Here’s another excellent video debunking the claim that climatologists are “censoring” scientific journals to stifle critics and skeptical scientists.
2 |
watching you tiny alien kittens are Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:21:51pm |
So...uhh...I should call off the hit on Lord Monckton? Geez, do give a guy some warning next time how about?
///
| 3 |
Four More Tears Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:25:46pm |
Okay, after a bottle of Chimay this isn't making much sense.
| 5 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:36:51pm |
That's a really good video.
Unfortunately, the other side appears to reject the idea of science altogether. They'd rather scream about things that don't exist, as we know full well from our experience here with Creationists.
| 6 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:38:38pm |
Excellent video. He made very compelling arguments.
| 7 |
Charles Johnson Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:39:06pm |
How come nobody told me we had an insult-spewing asshole in the "Inglorious Basterds" thread tonight who needed to be banned?
Man, things are getting so freaking insane lately. People flouncing in a clean stove thread, and insulting me for recommending a movie.
| 8 |
laZardo Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:40:11pm |
re: #5 Summer
That's a really good video.
Unfortunately, the other side appears to reject the idea of science altogether. They'd rather scream about things that don't exist, as we know full well from our experience here with Creationists.
That's conservatism for you, unfortunately. Unless they can be convinced or otherwise politically marginalized then they could as well be held responsible for future disasters.
| 9 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:40:12pm |
re: #7 Charles
How come nobody told me we had an insult-spewing asshole in the "Inglorious Basterds" thread tonight who needed to be banned?
Man, things are getting so freaking insane lately. People flouncing in a clean stove thread, and insulting me for recommending a movie.
The clear hallmarks of an insane set of people. =)
| 10 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:40:28pm |
re: #7 Charles
How come nobody told me we had an insult-spewing asshole in the "Inglorious Basterds" thread tonight who needed to be banned?
Man, things are getting so freaking insane lately. People flouncing in a clean stove thread, and insulting me for recommending a movie.
Missed that.
| 12 |
Dark_Falcon Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:42:25pm |
re: #7 Charles
How come nobody told me we had an insult-spewing asshole in the "Inglorious Basterds" thread tonight who needed to be banned?
Man, things are getting so freaking insane lately. People flouncing in a clean stove thread, and insulting me for recommending a movie.
I never looked into that thread. The movie is on my "wait till it comes on HBO or Starz" list and I was at work while it was live. Sorry that happened though, and glad you flushed the flouncer.
| 13 |
Political Atheist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:43:05pm |
re: #7 Charles
Sorry man, not seen the movie so I skipped the thread.
| 14 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:43:20pm |
re: #7 Charles
The bat-shit crazy assholes keep going back to older and older threads to spew their garbage, it seems. They'll be trying to leave their bilge on threads from 2006 before long.
| 15 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:45:12pm |
| 16 |
Political Atheist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:47:16pm |
re: #14 Slumbering Behemoth
I just do not see why one would post to a dead thread. The whole troll and blogwar thing is mental dysfunction exemplified. Hey you have been bloging here longer than I-Has the flounce thing always been this weird?
| 17 |
rikzilla Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:49:31pm |
The deniers are grasping at straws and then representing the straws as bedrock fact.
Fact: The stolen CRU emails PROVE AGW is teh scam!!!11
Fact: Tree ring data is more accurate than modern instrumentation!
Fact: 30,000 "scientists" who signed the petition prove there is no consensus amongst climate scientists.
Hey folks! Ever wanted to be a respected scientist? You too can go sign the petition along with Drs Bozo D. Clown, Gerri Halliwell, and "Bones" Mc Coy. They along with assorted cranks and veterinarians make up the bulk of dissenting "Scientists". Hey, it seems cold out tonight...I need to go check the tree rings...you just can't trust those new fangly thermometer thingys ya know...
The thing that makes me sad is that Mr. Randi of the JREF has been had by the petition project!!! It's the first sign I've had that The Amazing Randi may be succumbing his advanced years. It's beyond sad.
| 18 |
Dark_Falcon Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:49:56pm |
re: #16 Rightwingconspirator
I just do not see why one would post to a dead thread. The whole troll and blogwar thing is mental dysfunction exemplified. Hey you have been bloging here longer than I-Has the flounce thing always been this weird?
