not trollin'.

Have you checked out Ghastly?

Please, nobody check out Ghastly unless you're very, very comfortable with not just your own, but everyone else's sexuality in the whole damn world.

241 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:15:53pm

re: #230 brookly red

I try to learn the science but the teacher keeps you know, apologizing for his inaccuracies...

So, I assume you mean Al Gore by that. How about you look to the actual scientists?

OK, just today, I linked one of the scariest papers I have ever read in my professional career.

Few here commented.

It was a Proceedings of the National Academy, discussing crop failures in America due to climate changes. PNAS papers are a big deal. Not everyone gets to publish them. Not everyone passes the peer review which is very strong for that.

And what did this paper say. Short form it said that at a minimum, just taking temperature fluctuation into account we have a 30% loss in crops.

The upper end reported (from their experiments and data sets) was 82%.

The reason for the wide range was we are not yet certain how much warming will occur by the end of the century. It will certainly and without doubt be significant, but we don't know how bad, bad will get. The 30% is based on the absolute softest possible predictions.

And this paper doesn't even go into all sorts of other factors that could make this worse, like urban expansion or insect migrations.

And in the meantime I have to deal with people here not looking at the science!

So look. Just look. this paper is very readable.

[Link: www.agcarbonmarkets.com...]

242 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:16:33pm

re: #241 LudwigVanQuixote

And it was a paper, not a published letter?

243 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:16:47pm

re: #238 brookly red

OK I have given that some thought, & I am willing to listen to the science, are you willing to provided a teacher that doess not have a billion dollar conflict of interest? it is all good.

Hasn't Charles been posting this stuff for months? All those links to explanations of the science? All those youtube movies?

244 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:16:54pm

How about we dispense with the personal attacks and stick to actual issues? Calling people names by either side isn't helping anything.

LVQ I do have to agree that you come on way too strong and tend to read too much into otherwise innocuous comments. I know you feel strongly about this but tend to actually make people dismiss you because of the way that you frame your arguments.

245 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:18:59pm

re: #244 ausador

How about we dispense with the personal attacks and stick to actual issues? Calling people names by either side isn't helping anything.

LVQ I do have to agree that you come on way too strong and tend to read too much into otherwise innocuous comments. I know you feel strongly about this but tend to actually make people dismiss you because of the way that you frame your arguments.

I do agree with this, Ludwig. It's never a good idea to leave yourself open to easy cheap shots, and it does take away from your argument; not to the extent that many people pretend or would like to believe, but I think it's important to avoid the appearance of browbeating. Not matter how much those brows need a beatin'.

It's PR, but it's real.

246 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:19:06pm

re: #243 WindUpBird

Hasn't Charles been posting this stuff for months? All those links to explanations of the science? All those youtube movies?

OK, I am there now just lose that Gore fellow & we can talk.

247 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:19:27pm

re: #232 WindUpBird

Sorry, I am not a fan of this false equivalency. One side has no science, the other does. If you hate Ludwig, fine, but it has nothing to do with the science. There is zero equivalency. There are scientists on one side, and craven charlatans on the other. That scientists don't always use best practices doesn't mean the science is wrong. Bad code doesn't mean bad science. I could walk down the aisles of a Gamestop and point out all the games ont he shelf that are riddled with awful, broken code that are selling like hotcakes.

If we're waiting for all scientists to be perfect people with perfect practices before accepting their conclusions, it won't ever happen.

Yes, and I've made that point explicitly many times, in response to folks who took my criticism of coding style and data management practices as support for the position that the information produced was, somehow, wrong. Despite being extremely careful to state that it's impossible to tell from the limited sample of code I've looked at exactly what it does, let alone whether it's correct. And I've provide a reasonable - and completely speculative - explanation for the code that's caused so much consternation with it's comments about "fudge factors" and other remarks: it looks to me like a piece of plotting code, with the data scaled by three-quarters to make it fit in the graphing window.

Finally, I would not call the flaming twits on the side of AGW scientists. I would call them flaming twits. Ludwig is an excellent example, who claimed just a couple days ago that science can never be questioned in any way, that it is beyond examination or investigation - about the most unscientific attitude it is possible for me to imagine.

248 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:20:23pm

re: #246 brookly red

Why should that be a condition? The science is what the science is, with or without Gore's involvement.

re: #247 SixDegrees

Ludwig is an excellent example, who claimed just a couple days ago that science can never be questioned in any way, that it is beyond examination or investigation - about the most unscientific attitude it is possible for me to imagine.

Would you mind linking to what Ludwig actually did say, rather than paraphrasing?

249 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:20:43pm

re: #238 brookly red

OK I have given that some thought, & I am willing to listen to the science, are you willing to provided a teacher that doess not have a billion dollar conflict of interest? it is all good.

I take it then that you have ignored all the links I've given over the years to sites, some indeed by teachers (professors) of this very subject?

250 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:21:09pm

re: #240 Obdicut

Well, that sad children webcomic is hellishly weird; I wouldn't spring it on people randomly.

But it's not trollin'.

Have you checked out Ghastly?

Please, nobody check out Ghastly unless you're very, very comfortable with not just your own, but everyone else's sexuality in the whole damn world.

PoSC is weird, but it's pretty much accepted by my entire circle of friends (a couple of whom are in their late 40's) as one of their favorite comics. Didn't ever occur to me it would be a big thing. But god damn, I just went to Ghastly's site, and I about lost my cup of coffee all over my laptop. ALAN MOORE? XD

Now, there ARE comics I like that I would not link to. 8-)

251 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:22:05pm

re: #249 freetoken

I take it then that you have ignored all the links I've given over the years to sites, some indeed by teachers (professors) of this very subject?

And people wonder how one could lose there cool once and a while.

252 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:22:29pm

re: #249 freetoken

I take it then that you have ignored all the links I've given over the years to sites, some indeed by teachers (professors) of this very subject?

Is Gore your man? yes or no.

253 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:22:58pm

re: #226 LudwigVanQuixote

You are right, the consensus would be along the lines of almost certain. There is a small chance it takes a little longer.

In the mean time rather than betting against the science, you could learn it.

I am not betting against the science.
But let's keep in mind that we are all being asked to bet, and it will sell a lot better if others, like you, who are not world renowned scientific geniuses, just stop pretending that you know for sure that it's a done deal.
This is not a crusade and you are not a crusader.

254 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:23:09pm

re: #239 albusteve

that's rich coming from you

It's solid Gold, baby.

255 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:23:16pm

this was never about Gore's outstanding science, it's about his hypocritical lifestyle, living lavishly while telling the rest of the world to cut....all of Gore lovers know this....Gore can be 'hated' quite separately from the issue of AGW....anybody that can't tell the difference is stupid

256 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:24:11pm

re: #255 albusteve

this was never about Gore's outstanding science, it's about his hypocritical lifestyle, living lavishly while telling the rest of the world to cut...all of Gore lovers know this...Gore can be 'hated' quite separately from the issue of AGW...anybody that can't tell the difference is stupid

That cuts both ways.

257 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:24:47pm

re: #254 WindUpBird

It's solid Gold, baby.

no it's not....it's rude and terrible form...you are clearly hypocritical and two faced

258 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:25:07pm

re: #256 recusancy

That cuts both ways.

and...

259 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:26:40pm

re: #257 albusteve

no it's not...it's rude and terrible form...you are clearly hypocritical and two faced

Clearly, yes. Am I being charged by the hour for this wisdom?

You know, you were more fun when you were attacking my music tastes for no reason.

260 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:27:31pm

re: #258 brookly red

and...

I think you get my point.

261 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:27:42pm

re: #259 WindUpBird

Clearly, yes. Am I being charged by the hour for this wisdom?

You know, you were more fun when you were attacking my music tastes for no reason.

then fess up and apologize, quit trying to display somebody you're not

262 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:28:18pm

re: #260 recusancy

I think you get my point.

I don't...what do you mean?