Flouncing is actually somewhat new here. Most of it is people who decide that Charles' decision to leave the right was a poor one. They further feel compelled to say so and in insulting ways, thus earning a banned.
| 19 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:50:25pm |
The man shown at 8:23 is Guy Stewart Callendar:
Beginning in 1938, Guy Stewart Callendar (1898-1964), a noted steam engineer and amateur meteorologist, revived the carbon dioxide theory of climate change by arguing that rising global temperatures and increased coal burning were closely linked. Working from his home in West Sussex, Callendar collected weather data from frontier stations around the world, formulated a coherent theory of infrared absorption by trace gases, and demonstrated that the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere, like the temperature, was indeed rising. This later became known as the "Callendar effect".
The collection comprises notebooks, correspondence, and other documents of G.S. Callendar. They include family papers and his war-time work on climate. All items have been digitised for reference purposes.
A full description of the collection can be found at the Archives Hub.
An at Wiki.
The work mentioned in the video was from the 1940s. I bring this up because every so often some dunderhead will show up saying that CO2 "is harmless plant food."
| 20 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:51:12pm |
I don't think climatologists should be or are censoring scientific journals. But they might want to consider editing them. I mean, have you tried to read some of that prose? Pliny the Elder weeps.
By the way, I am now about two thirds of the way from New England to the Mojave Desert, in case anyone wonders at my recent lack of snark.
| 21 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:51:58pm |
re: #16 Rightwingconspirator
Has the flounce thing always been this weird?
To the best of my recollection, it didn't start to get weird until Charles took the ID/Creationist subject head on, which I give him HUGE props for doing.
Though I wasn't here at that time, I'd be willing to bet there was a lot of weird flouncieness after the 9/11 terrorist attacks as well.
| 22 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:52:03pm |
More here for the history:
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
In the 19th century, scientists realized that gases in the atmosphere cause a "greenhouse effect" which affects the planet's temperature. These scientists were interested chiefly in the possibility that a lower level of carbon dioxide gas might explain the ice ages of the distant past. At the turn of the century, Svante Arrhenius calculated that emissions from human industry might someday bring a global warming. Other scientists dismissed his idea as faulty. In 1938, G.S. Callendar argued that the level of carbon dioxide was climbing and raising global temperature, but most scientists found his arguments implausible. It was almost by chance that a few researchers in the 1950s discovered that global warming truly was possible. In the early 1960s, C.D. Keeling measured the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere: it was rising fast. Researchers began to take an interest, struggling to understand how the level of carbon dioxide had changed in the past, and how the level was influenced by chemical and biological forces. They found that the gas plays a crucial role in climate change, so that the rising level could gravely affect our future. (This essay covers only developments relating directly to carbon dioxide, with a separate essay for Other Greenhouse Gases. For related theoretical issues, see the essay on Simple Models of Climate.)
CONTINUES
| 23 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:52:05pm |
Stewart did the teabagger protests on the Daily Show tonight. I didn't see it on cspan yesterday. It was almost like they were trying to write material for him. They were saying some of the stupidest shit imaginable.
Some guy was saying that they needed to show the politicians that "the pen is NOT mightier then the sword". My head almost exploded.
You've have to post the vid tomorrow when it becomes available.
| 24 |
Jack Burton Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:53:04pm |
re: #18 Dark_Falcon
Flouncing is actually somewhat new here. Most of it is people who decide that Charles' decision to leave the right was a poor one. They further feel compelled to say so and in insulting ways, thus earning a banned.
I think the recent flouncers feel as though they were betrayed or some stupid shit like that. The annoyed leftists of the type who thought CJ was an anti-muslim bigot running a hate site on par with Stormfront never really thought he was "on their side" so no need for the phony melodrama.
| 25 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:53:04pm |
re: #20 Cato the Elder
I don't think climatologists should be or are censoring scientific journals. But they might want to consider editing them. I mean, have you tried to read some of that prose? Pliny the Elder weeps.
By the way, I am now about two thirds of the way from New England to the Mojave Desert, in case anyone wonders at my recent lack of snark.
We submit that the passive voice has been established by tradition and in this response conclude that prose is for humanities weenies :)
| 26 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:54:55pm |
re: #20 Cato the Elder
[...]
By the way, I am now about two thirds of the way from New England to the Mojave Desert, in case anyone wonders at my recent lack of snark.
Good grief, you're not on the run from the law again are you?
| 27 |
Sharmuta Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:55:36pm |
re: #22 Gus 802
More here for the history:
AIP is really a great resource that I hope more Lizards will look into, even if they accept AGW, they might still learn some interesting stuff.
| 28 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:55:59pm |
re: #16 Rightwingconspirator
I just do not see why one would post to a dead thread. The whole troll and blogwar thing is mental dysfunction exemplified. Hey you have been bloging here longer than I-Has the flounce thing always been this weird?
They're the kind of immature idiots that try to mount DNS attacks on web sites.
Kinda like kids who egg mailboxes the night before Halloween and rush back to a place to laugh about it as if they just did something terribly worthwhile, exhilarating, and worth bragging about in homeroom the next day.
You know: dorks.
| 29 |
Jack Burton Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:56:19pm |
re: #23 recusancy
"I'll take 'The Penis Mightier' for 200 Alex."
| 30 |
Political Atheist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:56:39pm |
re: #18 Dark_Falcon
Thx. When i registered I just had no idea about any of that. Noob squared.
| 31 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:56:58pm |
| 32 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:57:30pm |
re: #26 Bagua
Good grief, you're not on the run from the law again are you?
No, just driving across the country for the first time ever, something every red-blooded American boy should do before the age of 60. Go west, old man!
| 33 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:57:31pm |
re: #27 Sharmuta
AIP is really a great resource that I hope more Lizards will look into, even if they accept AGW, they might still learn some interesting stuff.
The old photographs of the foundiung scientists caught my eye. Maybe I'll add The Discovery of Global Warming to my reading list.
| 34 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:57:38pm |
re: #20 Cato the Elder
I don't think climatologists should be or are censoring scientific journals. But they might want to consider editing them. I mean, have you tried to read some of that prose? Pliny the Elder weeps.
[...]
Agreed the real scandal of the emails is the grammar, typos and crude sentence structure. They played fast and furious with the Queen's English and should be punished accordingly.
| 35 |
Sharmuta Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:59:15pm |
re: #33 Gus 802
The old photographs of the foundiung scientists caught my eye. Maybe I'll add The Discovery of Global Warming to my reading list.
I think most of the book is on the site, but I might be mistaken.
| 36 |
Political Atheist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 9:59:27pm |
re: #28 Summer
Only the tech changes.
| 37 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:00:00pm |
re: #35 Sharmuta
I think most of the book is on the site, but I might be mistaken.
Looks like it. I was never one for reading at length online.
| 38 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:00:07pm |
re: #23 recusancy
Some guy was saying that they needed to show the politicians that "the pen is NOT mightier then the sword". My head almost exploded.
Well, per Terry Pratchett, it is, but only if the sword is very small, and the pen is very sharp.
/Treasonous freaks.
| 39 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:00:44pm |
re: #18 Dark_Falcon
Downdinged for wrong possessive form of "Charles".
| 40 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:01:35pm |
re: #28 Summer
Frustrated, impotent, sex-starved dorks.
| 41 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:02:25pm |
re: #32 Cato the Elder
No, just driving across the country for the first time ever, something every red-blooded American boy should do before the age of 60. Go west, old man!
You're not seriously claiming to be under the age of sixty are you old boy?
I recall you previously reporting to be quite ancient in fact. Perhaps someone more technically disposed than I can search for the relevant comment.
| 42 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:04:13pm |
re: #38 SanFranciscoZionist
Well, per Terry Pratchett, it is, but only if the sword is very small, and the pen is very sharp.
/Treasonous freaks.
And then Laura Ingrahm ended it by re-purposing a holocaust poem (first they cam for...) about rich, landowning, gun users as the jews. Ya.
| 43 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:05:28pm |
This nonsense is going to continue.
There are too many vested interests for the noise to not settle down. What truly shocks and appalls me though is that some years ago, both parties had the good sense to keep politics separate from science.
There was a period after the second world war where the science was the science and scientists advised Washington. The scientists might not have always been listened to, but the congress critters and presidents never had the nerve to try to tell the scientific community what science was.
After the war, it was understood that the side with the best scientists won. With the space race and the cold war this was even more strongly reinforced. It took the GOP alliance with the religious right to bring that down.
The GOP is largely to blame for bringing back the notion that science is up to a vote by politicians.
No science can ever be decided by what is popular. It tells us all sorts of things that we sometimes do not want to hear.