263 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:28:55pm

re: #247 SixDegrees

Yes, and I've made that point explicitly many times, in response to folks who took my criticism of coding style and data management practices as support for the position that the information produced was, somehow, wrong. Despite being extremely careful to state that it's impossible to tell from the limited sample of code I've looked at exactly what it does, let alone whether it's correct. And I've provide a reasonable - and completely speculative - explanation for the code that's caused so much consternation with it's comments about "fudge factors" and other remarks: it looks to me like a piece of plotting code, with the data scaled by three-quarters to make it fit in the graphing window.

Finally, I would not call the flaming twits on the side of AGW scientists. I would call them flaming twits. Ludwig is an excellent example, who claimed just a couple days ago that science can never be questioned in any way, that it is beyond examination or investigation - about the most unscientific attitude it is possible for me to imagine.

No I never claimed that. I claimed truthfully that we know what we know and that some things are actually settled. You then went on a stupid, misguided smear like you are doing now. I know it is easier for you to make stuff up about me and shout insults then look at the science, but I'm not going to let you get away with it.

So let's look into this idea of yours that science is never settled and put it to rest once and for all.

The Earth is round. This is settled science.

You see once data gets sufficiently dense, you run itno the issue that all the predictions made by the model that came true, well, still have to be tru by whatever would come and replace it.

When you think about it, the amount of evidence that we have that the Earth is round is so much, that for it lo and behold not to be, but still in the new paradigm explain everything we know that pointed to roundness, becomes nearly impossible.

I mean sure, we might not be on the Earth at all, we might be in the Matrix... then indeed, the Earht, which was never real was never round... But it really is at that point with the science. Only something like invoking the Matrix could consistently with everything else we know, make the Earth not round.

You foolishly wrote about Einstein replacing Newton too.

Did you know that Einstein did not replace Newton?

Really, Newton's equations are contained by Einstein's. In the weak field limit, they are all that is left. Newton is still right. He just didn't get the whole picture - and unless you are near a really big honking gravitational field you need not pull out Einstein. Newton is quite sufficient to get to the moon and back. Does this mean he was wrong suddenly or that science replaced him, like you would like to claim?

No not at all.

There is a reason that we still teach Newton after all of these centuries in science class, but Aristotle is reserved for the philosophy dept.

264 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:30:14pm

re: #260 recusancy

I think you get my point.

no, I am kinda stoopid. spell it out for me & don't use big words...

265 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:30:29pm

re: #253 Spare O'Lake

I am not betting against the science.
But let's keep in mind that we are all being asked to bet, and it will sell a lot better if others, like you, who are not world renowned scientific geniuses, just stop pretending that you know for sure that it's a done deal.
This is not a crusade and you are not a crusader.

No but I am a physicist, who does actually know what the actual science is, and who actually stays current with papers that he is actually capable of reading.

And this is actually the greatest current threat to the human race.

Now rather than make this about me, read the science.

266 Kewalo  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:31:41pm

re: #120 MandyManners

Can I have your kimchi?

You can have all the kimchi, but I'm keeping my kalbi.

267 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:32:08pm

re: #263 LudwigVanQuixote

The earth is round-ish, but otherwise an excellent post.

That PNAS paper, by the way, was it submitted as a paper or as a letter? I assume a paper, but I can't tell. Sorry to be a pest.

268 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:33:06pm

re: #267 Obdicut

The earth is round-ish, but otherwise an excellent post.

That PNAS paper, by the way, was it submitted as a paper or as a letter? I assume a paper, but I can't tell. Sorry to be a pest.

no it's a paper
The reference numbers are in the first link I posted on it a few threads down.

269 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:33:50pm

re: #263 LudwigVanQuixote

Still waiting for those posts where myself and others ever denied or supported climate science.

270 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:34:56pm

re: #268 LudwigVanQuixote

Sorry, I'm a n00b at navigating the journals; I'm not a scientist, just an amateur. Apologies for the dumb question.

271 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:35:29pm

re: #269 SixDegrees

Still waiting for those posts where myself and others ever denied or supported climate science.

And I'm still waiting for you to explain how I'm a troll.

The magazines in my waiting room are just old copies of Highlights; what do you have in yours?

272 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:35:35pm

re: #269 SixDegrees

Still waiting for those posts where myself and others ever denied or supported climate science.

"every last one of you are denialists"....brilliant!

273 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:35:43pm

re: #269 SixDegrees

Still waiting for those posts where myself and others ever denied or supported climate science.

Well your little rants about science never being settled and that we can not possibly make the predictions we do, in fact like the one you just made would count... Don't you think?

Of course we know what we know.

Of course the Earth is warming and of course we are causing it. Of course CO2 is a GHG. this is all settled science.

Care to still debate that? Care to debate that we don't know this?

274 Kewalo  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:36:22pm

re: #164 WindUpBird

Yes it is and easy to make at home too. During the bar-b-que season here we do kalbi all the time.

275 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:38:14pm

re: #270 Obdicut

Sorry, I'm a n00b at navigating the journals; I'm not a scientist, just an amateur. Apologies for the dumb question.

I agree.

276 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:38:37pm

re: #272 albusteve

"every last one of you are denialists"...brilliant!

When did he say that?

277 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:39:18pm

re: #265 LudwigVanQuixote

No but I am a physicist, who does actually know what the actual science is, and who actually stays current with papers that he is actually capable of reading.

And this is actually the greatest current threat to the human race.

Now rather than make this about me, read the science.

There are brilliant, world class astrophysicists who do not agree.

278 albusteve  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:40:31pm

re: #276 Walter L. Newton

When did he say that?

up thread #190...but apparently he didn't mean what he said....there is a list of posters he referred to....the whole thing really sucks bro

279 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:40:57pm

re: #277 Spare O'Lake

There are brilliant, world class astrophysicists who do not agree.

In the sense that they think asteroids are a greater danger, or what?

280 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:41:27pm

re: #277 Spare O'Lake

There are brilliant, world class astrophysicists who do not agree.

Let's see them, as a percentage of the brilliant world-class astrophysicists who DO agree.

And most importantly, let's also see whose payroll these disagreeing world class astrophysicists are on.

281 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:42:05pm

re: #270 Obdicut

Sorry, I'm a n00b at navigating the journals; I'm not a scientist, just an amateur. Apologies for the dumb question.

OMG, you are awesome... I 'm sorry. I was a legit question.

Here are the ref numbers

Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to U.S. crop yields under climate change

Wolfram Schlenkera, and Michael J. Roberts

PNAS 2009 106:15594-15598

282 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:42:25pm

re: #279 Obdicut

In the sense that they think asteroids are a greater danger, or what?

Galactus. Global warming is nothing compared to the awesome might of Galactus.

283 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:43:51pm

Ludwig,

Let me thank you for the input you bring.
You were probably the biggest reason I got an account here, to thank you.

I'm sorry it seems that the right seems to touchy over this, and its a pity stories condemning agw folk are not fact checked better before being posted.
Perhaps if they were, there then there would be better understanding, and the same points would not be endlessly repeated.

Good luck Ludwig, I appreciate your effort.

Thank you Charles for your sanity.

Consider this my up ding.

Cheers.

284 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:43:53pm

re: #277 Spare O'Lake

There are brilliant, world class astrophysicists who do not agree.

And are web troll who think that Obama is a communist. However, why not look at the very real threat of AGW. It's really a 100% guaranteed un fun ride of we do nothing.

Thee is a pretty good chance we don't get hit by a planet killer asteroid tomorrow.

285 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:44:18pm

re: #252 brookly red

Is Gore your man? yes or no.

oh those yes or no questions are so hard...

286 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:44:41pm

re: #283 ozbloke

Ludwig,

Let me thank you for the input you bring.
You were probably the biggest reason I got an account here, to thank you.

I'm sorry it seems that the right seems to touchy over this, and its a pity stories condemning agw folk are not fact checked better before being posted.
Perhaps if they were, there then there would be better understanding, and the same points would not be endlessly repeated.

Good luck Ludwig, I appreciate your effort.

Thank you Charles for your sanity.

Consider this my up ding.

Cheers.

Wow thank you!

287 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:45:53pm

re: #284 LudwigVanQuixote

And are web troll who think that Obama is a communist. However, why not look at the very real threat of AGW. It's really a 100% guaranteed un fun ride of we do nothing.