The real problem is that now, science is something that the average jackass on the street feels he can expound upon whether or not he has looked inot it or even knows the most basic parts of it. OK that is fine, perhaps there were always fools like that, but the political parties once had the sense to be above that and not pander to it.
Not so anymore. The thinking really is that they can make the science go away. But, I have to wonder what the heads of the GOP are really thinking. They can't all be that stupid. Surely they have to realize that the science community is not lying, while the special interest groups in the energy industry are clearly biased. Surely the heads of the GOP have to realize that the science really will not just go away and that the warnings are dire.
So how can they possibly go on and deny the science so vociferously?
The only possible explanation is that the GOP really is that craven and that evil that they really don't care. Perhaps they think that they need to just win now and when the problems come, the scientists will fix things magically. But we keep telling them that we won't be able to, that once the ball starts rolling enough, there is nothing we can do.
No. Arrogance, foolishness and stupidity. The GOP deserves to be castigated utterly.
The Dems a little less, because they acknowledge the science, yet still can't seem to find the courage to take real action. In the long run, the Dems will be cast as they always are - a bit better ont eh science, but too weak and divided and lacking focus to do their jobs. The GOP will be seen as the obstructionist and opportunist party of fools who made it impossible for America to act in time.
And a curse on both of them.
| 44 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:05:52pm |
re: #26 Bagua
Good grief, you're not on the run from the law again are you?
But on a serious note, I found out today that the state of Ohio is one gigantic speed trap. Honestly, I've never seen so many state troopers lurking to nail the unwary. They should take a page from Sarah Palin's book and just shoot speeders from helicopters.
Along I-70 there was a cop lurking at every second median-strip turnaround.
Avoid Ohio if at all possible; if you can't, set your cruise control to two mph below the posted speed limit and pray your speedometer is accurate.
| 45 |
Sharmuta Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:06:16pm |
Related:
The Russians say that global warming isn't happening there
A Russian think tank today reported that the climate research team at the center of the scandal involving suppression of data and contrary opinions may have picked weather stations in Russia that showed warming, while excluding more stations that did not.
The Russians say that the figures used by the UK's Hadley Center for Climate Change show a warming of 2 degrees Celsius since 1870, while using the entire data set available yields a more modest warming of 1.4 degrees Celsius.
| 46 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:09:07pm |
re: #42 recusancy
And then Laura Ingrahm ended it by re-purposing a holocaust poem (first they cam for...) about rich, landowning, gun users as the jews. Ya.
I can't even think of anything to say. These people are disgusting.
| 47 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:10:33pm |
I still think Anthropogenic Global Warming is an enormous fraud.
We're lucky that the world has been warming for the last 500 years, otherwise, there would be food shortages due to cold weather, etc.
To think that humankind can alter the weather is a huge conceit.
Earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling naturally.
The whole thing is nothing but a scam to steal our freedom and money.
Here's an interesting link.
[Link: www.dailyexpress.co.uk...]
| 48 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:11:59pm |
re: #45 Sharmuta
Related:
This fits with the general Russian stance.
This is purely political. I assure you that there are hundreds of Russian papers that support AGW.
I wrote yesterday, and I am becoming more convinced it is true, that the Russians know the score and have dome the calculus.
They have most of their major cities inland, and a warmer Russia will mean more farmland and oil and gas development in the north. Their bread basket will ultimately have to be moved north, but they have the land to do it and the army to keep others out. They even get a warm water port out of the deal.
Russia is not exactly a climate winner, but they are hit much less severely by it than the US, Europe and China. I honestly think that the Russian leadership almost welcomes it. They will be well positioned compared to us. We are actually one of the biggest climate losers.
So it is like chess. They may lose a bishop ultimately. We loose tow rooks and a queen - and in the mean time Europe pays them for oil.
| 49 |
Political Atheist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:12:28pm |
re: #44 Cato the Elder
Be very glad you are not doing interstate runs under the old 55 mph limit. It was just awful. Felt like you could let your feet drag.
| 50 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:13:01pm |
re: #44 Cato the Elder
But on a serious note, I found out today that the state of Ohio is one gigantic speed trap. Honestly, I've never seen so many state troopers lurking to nail the unwary. They should take a page from Sarah Palin's book and just shoot speeders from helicopters.
[...]