Thee is a pretty good chance we don't get hit by a planet killer asteroid tomorrow.

but those tax hikes? damn skippy.

288 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:48:56pm

re: #281 LudwigVanQuixote

Thanks. If I haven't mentioned it before, my fiancee is a cancer researcher, so I just know that PNAS also accepts letters from members, which is why I asked.

The reference actually does look like it's a letter, though:

[Link: www.pnas.org...]

And I believe that letters to PNAS are NOT peer-reviewed, just have to pass editorial review. However, that article is already being cited, so it's obviously a strong one.

Sorry to be a stickler in the midst of the brouh-ha-hah, and please correct me if I'm wrong about letters and peer review.

By the way, have you seen this?

289 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:49:12pm

re: #273 LudwigVanQuixote

Still waiting. Having trouble finding an example?

290 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:49:45pm

re: #285 brookly red

oh those yes or no questions are so hard...

And those forced irrelevant choices are so stupid.

We just got done talking about how people would rather make the issue Gore, because either it's easier to attack Gore, they don't understand the science, don't want to understand the science, or deny AGW because their tribalism kicks in and it's something that leftists are concerned about.

291 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:50:25pm

re: #289 SixDegrees

Still waiting. Having trouble finding an example?

Recuansy already posted one above, though you can use the excuse of ignorance, if you like.

I'm also still waiting on your explanation that I'm a troll. Think you'll be getting around to that anytime soon?

292 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:50:28pm

re: #190 LudwigVanQuixote

re: #147 SixDegrees

re: #102 reine.de.tout

Umm since Charles already linked to the predictions of that very scientist saying that ice free summers in the arctic are real and coming soon, I will just give you this:

[Link: www.youtube.com...]

Every last one of you little denialists - and in particular you six, who is a bright guy and should know better could take the time to know that MSM is not a good source for science and particularly not right wing papers.

So really, you go and you create false controversy and then you claim that you are all being so very reasonabe without looking at a single bit of the actual science.

It frankly is not a good performance.

So yes Mandy, you posted a pack of lies. Technically, you just linked, and technically, the goal of what you linked to was only a political rant made to make the situation less awful than it is - when the actual science says otherwise.

But you should know better.

Guess what JERK, and yes, I said JERK. You can say as much as you want, but everyone has the right to agree or not agree, and you don't constitute the final say on anything, whether you like it or not.

Since the science is so settled, and the questions and solutions are so ironclad, then it interesting that all of your little supporters around the world are having a hell of a time convincing each other to sit down and make some decisions (er, like the debacle called Copenhagen currently falling apart as we speak).

If it were so settled, then we would be hell-bent on the way to fixing the problem. You can snipe and snipe all you want, but until I see YOUR SCIENTIST and friends actually start to move forward on the "fixin" part of this, I'll keep my MIND open, as all good critical thinkers understand, and I will strive to listen to ALL SIDES in hopes that we can move forward TOGETHER.

Thanks goodness you are not our AGW savior, just a mouth in the wilderness.

293 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:51:59pm

re: #289 SixDegrees

Still waiting. Having trouble finding an example?

Are you trying to go off topic again?
///

294 Stuart Leviton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:52:14pm

re: #10 Girth

Hitchens on Falwell:
[Video]The man does not pull punches.


Hitchens is God. Well, you know what I mean.
While I am not a George Bush supporter, here's Hitchens versus Bill Maher's audience

295 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:54:14pm

re: #292 Walter L. Newton

Dearest walter, if it were up to the scientist this would have been fixed. Alas it is up to greedy politicians and stupid credulous people who vote for them.
It is up to people like you who can yell and rant and thin you have a right to an opinion about things which you can't be bothered to actually learn.

Geeze Walter, is learning basic that hard?

Are the concepts that tough for you?

Is the idea that GHGs are real so tough to understand or that doubling their concentration must have an effect, seem so un intelligable to you?

I would like to believe you are not that fucking stupid.

296 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:54:21pm

re: #293 Walter L. Newton

Are you trying to go off topic again?
///

What does your post have to do with Citibank's share price?

297 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:54:30pm

That's so cute Recusancy... that down ding on my #292 will make everything all right. That's the down ding of a logical critical thinker... really... NOT!

LOL.

298 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:55:47pm

re: #292 Walter L. Newton

If it were so settled, then we would be hell-bent on the way to fixing the problem. You can snipe and snipe all you want, but until I see YOUR SCIENTIST and friends actually start to move forward on the "fixin" part of this, I'll keep my MIND open, as all good critical thinkers understand, and I will strive to listen to ALL SIDES in hopes that we can move forward TOGETHER.

Wow, uh, this doesn't make any sense at all. This has zero, nothing, nada to do with the state of the science. You're actually saying that humans as a group always agree and act in their own collective best interests in crisis?

Rapa Nui, anyone?

Scientists aren't senators, congressmen, and presidents. Quite the opposite, scientists are often shat on by senators, congressmen, and presidents, when political fortunes don't mesh well with actual reserahc.

299 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:56:27pm

re: #279 Obdicut

re: #280 WindUpBird

re: #284 LudwigVanQuixote

Rant on, nutbars.

300 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:57:32pm

re: #295 LudwigVanQuixote

Dearest walter, if it were up to the scientist this would have been fixed. Alas it is up to greedy politicians and stupid credulous people who vote for them.
It is up to people like you who can yell and rant and thin you have a right to an opinion about things which you can't be bothered to actually learn.

Geeze Walter, is learning basic that hard?

Are the concepts that tough for you?

Is the idea that GHGs are real so tough to understand or that doubling their concentration must have an effect, seem so un intelligable to you?

I would like to believe you are not that fucking stupid.

Well, Ludwig, let me clear something up for you. I would like to believe that you're not a fucking JERK, but it's SETTLED, you ARE.

See, I can play on your level, since you can't hold up you end in this conversation without turing into a 6 grader in the schoolyard acting like a hurt little baby, I suggest that EVERYONE who comments and replies to you do so at the same level as you do, maybe we will finally be able to understand what you are saying.

But until that time, I suspect that level-headed people will just sit back an amazement as you go on and on ranting like a child.

301 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:57:34pm

re: #299 Spare O'Lake

re: #280 WindUpBird

re: #284 LudwigVanQuixote

Rant on, nutbars.

Keep clinging to your ignorance... I'm sure that is easier for you. I can still hope though that you read some science.

302 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:57:58pm

re: #299 Spare O'Lake

re: #280 WindUpBird

re: #284 LudwigVanQuixote

Rant on, nutbars.



Waiting
for world class astrophysicists.

Waiting...

waiting...

(I have mostly Road & Track issues from the mid 90's in my waiting room)

303 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 3:58:51pm

re: #295 LudwigVanQuixote

Dearest walter, if it were up to the scientist this would have been fixed. Alas it is up to greedy politicians and stupid credulous people who vote for them.
It is up to people like you who can yell and rant and thin you have a right to an opinion about things which you can't be bothered to actually learn.

Geeze Walter, is learning basic that hard?

Are the concepts that tough for you?

Is the idea that GHGs are real so tough to understand or that doubling their concentration must have an effect, seem so un intelligable to you?

I would like to believe you are not that fucking stupid.

There goes your last ounce of credibility with me.
Done.

304 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:00:53pm

re: #301 LudwigVanQuixote

Keep clinging to your ignorance... I'm sure that is easier for you. I can still hope though that you read some science.

Hey Ludwig, I have an idea, let's talk science. The dataset, Harcrut3, the dataset that a lot of modeling has been run against, at UEA, tell me, how was that dataset compiled.

And get ready, becuase I am going to be going into a lot of science here, computer science, database design science and other areas of the Information Technology as used and practiced at CRU.

Let's work through this step by step.

305 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:01:10pm

re: #299 Spare O'Lake

How am I ranting, please?

306 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:03:08pm

re: #288 Obdicut

This went through editorial review, however, not just anyone is an editor who makes these reviews.

And it was a paper.