They will not kill off the speeders as that would deter speeding. They are harvesting a much more valuable trophy than pelts, the fines. The business model depends on a plentiful supply of speeders to fill the coffers.
| 51 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:13:15pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
To think that humankind can alter the weather is a huge conceit.
Weather, climate. Climate, weather. Yeah, totally interchangeable./
Let's presume you meant climate instead of weather. Why, in your opinion, is it a huge conceit to think that humankind can alter it?
| 52 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:14:00pm |
re: #48 LudwigVanQuixote
They want the resources in the arctic floor as the ice disappears too.
| 53 |
Political Atheist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:14:59pm |
re: #51 Slumbering Behemoth
OT-I like the avatar. I do some furnace fire photography, and I get some weird shapes. Never that one though!
| 54 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:15:40pm |
The deniers of globalized warming
Say that nothing we're doing is harming
The ice or the sea.
I must disagree.
It's their lack of degrees that's alarming
Copyright 2009 Cato the Elder
| 55 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:16:03pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
To think that humankind can alter the weather is a huge conceit.
We can make a nuclear bomb, telecommunications networks, factories that fill the sky with smoke and produce wonders, we can fly through the skies and into space, we can produce a floating sea of abandoned plastic, but clearly, it would be conceited to think we could have a big enough impact to damage our environment? What planet are you from?
| 56 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:16:30pm |
re: #49 Rightwingconspirator
Be very glad you are not doing interstate runs under the old 55 mph limit. It was just awful. Felt like you could let your feet drag.
I could never drive 55. Thank God no one else could, either.
Go with the flow.
| 57 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:16:31pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
My dad got a hold of this today. That's the biggest hunk of steaming shit that I've seen in quite some time.
| 58 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:17:02pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
I still think Anthropogenic Global Warming is an enormous fraud.
We're lucky that the world has been warming for the last 500 years, otherwise, there would be food shortages due to cold weather, etc.
To think that humankind can alter the weather is a huge conceit.
Earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling naturally.
The whole thing is nothing but a scam to steal our freedom and money.
Here's an interesting link.[Link: www.dailyexpress.co.uk...]
Where did you find that? Looks kind of dumb.
| 59 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:17:32pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
I still think Anthropogenic Global Warming is an enormous fraud.
We're lucky that the world has been warming for the last 500 years, otherwise, there would be food shortages due to cold weather, etc.
To think that humankind can alter the weather is a huge conceit.
Earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling naturally.
The whole thing is nothing but a scam to steal our freedom and money.
Here's an interesting link.[Link: www.dailyexpress.co.uk...]
This is such painful nonsense that I almost don't know where to start.
First off, we were cooling slowly but steadily for the last 1000 years up until about 1900, when we started to warm very rapidly and reverse and greatly over shoot the previous 1000 years of gentle cooling.
What you write is just a series of the same old stuff that teh deniers just keep regurgitating. It just isn't true - or at best is utterly misleading. Yes the Earth has gone through cycles in the past. None of them were caused by Human activities like this one. None of them happened in the eye blink of a century.
Natural cycles take thousands of years to get going. This is almost instantaneous in comparison. It is a big smoking gun.
While we are at it, we have increased our CO2 concentrations by over 50% in the last 100 years.
How could you possibly think that would have no effect?
| 60 |
Surabaya Stew Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:18:43pm |
re: #7 Charles
How come nobody told me we had an insult-spewing asshole in the "Inglorious Basterds" thread tonight who needed to be banned?
Man, things are getting so freaking insane lately. People flouncing in a clean stove thread, and insulting me for recommending a movie.
Sorry about that, but Christoph Waltz and some nice cinematography aside I didn't care for the movie; therefore the thread got ignored by your truly. A shame though that these screwballs appear to be getting more numerous....
| 61 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:19:11pm |
| 62 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:19:51pm |
| 63 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:20:17pm |
re: #3 JasonA
Okay, after a bottle of Chimay this isn't making much sense.
That would be my favorite beer :)
| 64 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:21:43pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
This really is possibly the stupidest thing I've seen in a long time. And I just watched video footage of the teabag protest yesterday.
| 65 |
Sharmuta Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:23:11pm |
re: #48 LudwigVanQuixote
This is purely political. I assure you that there are hundreds of Russian papers that support AGW.
I'm sure it is. I assume they have their own oil interests to protect.
| 66 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:23:25pm |
re: #46 SanFranciscoZionist
As a person of non-Jewish persuasion, I share your disgust. Every time someone pulls out such cravenly dishonest equivalencies to make a political point, they diminish and ridicule the suffering of people who have known true, deadly oppression under such a horrible dictatorship, and minimize the evil perpetrated by the third reich.
*SPIT!*
| 67 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:23:38pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
I still think Anthropogenic Global Warming is an enormous fraud.
We're lucky that the world has been warming for the last 500 years, otherwise, there would be food shortages due to cold weather, etc.
To think that humankind can alter the weather is a huge conceit.
Earth goes through cycles of warming and cooling naturally.
The whole thing is nothing but a scam to steal our freedom and money.
Here's an interesting link.[Link: www.dailyexpress.co.uk...]
And whom exactly is it that wants to steal your freedom?
Scientists? They learn that in "science skool" or sumthin'?
I betcha also know that they want to steal yer moonshine too, and yer wimmin?
| 68 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:26:08pm |
re: #61 recusancy
LOL.. That about sums it up.
Oh look! A reference to said European Foundation.
The European Foundation has spoken out about the fact that climate change is natural and there is no evidence to prove that CO2 has any effect on global warming. In fact CO2 being a plant food has proved beneficial in crop production. Jim McConalogue, writing for the European Foundation has disclosed a hundred reasons why global warming is normal and not man-made. Among some of the reasons are that warmer periods were found around 800 years ago before the rise in CO2 levels, also just after the Second World War there’s record of a massive surge of CO2 emissions, the temperature of the planet fell, however, for four decades after 1940. He also states that “Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than 10 times as high.”...
And here's Jim McConalogue:
Jim McConalogue is Editor of The European Journal.
He received a Master of Science in Social and Political Theory at Birkbeck College (University of London) and a Master of Arts in Political Philosophy from the University of York. James has worked for publishers in London and Oxford and more recently, has written a number of articles for magazines and blogs on UK politics and EU affairs.
Looks like Jim is quite the climate expert.
| 69 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:26:51pm |
re: #53 Rightwingconspirator
Thanks. I adopted it as a "salute" to a crazed, radical, jihadi asshat that sent Charles a particularly disturbing piece of hate mail, and it remains.
| 70 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:28:41pm |
re: #47 UncleSam
My father reads things over the phone with my niece every week. He showed me this today and told me that this is what he intends to read with her this week. I begged him not to and started an hour long argument about science with him over it.
He will not accept AGW unless someone "proves" it to him. I told him that I can show him the links to learn about it himself, but he said he won't read them. How can you fight this kind of stupid?
How can I stop him from infecting my niece with it? This is the same problem I have with the ID people. Anti-science is pro-stupid.
| 71 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:30:04pm |
re: #70 Girth
My father reads things over the phone with my niece every week. He showed me this today and told me that this is what he intends to read with her this week. I begged him not to and started an hour long argument about science with him over it.
He will not accept AGW unless someone "proves" it to him. I told him that I can show him the links to learn about it himself, but he said he won't read them. How can you fight this kind of stupid?
How can I stop him from infecting my niece with it? This is the same problem I have with the ID people. Anti-science is pro-stupid.
Tell your father that if he will not look at the proof he has no right to judge.
| 72 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:31:24pm |
re: #55 SanFranciscoZionist
We can make a nuclear bomb, telecommunications networks, factories that fill the sky with smoke and produce wonders, we can fly through the skies and into space, we can produce a floating sea of abandoned plastic, but clearly, it would be conceited to think we could have a big enough impact to damage our environment? What planet are you from?
Earth.
Yeah, we can create pollution, but the global climate is such an enormously massive and complex system that humans could not alter it unless we devoted every resource we have to doing so.
The climate changes due to solar cycles and other natural factors.
Why did the Ice Age end?
Was it because the primitive humans of the time built too many campfires?
I think the answer is, "No."
The climate changes due to natural cycles.
Right now, I'm freezing my ass off.
There are recording-breaking low temperatures all over North America.
In the seventies and early eighties, the big scare was The New Ice Age.
We were all going to freeze to death and have to live underground to escape the glaciers.
It's all a huge crock of crap.
| 73 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:32:49pm |
re: #72 UncleSam
I believe you're mistaken, and willfully so.
| 74 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:33:04pm |
Oops. Missed this one!