Here is the proceedings listing:

[Link: www.pnas.org...]

Communicated by V. Kerry Smith, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, July 1, 2009 (received for review October 13, 2008)

307 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:03:45pm

re: #304 Walter L. Newton

that is sooo not on the agenda, in fact it could case hurt feelings...

308 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:04:02pm

re: #302 WindUpBird

Here's a couple:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

309 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:04:11pm

re: #289 SixDegrees

Still waiting. Having trouble finding an example?

I've given you several. How about you realize that some science is settled and we know what we know. The very contention that we never settle anything in science is a form of denialism.

310 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:04:16pm

re: #303 Spare O'Lake

There goes your last ounce of credibility with me.
Done.

Don't be such a queen. He never had any credibility with you, because you're always feuding with him, and you're firmly in the false-equivalency tilt-a-whirl. You guys and Ludwig have it out constantly, all the time. I saw it before I was even registered here. He shows up, posts links to established science, which you all ignore, he gets mad, and then you get catty and bitchy and circle the wagons, and then make him the new Al Gore. And the circle of life continues.

I don't remember having it out with you in any serious way, but you still call me a nut for asking you to back your shit up.

Still waiting for your phantom astrophysicists and who's writing their payroll checks. Credibility, much?

311 Jaerik  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:04:49pm

Walter:

Let's go one step further. Let's throw out every data set, every model, and every article that CRU has ever worked or collaborated on. Let's wipe them off the face of the planet. Let's even go back in time to do so.

There's still 3-4 other climate centers using separate data and separate models that have arrived at precisely the same conclusion. In fact, the graphs are nearly identical.

How do you explain that one?

312 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:05:35pm

re: #305 Obdicut

Asteroids.

313 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:06:11pm

re: #306 LudwigVanQuixote

Cool, thanks. Just trying to be ready to respond to any denier talking points.

It's obviously a strong paper, since it's been cited already.

314 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:06:58pm

re: #312 spare o'lake

Okay. So that has no bearing on whether AGW is a threat, right, just if it's, in the opinion of those scientists, the largest threat to human survival?

So they're not, in fact, deniers?

315 Kewalo  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:06:59pm

I'm not a scientist of any kind, but the science just isn't that difficult. But for people like me you might want to consider this. I am trying to post the global temp for 2009 from NOAA but I'm not able to. Anyone have a clue what I might be doing wrong?

316 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:07:35pm

re: #303 Spare O'Lake

There goes your last ounce of credibility with me.
Done.

What, that he can't learn the basic science?

Look, it is really simple you are one of those ones here too who likes to not look at the science. OK, your little game with that table the other week... please. Like I think that a person who judges science by politics even after being hit in the head with endless evidence, is ever going to learn.

So pardon me if your choice to like me does little to hurt my feelings.

317 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:07:43pm

re: #309 LudwigVanQuixote

I've given you several. How about you realize that some science is settled and we know what we know. The very contention that we never settle anything in science is a form of denialism.


the science is settled! resistance is futile! throw down you intelect, and come out mit your hands up!

318 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:07:59pm

re: #309 LudwigVanQuixote

Still waiting for proof that I've denied climate science...

319 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:08:52pm

re: #310 WindUpBird

When you called me a queen what did you mean?
You gaping asshole.

320 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:09:16pm

re: #311 Jaerik

Walter:

Let's go one step further. Let's throw out every data set, every model, and every article that CRU has ever worked or collaborated on. Let's wipe them off the face of the planet. Let's even go back in time to do so.

There's still 3-4 other climate centers using separate data and separate models that have arrived at precisely the same conclusion. In fact, the graphs are nearly identical.

How do you explain that one?

Because, most of the temperature data that has been compiled in the numerous datasets, like Harcrut3, have come from the same 4 to 5 sources, so, even though we are talking about different datasets, the foundation data elements in those dataset have all come from the same sources.

Hell, as you know, (well, maybe you don't know), there is only so many temperature data points available monthly from 1850 until now.

Oh, and I am not going to go any further in discussing OTHER datasets and other modeling software, this is the only time I am going off topic, my topic, as I set forth a few comments ago.

I am concentrating on the Hadcrut3 dataset and the IT modeling practices of CRU.

Good try, didn't work...

321 Stuart Leviton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:09:45pm

re: #15 freetokenSorry to disagree about Germany my friend. Germany had law but as for democracy,, while the German Aristocracy allowed to share power with the industrialists, the the middle and lower class were kept out of power. Add that to a foreign policy which left her isolated and surrounded by enemies and you wound up with the conditions for war and revolution. Even after WWI, Germany was unable to form a stable democracy - although she did hold out much longer than the Eastern European nations which turned totalitarian a decade earlier. Sorry to disagree, my friend, but Germany was a moral lesson in what happens if you don't share your toys.

322 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:10:05pm

re: #318 SixDegrees

Still waiting for proof that I've denied climate science...

I'm still waiting for Ludwig to discuss the science with me as I asked above?

323 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:10:05pm

re: #318 SixDegrees

Again, Recuansy already posted it above. Are you using the defense of ignorance?

324 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:10:30pm

re: #308 spare o'lake

Here's a couple:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

So you're hitting me with a guy totally outside the mainstream who believes it's cosmic rays, who was in a wildly discredited documentary that edited and misrepresented scientists' words to the point where they protested. Shaviv has been totally debunked.

Now tell me what percentage of scientists involved in this issue agree with him, which was party of my original question.

You guys really will reach anywhere, across time and space, won't you?

325 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:10:37pm

re: #317 brookly red

the science is settled! resistance is futile! throw down you intelect, and come out mit your hands up!

If you disagree about the basic science of AGW, you are either stupid, ignorant, willfully blind, delusional or some combination of the above

LudwigVanQuixote

Discussion will not be allowed. Please shut your piehole and prepare for North Korean embarkation.

326 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:10:43pm

re: #319 spare o'lake

When you called me a queen what did you mean?
You gaping asshole.

hehe, only for my friends!

327 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:11:31pm

re: #318 SixDegrees

Still waiting for proof that I've denied climate science...

MMMhmmm, the pseudo denier pseudo denies he is a denier and sticks around to troll. Six you are a new level of pathetic really. It almost makes me miss the real ones. They at least had the courage of their convictions.

You are just too droll.

328 Stuart Leviton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:11:59pm

re: #54 Obdicut

Speaking as an ex-bartender: You can not tell if a real drunk is sober or completely three sheets overboard. It's a lifestyle for them.

That said, while I wouldn't get into a car with Hitchens, alcohol and rhetoric have a long and storied association.


A shocking revelation: Hitchens has his own private God.

329 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:12:25pm

re: #289 SixDegrees

Still waiting. Having trouble finding an example?

Don't feel bad, I too got questioned a few days ago, apparently I must be a denier because I find both cap & trade and simple regulatory control of emissions to be nearsighted bullshit. Nevermind the dozen or so times I have called for complete cessation of the use of fossil fuels for transportation and energy production within the next 30 years. Because I don't like the feel-good but do-little proposals currently being batted around to combat climate change I simply must be a denier.

Heh, I'm working on a thorough and complete proposal of my own but it isn't as easy as a few easily explained paragraphs. Maybe in a couple of months...

330 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:13:03pm

re: #319 spare o'lake

When you called me a queen what did you mean?
You gaping asshole.

But in case you really don't know: Drama queen.

The "last ounce of credibility. Done." thing is silly. All you do is go back and forth with Ludwig. I don't believe for an instant he still had any cred with you.

331 Kewalo  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:14:01pm

I changed browsers, I guess my problem was with FF.

The years 2001-2008 rank among the ten warmest years of the 130-year (1880-2009) record and 2009 will certainly join them as one of the ten warmest years of the global surface temperature record. Based upon several factors, including the known year-to-date (January through October) temperature anomaly, recent historical values for November and December, and the presence of an El Niño episode in the tropical Pacific, the global January-December temperature for combined land and ocean surfaces is estimated to be about 0.56°C (1.01°F) above the 20th century average, which would be the fifth warmest since records began in 1880. However, uncertainty associated with the November and December outcome suggests a range of most likely ranks of fourth, fifth or sixth warmest on record. Regardless of this year's exact placement, the 2000s decade (2000-09) will be the warmest on record for the global, with a surface temperature about 0.54 °C (0.96 °F) above the long-term (20th century) average. This will easily surpass the 1990s value of 0.36 °C (0.65 °F).
[Link: www.ncdc.noaa.gov...]

Unless someone really believes that these national agencies are "fudging" the numbers I think it's settled that the earth is getting warmer. I can also post a link to the rise in CO2. So to go from these numbers to why the earth is warming and the CO2 rising it was pretty easy for me, a non-scientist to conclude that we humans are the principle reason.

332 Sharmuta  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:15:29pm
333 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:15:45pm

re: #320 Walter L. Newton

Waler, you don't know the first damn thing about this. I am not even going to go there with you in an effort to actually save you embarrassment.

So before we even go down that little path, I want you to consider the following points:

1. Data was published multiple times with the full error analysis in multiple journals along the way.

2. You wouldn't have a clue how to analyze the raw data in the first place,

3. At no will you ever be able to show that they ever did anything wrong with their data. The best you can argue is that you are pissed that you can't follow their code.

4. Of course they know where their data came from. I mean they only would have reported it up and down in any journal article they published.

5. There is a lot more data and it is publicly available even in raw form...

6. You are not a scientist, but don't let that stop you from presenting yourself as someone in a position to judge jack or shit - as if you would be objective?

Sorry Walter, just don't even try. I am just not going to play with you.

334 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:15:58pm

re: #325 SixDegrees

Discussion will not be allowed. Please shut your piehole and prepare for North Korean embarkation.

jah, jah piehole, jah...auf zum Zug mit dem Rest von Ihnen schmutzige Verweigerer

335 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:16:45pm

re: #317 brookly red

the science is settled! resistance is futile! throw down you intelect, and come out mit your hands up!

Or just stop being willfully blind and learn the basic science. It isn't hard.

336 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:17:02pm

re: #319 spare o'lake

When you called me a queen what did you mean?
You gaping asshole.

He meant that you whine like a bitch :)

337 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:17:57pm

re: #325 SixDegrees

Discussion will not be allowed. Please shut your piehole and prepare for North Korean embarkation.

Poor Six, care to acknowledge that the roundness of the Earth is settled science?

338 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:19:20pm

re: #335 LudwigVanQuixote

Or just stop being willfully blind and learn the basic science. It isn't hard.

please stop declaring it settled, it's not.

339 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:19:41pm

Internet: Serious Fucking Business!

340 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:20:43pm

re: #324 WindUpBird

So you're hitting me with a guy totally outside the mainstream who believes it's cosmic rays, who was in a wildly discredited documentary that edited and misrepresented scientists' words to the point where they protested. Shaviv has been totally debunked.

Now tell me what percentage of scientists involved in this issue agree with him, which was party of my original question.

You guys really will reach anywhere, across time and space, won't you?

You asked for the names of the astrophysicists and I gave them to you. They have impeccable credentials and have not been "debunked" merely because they represent minority views. As I understand it the solar research is ongoing.
You have just shown me how closed your own mind is.

341 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:21:14pm

re: #338 brookly red

What isn't settled, please?

A) That CO2 causes warming in atmosphere?

B) That humankind has increased the CO2 concentration into the atmosphere?

342 Jaerik  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:21:15pm

re: #320 Walter L. Newton

Because, most of the temperature data that has been compiled in the numerous datasets, like Harcrut3, have come from the same 4 to 5 sources...

But that's where I'm confused. I'm trying to figure out your argument, not refute it. I'm not sure what I'm "trying."

You're saying that the unreliability of the CRU data and models is why there is room for speculation. I'm tentatively agreeing with you for the sake of argument and suggesting we discount ALL CRU data. Let's completely write them off! No loss to me.

But then I'm pointing out that there are, as you said, "4 to 5 other sources," that have nothing to do with CRU, that still back up their models. Independent sources, that pre-date CRU's questionable modeling.

Are you saying those 4 or 5 original sources are now all unreliable? Did CRU's shenanigans with the data somehow go back in time and corrupt the original data?

Did CRU erase their data as I've seen you previously claim? Or is the data from those 4-5 original sources that you're now retroactively discounting? I'm confused. You're being inconsistent or not explaining yourself well - one or the other.

343 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:22:01pm

re: #333 LudwigVanQuixote

Waler, you don't know the first damn thing about this. I am not even going to go there with you in an effort to actually save you embarrassment.

So before we even go down that little path, I want you to consider the following points:

1. Data was published multiple times with the full error analysis in multiple journals along the way.

2. You wouldn't have a clue how to analyze the raw data in the first place,

3. At no will you ever be able to show that they ever did anything wrong with their data. The best you can argue is that you are pissed that you can't follow their code.

4. Of course they know where their data came from. I mean they only would have reported it up and down in any journal article they published.

5. There is a lot more data and it is publicly available even in raw form...

6. You are not a scientist, but don't let that stop you from presenting yourself as someone in a position to judge jack or shit - as if you would be objective?

Sorry Walter, just don't even try. I am just not going to play with you.

You are so cute.

Most people here know one thing for sure, I do understand HOW the data was analyzed. I don't have to know the route to a certain place in order to know how to drive a car.

I do know a hell of a lot about the data processing procedures that have been going on at CRU, I have all the Fortran and IDL source code, datasets, programmer notes, and I have go over a great deal of this stuff.

But, it doesn't matter... and do me a favor, since you don't want to discuss the computer science related to UEA and CRU, don't brother to jump into my conversation when I am dealing with that topic.

You never answered my question above anyway.

344 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:22:12pm

re: #336 LudwigVanQuixote

He meant that you whine like a bitch :)


can't you just go back to your Malkin leather fantasies & stop calling other people bitches? you really did play your self with that one...

345 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:22:55pm

re: #338 brookly red

please stop declaring it settled, it's not.

Really?

CO2 is a GHG. This is settled.

The more of it you have in your atmosphere, with a star like our sun at least, the warmer you must get. This is settled.

We have increased CO2 concentrations in our atmosphere by more than 50% since the beginning of the century.

This too is settled.

When ice gets warmer, it melts. WOuld you believe that this too is settled science?

Ice reflects more light than water does. This to is settled.

So I have given you the driver and a primary feedback.

Both are settled.

Care to challenge any of those points? They are truly sufficient to see that there must be a problem.

346 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:23:30pm

re: #342 Jaerik

But that's where I'm confused. I'm trying to figure out your argument, not refute it. I'm not sure what I'm "trying."

You're saying that the unreliability of the CRU data and models is why there is room for speculation. I'm tentatively agreeing with you for the sake of argument and suggesting we discount ALL CRU data. Let's completely write them off! No loss to me.

But then I'm pointing out that there are, as you said, "4 to 5 other sources," that have nothing to do with CRU, that still back up their models. Independent sources, that pre-date CRU's questionable modeling.

Are you saying those 4 or 5 original sources are now all unreliable? Did CRU's shenanigans with the data somehow go back in time and corrupt the original data?

Did CRU erase their data as I've seen you previously claim? Or is the data from those 4-5 original sources that you're now retroactively discounting? I'm confused. You're being inconsistent or not explaining yourself well - one or the other.

I am going to explain it to you, as I have been able to reconstruct this. But give me some time to build the comments... I will be composing one right now... just hang in here... ok?

347 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:24:05pm

re: #327 LudwigVanQuixote

Still waiting...

348 Jaerik  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:24:23pm

re: #346 Walter L. Newton

I will be composing one right now... just hang in here... ok?

I'm in no hurry. Take your time.

349 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:25:23pm

re: #347 SixDegrees

Still waiting...

Ohh please hold your breath Six...

350 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:26:15pm

re: #345 LudwigVanQuixote

Really?

CO2 is a GHG. This is settled.

The more of it you have in your atmosphere, with a star like our sun at least, the warmer you must get. This is settled.

We have increased CO2 concentrations in our atmosphere by more than 50% since the beginning of the century.

This too is settled.

When ice gets warmer, it melts. WOuld you believe that this too is settled science?

Ice reflects more light than water does. This to is settled.

So I have given you the driver and a primary feedback.

Both are settled.

Care to challenge any of those points? They are truly sufficient to see that there must be a problem.

can't you just go back to your Malkin leather fantasies & stop calling other people bitches? you really did play your self with that one...

351 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:26:47pm

re: #347 SixDegrees

Still waiting...

Why? As I've said several times, it's already been linked above. Unless you're claiming ignorance, you posted a well-debunked talking point.

Hey, by the way: you called me a troll, and I'm still waiting for you to explain why. Are you simply unable to do so?

352 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:28:50pm

re: #349 LudwigVanQuixote

So you're unable to back up your claim.

What a surprise.

353 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:29:31pm

re: #349 LudwigVanQuixote

...and I see now you're fantasizing over my death. How rational of you.

354 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:30:52pm

re: #353 SixDegrees

...and I see now you're fantasizing over my death. How rational of you.

not death, submission...

355 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:31:33pm

re: #343 Walter L. Newton

Walter, way to ignore the points I posted. Let me repeat if you have somehow found in the last few days, all the code that was hacked from CRU, because you were complimenting six on it yesterday or the day before, in in that day of your intense and brilliant analysis of the code, you fell you have a serious question, then make it. I do not have their code in front of me, and more over for all the reasons I listed and you ignored, it would be a stupid enterprise anyway.

I don't care if you are the original computer nerd who dreams in machine language and writes poetry in hexadecimal. It does not mean you know the first thing about the science.

I repeat. Their science and their data was published many times in peer reviewed journals along the way. People with actual PhD.s looked at it and did not see glaring nonsense errors.

I care, I really don't care about what you think about their coding skills particularly if you only have some piece of their code taken from a hack that was designed to disscredit them.

Do you have any idea how much that makes you and six into assholes for even looking at it, let alone trying to debate about it?

Six you want evidence of being a denier you little shiot, ok how about you took criminally gathered partial evidence at face value, to critique honest hardworking scientists and convinced your little sheep Walter to bleat after you?

356 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:32:25pm

re: #350 brookly red

can't you just go back to your Malkin leather fantasies & stop calling other people bitches? you really did play your self with that one...

No because I am bringing the real science... Is that so hard for you to look at? Or do yuo just want to ignore it. It makes little difference to me.

357 Stuart Leviton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:32:38pm

re: #203 LudwigVanQuixoteShalom Bayet, vebakisha.

358 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:33:33pm

re: #357 Stuart Leviton

Shalom Bayet, vebakisha.

Adonai Elochaichem Emet

359 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:34:55pm

re: #350 brookly red

can't you just go back to your Malkin leather fantasies & stop calling other people bitches? you really did play your self with that one...

And I didn't, I was clarifying when he asked about what someone else called him.

360 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:34:56pm

re: #342 Jaerik

But that's where I'm confused. I'm trying to figure out your argument, not refute it. I'm not sure what I'm "trying."

You're saying that the unreliability of the CRU data and models is why there is room for speculation. I'm tentatively agreeing with you for the sake of argument and suggesting we discount ALL CRU data. Let's completely write them off! No loss to me.

But then I'm pointing out that there are, as you said, "4 to 5 other sources," that have nothing to do with CRU, that still back up their models. Independent sources, that pre-date CRU's questionable modeling.

Are you saying those 4 or 5 original sources are now all unreliable? Did CRU's shenanigans with the data somehow go back in time and corrupt the original data?

Did CRU erase their data as I've seen you previously claim? Or is the data from those 4-5 original sources that you're now retroactively discounting? I'm confused. You're being inconsistent or not explaining yourself well - one or the other.

Let's first deal with your last question "Did CRU erase their data as I've seen you previously claim?" No, they did not erase data.

The Hadcrut3 data set is made up of data elements, about 5000 of them, temperature readings, in 5 degree by 5 degree grids, which cover the whole planet. A grid that size is about the size of Nevada (hat tip 6 Degrees). Every month, from Jan 1850 until now, CRU has tried to put a temperature reading into each grid, one reading for each month, for each year from Jan. 1850.

Of course, it's impossible to fill each grid, each month with temperature readings, early on that was a lot of places with no way to get a temperature reading, a lot of open ocean, uninhabited places... but they tried, using many sources, every thing from actual reading in that grid, to tree ring information.

So, where the claim that the "erased data" came from was this. You start with your first data set (file a table, you know, like a spreadsheet) and you fill in as much of the data as you can.

You do research, and you come up with NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data to fill into the grids.

So, you make a SECOND pass on the data set, putting the NEW NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data into the data set.

But you never made a COPY of the first data set. You simply edited the existing one with NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data, and never made a legacy copy so you could compare original data against the next set of data points.

And this went on and on over the years, always coming up with NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data.

What's the problem? One, they cannot look at every grid right now, especially the older grids what haven't had NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data entered in years, and tell you the SOURCE for that temperature reading. Why, because as they added NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data, they didn't keep legacy copies, the mapping of what data from what source into what grid become sloppy or non-existent.

Now if you are still with me... let me know and I will continue in another comment...

361 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:35:48pm

re: #360 Walter L. Newton

No just look at 343. This is all nonsense. You don't have a credible source.

362 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:36:27pm

re: #356 LudwigVanQuixote

No because I am bringing the real science... Is that so hard for you to look at? Or do yuo just want to ignore it. It makes little difference to me.

It makes all the difference to you... no matter how many times you declare it settled I will not submit, & it's killing you. ;)

363 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:37:03pm

re: #355 LudwigVanQuixote

Ludwig, I am composing a narrative for Jaerik, who seems interested in the data. Stick around and you can jump in if you want. Otherwise, I'm not interested in your comments right now, I tried to engage you in this conversation a little while ago, you refused, I'm busy.

364 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:37:55pm

re: #354 brookly red

not death, submission...

Not gonna happen. Like I've said, I don't have a dog in this race, not one that I'll bring to this forum, anyway. I'm an equal opportunity highlighter of assholism, and I'm not going to stop pointing it out when one side does it even if I agree with some underlying premise in their lane.

Let's face it: if I were here to attack AGW, all I'd have to do is keep my mouth shut and let people like Ludwig do my job for me. He's a master at shoving many of the undecided into the opposition's camp with proclamations like

If you disagree about the basic science of AGW, you are either stupid, ignorant, willfully blind, delusional or some combination of the above

I mean, you can't buy better support for "denialism" than that.

365 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:38:09pm

re: #362 brookly red

It makes all the difference to you... no matter how many times you declare it settled I will not submit, & it's killing you. ;)

IN other words you are just being a troll. ok.. LA LA LA I can't hear you says the boy. Fine. The science is still real. Physics does not care if you defiantly refused to believe in in it. But it does always win.

Go away or stay it makes no differences little boy.

366 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:39:40pm

re: #364 SixDegrees

Not gonna happen. Like I've said, I don't have a dog in this race, not one that I'll bring to this forum, anyway. I'm an equal opportunity highlighter of assholism, and I'm not going to stop pointing it out when one side does it even if I agree with some underlying premise in their lane.

Let's face it: if I were here to attack AGW, all I'd have to do is keep my mouth shut and let people like Ludwig do my job for me. He's a master at shoving many of the undecided into the opposition's camp with proclamations like

If you disagree about the basic science of AGW, you are either stupid, ignorant, willfully blind, delusional or some combination of the above

I mean, you can't buy better support for "denialism" than that.

indeed.

367 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:42:24pm

re: #363 Walter L. Newton

Ludwig, I am composing a narrative for Jaerik, who seems interested in the data. Stick around and you can jump in if you want. Otherwise, I'm not interested in your comments right now, I tried to engage you in this conversation a little while ago, you refused, I'm busy.

NO because your narrative is questionable from the start.

There is no way to consider it, without the code and the complete code in question.

Now the best case scenario is you got your hands on a piece of someone's private and stolen work, which you are now analyzing in the way that those who released that piece would like you to look at it. And you know what, even if it is fully legit - in the sense that the code is the actual stolen code. You still will not be able to prove anything.

why?

Because the science of the papers it was published in is kosher. The review was kosher.

Even Six was smart enough to drop this nonsense yeterday when he got called on it. You however were always too pig headed to see when yuo have a completely losing hand. This is just like when you believed Jonah Goldberg Walter. You should learn from your past mistakes.

368 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:44:11pm

re: #364 SixDegrees

How brave six, when are you going to start the screaming.. or the whining?

Really you should save your little friend Walter from making a bigger fool of himself than he is already. You were at least smart enough to stop this foolishness yesterday.

369 brookly red  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:44:12pm

re: #365 LudwigVanQuixote

IN other words you are just being a troll. ok.. LA LA LA I can't hear you says the boy. Fine. The science is still real. Physics does not care if you defiantly refused to believe in in it. But it does always win.

Go away or stay it makes no differences little boy.

I am 50 years old Ludwig, not a boy, so sorry to disappoint you... besides boy is a racist term anyway, haven't we settled that?

370 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:44:50pm

re: #330 WindUpBird

But in case you really don't know: Drama queen.

The "last ounce of credibility. Done." thing is silly. All you do is go back and forth with Ludwig. I don't believe for an instant he still had any cred with you.

It's his dismissive arrogance, trollish need to dominate the threads, and his demeaning way of speaking to others which ultimately gets my hackles up.

371 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:45:14pm

re: #342 Jaerik

(continued)

So, no, data was not erased, it just wasn't kept in legacy copies, at least that's why CRU has said and answered to.

Where did they get the temperature reading for the grids? From weather stations, tree rings, individual sources (ex: newspapers) all kinds of sources. But, sometimes one month they would get a reading from one place in the 5 x 5 degree grid, the next month from a location at a totally different place in the 5 x 5 degree grid.

Over the years, they would go back, get NEW, BETTER or AMENDED data, and try to fill in the months and years in each grid the best they could.

But thier current ability to tell you exactly WHERE each of the temperature reading came from, for every month, for every year in every grid, they can't totally do that. In some cases they can't even tell if one reading came from one end of the grid and then from the other end of the grid. Geographical locations within the grid and the temperature reading is important.

(Continued in a new comment)

372 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:46:05pm

re: #370 spare o'lake

It's his dismissive arrogance, trollish need to dominate the threads, and his demeaning way of speaking to others which ultimately gets my hackles up.

It's your willful ignorance that gets mine up. You are not dumb. I mean it. You have more than enough brains to look at the facts. I just wish you would. No one is hiding them.

373 Jaerik  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:46:43pm

re: #360 Walter L. Newton

Now if you are still with me... let me know and I will continue in another comment...

Completely with you, but so far you've only explained why CRU might be wrong. I already presupposed that CRU's models and conclusions are invalid as part of the argument. But keep going...

374 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:47:49pm

re: #371 Walter L. Newton

And he will push out this turd no matter what! It does not matter that he is going on about a piece of stolen code that was at best taken out of all context in order to discredit people. It does not matter that the actual code produced peer accepted results. It does not matter that he doesn't know the first thing about the science... GO on Walter... please tell us how fascists are leftists when you are done.

375 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:47:54pm

re: #367 LudwigVanQuixote

Unless you actually have something to challenge my narrative with, stay out of this. My narrative comes from the information about Hadcrut3 on CRU own website. I am just laying it out in lay language. I am a database designer of 30 years, I know what they are talking about and I know what I am talking about.

Evidently you don't.

376 recusancy  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:49:28pm

re: #374 LudwigVanQuixote

And he will push out this turd no matter what! It does not matter that he is going on about a piece of stolen code that was at best taken out of all context in order to discredit people. It does not matter that the actual code produced peer accepted results. It does not matter that he doesn't know the first thing about the science... GO on Walter... please tell us how fascists are leftists when you are done.

lol

377 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:49:36pm

re: #374 LudwigVanQuixote

And he will push out this turd no matter what! It does not matter that he is going on about a piece of stolen code that was at best taken out of all context in order to discredit people. It does not matter that the actual code produced peer accepted results. It does not matter that he doesn't know the first thing about the science... GO on Walter... please tell us how fascists are leftists when you are done.

Ludwig, I haven't even talked about code or programs or software, I am talking talking about the Hadcrut3 data set which is available for download free to the public...

here, go play with this for a while and leave me along while I continue...

[Link: hadobs.metoffice.com...]

378 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:50:16pm

re: #375 Walter L. Newton

Unless you actually have something to challenge my narrative with, stay out of this. My narrative comes from the information about Hadcrut3 on CRU own website. I am just laying it out in lay language. I am a database designer of 30 years, I know what they are talking about and I know what I am talking about.

Evidently you don't.

Umm... I proved that your narrative is pointless, questionable at best and ultimately disproven from the start. And so did did Jaerik.

You are just too pathetically stupid to see it. I really was honestly trying to save you from embarrassment Walter, but you just keep soldiering on... you poor deluded man.

379 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:50:49pm

re: #367 LudwigVanQuixote


Even Six was smart enough to drop this nonsense yeterday when he got called on it. You however were always too pig headed to see when yuo have a completely losing hand. This is just like when you believed Jonah Goldberg Walter. You should learn from your past mistakes.

Actually, I didn't "drop" anything. CRU's data management procedures are a mess. So is their code. I've said since the very first day the stolen data was released, and repeatedly, that this was the case. I've also said that such sloppiness doesn't necessarily imply that the results obtained were wrong. But it does provide a hook for the opposition to hang objections on, and the CRU crew was foolish not to realize this and archive their raw data. The same goes for their code: inserting off-the-cuff, unprofessional comments in it is a practice that ought to have been curtailed.

Want proof that both of these things are a problem? Look around. Your own irrational non-defense of the matter, and the fact that you deem it necessary, is all the proof you need that these it would have been better had CRU conducted these parts of their process more professionally.

Or, if you prefer, you can also produce a link to the post where I " drop[ped] this nonsense" and "got called on it" along with a link to those posts where I denied climate science.

380 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:51:20pm

Great, I get done with work, go out of my way to check my parent's house for them while they're away, and after checking finally get to pull up LGF only to find yet another thread turned into a trainwreck.

381 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:51:45pm

re: #373 Jaerik

Completely with you, but so far you've only explained why CRU might be wrong. I already presupposed that CRU's models and conclusions are invalid as part of the argument. But keep going...

No, I am ONLY telling you about how Hadcrut3 was put together over the years. And guess what, if you look through the history of LGF, you will see that I am not a AGW denier, but I am bothered about the sloppy methods in regards to Information Technology and they way, in this case, CRU has handled the data processing aspects of all this.

Everyone talks about peer-reviewed science, well guess what, any large company that would peer-review CRU's programming and data base construction techniques would give it THUMBS DOWN.

382 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:52:55pm

re: #379 SixDegrees

Actually, I didn't "drop" anything. CRU's data management procedures are a mess. So is their code. I've said since the very first day the stolen data was released, and repeatedly, that this was the case. I've also said that such sloppiness doesn't necessarily imply that the results obtained were wrong. But it does provide a hook for the opposition to hang objections on, and the CRU crew was foolish not to realize this and archive their raw data. The same goes for their code: inserting off-the-cuff, unprofessional comments in it is a practice that ought to have been curtailed.

Want proof that both of these things are a problem? Look around. Your own irrational non-defense of the matter, and the fact that you deem it necessary, is all the proof you need that these it would have been better had CRU conducted these parts of their process more professionally.

Or, if you prefer, you can also produce a link to the post where I " drop[ped] this nonsense" and "got called on it" along with a link to those posts where I denied climate science.

Well then apparently I gave you more credit than you deserve. Go down to your little thread about it and see my and Charles response to you.

That would answer your denier ism question too.

383 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:54:43pm

re: #381 Walter L. Newton

No, I am ONLY telling you about how Hadcrut3 was put together over the years. And guess what, if you look through the history of LGF, you will see that I am not a AGW denier, but I am bothered about the sloppy methods in regards to Information Technology and they way, in this case, CRU has handled the data processing aspects of all this.

Everyone talks about peer-reviewed science, well guess what, any large company that would peer-review CRU's programming and data base construction techniques would give it THUMBS DOWN.

How scientific... MMMHMMM. A thumbs down. they didn't write code that you would like... So ummm Walter, was the code wrong? Were the results it generated wrong? Was the fact that you are even looking at their stuff is illegal wrong?

Walter you are pathetic. Just for the record. Completely pathetic.

384 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:55:50pm

re: #372 LudwigVanQuixote

It's your willful ignorance that gets mine up. You are not dumb. I mean it. You have more than enough brains to look at the facts. I just wish you would. No one is hiding them.

You schlong, did you forget that we previously agreed on the probable veracity of the basics of the science and that I am therefore not a denier and that I am in favour of meaningful action to reduce GHG emissions? You just can't stand it if someone like me refuses to recite the catechism. That's your problem.

385 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:57:22pm

If this pointless back and forth bickering doesn't stop right now, I'll start handing out timeouts.

What a complete turn-off this is for people who want to read comments to learn something and get people's viewpoints.

It gets really old to have to keep saying this.

386 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 4:59:27pm

re: #385 Charles

If this pointless back and forth bickering doesn't stop right now, I'll start handing out timeouts.

What a complete turn-off this is for people who want to read comments to learn something and get people's viewpoints.

It gets really old to have to keep saying this.

Thank you, Charles. Let's all head over to the current AGW thread. There's some deniers over there in need of rebuttal and additional downdings.

387 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:00:07pm

re: #385 Charles

If this pointless back and forth bickering doesn't stop right now, I'll start handing out timeouts.

What a complete turn-off this is for people who want to read comments to learn something and get people's viewpoints.

It gets really old to have to keep saying this.

Noted and done for this thread.

388 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:01:04pm

re: #368 LudwigVanQuixote

It isn't foolish. Walter is entirely correct that CRU's data management was very sloppy, and that they are unable to reproduce it as he's described. And that sloppy data handling has indisputably caused problems for their work.

When our company does a software delivery, we employ a sometimes enormous set of test data that we run through the product to verify that it works. Prior to each deliver, after testing, we tag each and every item that took a part in that delivery - source code, test data, PowerPoint presentations, design documents, emails and on and on and on. We can, at a moment's notice, completely and accurately reproduce any past delivery's configuration and manifest should the need ever arise. It rarely does, but it isn't completely unheard of, either. This is standard industry practice, and there are excellent tools available that automate most of the process and reduce storage space by storing only the differences between files and the information needed to reconstruct them.

I would behoove the CRU - and others doing similar research - to take this incident to heart and start doing things right. The tools for managing this sort of thing have been around for at least 20 years and are available for free.

Don't put words in my mouth.

389 spare o'lake  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:01:10pm

I apologize for losing my cool.
Gotta run.

390 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:01:38pm

re: #364 SixDegrees

Although in theory I support what LVQ is supposedly trying to do I can't help but agree.

This is not the way to reach anyone, it is more a lesson in how to show yourself to be utterly dismissive and comtempuous of anyone who does not already share your views. Hell he even attacks those that do share his views but without the required amount of "mankind is doomed" fervor that he seemingly finds so attractive.

Sigh...I guess he sees no other way to make his argument sufficently compelling without the excessive drama. Sticking to even the minimal agreed upon effects by the IPCC would be enough when presented intelligently to make most people think hard about AGW. But I guess he finds "Hundreds of millions will die!!!" to be more compelling even without citable factual evidence.

Same old story, if your enemies don't do you in you can still always count on your friends to do it.

391 SixDegrees  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:02:27pm

re: #385 Charles

If this pointless back and forth bickering doesn't stop right now, I'll start handing out timeouts.

What a complete turn-off this is for people who want to read comments to learn something and get people's viewpoints.

It gets really old to have to keep saying this.

Noted. I'm out for the evening.

392 Jaerik  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:09:18pm

re: #381 Walter L. Newton

Everyone talks about peer-reviewed science, well guess what, any large company that would peer-review CRU's programming and data base construction techniques would give it THUMBS DOWN.

As would I. I'm a programmer by trade. Thumbs down.

I think what I'm trying to explain is... CRU and Hadcrut3 have an arguably murky and questionable history now. I disagree, personally, but a good debate comes from giving ground to either side in order to move the conversation forward. Here, I am willing to write off both CRU and Hadcrut3 as irreparably compromised. You don't need to spend any more paragraphs explaining why.

What I'm pointing out is that even with both of these out of the picture, CRU's models aren't the only model, Hadcrut3 is not the only data, and CRU's data interpolation techniques aren't the only widely-used technique.

And yet somehow, everyone has independently come to the same conclusion.

You seem like a smart guy, (and I hope you're willing to assume the same about me), so you have to understand why from a sheer probability perspective, given the number of independent variables, I am more inclined to believe this means the underlying supposition is correct. Occam's Razor.

Clearly, we disagree here. You appear to believe (and correct me if I'm wrong), that all of the research on AGW is tainted because of the problems with CRU and Hadcrut3. Either directly, because of pollution of the end product, or indirectly due to shared errors in data processing techniques, or mistakes in the original data itself.

And I respectfully just can't come with you on that. I'm sorry.

393 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:17:25pm

re: #392 Jaerik

Excellent post. I completely agree.

It simply doesn't matter whether the CRU code is sloppy. I've been writing code for 30+ years myself, and I've seen a lot of absolutely hideous spaghetti code that works beautifully. Sloppiness and poor commenting may be an undesirable thing for many reasons, but it does NOT necessarily say anything about whether the code will do what it's supposed to do.

And the fact that the results generated from the CRU code are duplicated by so many other completely independent sources really should have put this issue to bed a long time ago.

394 freetoken  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:17:57pm

re: #321 Stuart Leviton

No doubt that the German model of government before WWII was one of the direct causes of how that country went down the path it did.

Yet, the concept of representation was still there, even though it was strongly tilted toward the elite, the rich, etc. The idea of governance was built upon the nation-state, embodied in laws that in theory would be applied to everyone and enforced justly, etc.

In Japan too, where the style of government there was far less democratic than in the US, the structure of the society was fairly stable and integrated concepts of law, nation-state, etc.

The difference with Afghanistan is there is not that cultural underpinning upon which to build a modern society. My (limited) understanding of Afghanistan is that the society is still strongly built around the tribal model, with a paternal leader, with little self identity as an "Afghani" as the central defining element of the culture, or a modern concept of law (as opposed to an older religious one.)

That what my point, not that Germany was an ideal democracy.

It's not "my" point really, but a school of thought into which I have bought. That is why I find the (often offered) parallels with the US still having military bases in Germany and Japan not really relevant to Afghanistan. Our bases are not in Germany and Japan to build those nations, but rather to share the burden of defending them.

395 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 5:23:22pm

re: #393 Charles

Thanks for saying so, Charles. That's been my contention too.

Man, the code that made Battlefield 1942 run; kee-rist, that was a tangled mess. But such an awesome game.

396 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 6:21:10pm

re: #340 spare o'lake

You asked for the names of the astrophysicists and I gave them to you. They have impeccable credentials and have not been "debunked" merely because they represent minority views. As I understand it the solar research is ongoing.
You have just shown me how closed your own mind is.

You are incorrect. They have indeed been debunked. The trends are completely opposite what they would need to be for cosmic rays to make any sense. Their minority views are not like 70-30 minority views, they're 99.9-.1 minority views. You didn't read my link, you aren't reading Ludwig's evidence.

Keep grasping at straws. Keep linking to fringe opinions. Keep ignoring settled science. Keep on with your false-equivalency. Keep on being Republican!

397 PAUL_MACDONALD  Tue, Dec 15, 2009 7:07:02pm

re: #72 tradewind

Steven Tyler said after rehab that there's no musician who plays better drunk or stoned... they just think they do.

You've heard their music recently, yes? I would say he was wrong.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
5 days ago
Views: 154 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 320 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1