Copenhagen climate conference: Nick Griffin calls world leaders mass murderers
Nick Griffin has accused world leaders at the Copenhagen climate conference of the “biggest hoax in history” that will kill more people than the great famines under Stalin and Mao.
By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent in Copenhagen
Published: 11:50AM GMT 15 Dec 2009SNIP
He said world leaders and advocates of action on climate change such as Al Gore are “mass murderers” by supporting biofuels.
He said land for growing food is being taken to grow fuels for crops and it will cause starvation greater than the famines caused by Russian dictator Stalin during the 1930s and Chairman Mao in the 1950s.
"It is a crime against humanity which in future will be seen as an enormous man-made famine. Under Stalin 20 million people died, under Chairman Mao 30 million died. This will be the third and the greatest famine of the modern era and I regard that as a crime.”
SNIP
| 75 |
Jack Burton Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:34:24pm |
re: #72 UncleSam
Yawn...
Do you have anything to say that is not a talking point that has been debunked 1000 times already or no?
| 76 |
Sharmuta Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:34:43pm |
re: #72 UncleSam
I think you underestimate the delicate balance of our climate, and how altering one aspect of it can indeed alter the entire planet's climate. It only took one asteroid to wipe out the dinosaurs. India ramming into Asia also altered the earth's climate. But this time the climate is changing because there is too much CO2 in the atmosphere- excessive CO2 we put there. It is real, it's true- you can check the science for yourself.
| 77 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:35:40pm |
re: #72 UncleSam
[...] Right now, I'm freezing my ass off. [...]
You must learn to dress appropriately for the weather.
| 78 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:35:44pm |
re: #72 UncleSam
Oh right, because factors X and Y caused warming in the past, it's impossible for factor Z to cause it now or in the future, only X and Y can do that.
Logic fail. Try again.
| 79 |
Jack Burton Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:36:41pm |
re: #77 Bagua
You must learn to dress appropriately for the weather.
not climate.
Emphasis on the correct word there.
| 80 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:36:41pm |
re: #74 Gus 802
Oops. Missed this one!
Copenhagen climate conference: Nick Griffin calls world leaders mass murderers
I believe it's quite possible that in our frantic efforts to avert global climate change we could indeed end up killing more people (inadvertently or otherwise) than climate change alone could manage.
This has nothing to do with denying climate change and everything to do with distrusting hysterical mobs led by politicians.
| 81 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:37:48pm |
re: #74 Gus 802
Oops. Missed this one!
It's shocking that odious man is an MEP. Sadly it does grant him a voice.
| 82 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:38:40pm |
Well, it looks like my posts stirred up a lot of, um, stuff, which is good, I guess.
I just think that people should think about this seriously, rather than blindly accept all the "We're all gonna die and the world will end" rhetoric and allow themselves to be herded like sheep.
| 84 |
Sharmuta Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:40:09pm |
re: #82 UncleSam
I just think that people should think about this seriously
I agree. When are you going to take your own advice?
| 85 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:41:28pm |
| 86 |
Jack Burton Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:41:39pm |
re: #82 UncleSam
ROFLcopter... Pot... Kettle.
| 87 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:42:39pm |
re: #80 Cato the Elder
I believe it's quite possible that in our frantic efforts to avert global climate change we could indeed end up killing more people (inadvertently or otherwise) than climate change alone could manage.
This has nothing to do with denying climate change and everything to do with distrusting hysterical mobs led by politicians.
Well, the "hysterical mobs" aren't doing such a good job then are they? Doesn't look like much will come out of COP15 and there is resistance towards the more stringent mitigation as proposed by G77/China and AOSIS.
| 88 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:42:51pm |
If there was ever a time to GAZE it is now. This guy's a moron.
| 89 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:42:58pm |
re: #82 UncleSam
Well, it looks like my posts stirred up a lot of, um, stuff, which is good, I guess.
I just think that people should think about this seriously, rather than blindly accept all the "We're all gonna die and the world will end" rhetoric and allow themselves to be herded like sheep.
Do you think you are thinking seriously? Learning? Assessing available information? Or are you simply accepting the version that is most emotionally palatable to you?
| 90 |
Joo-LiZ Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:43:06pm |
| 91 |
Jack Burton Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:44:46pm |
re: #90 Joo-LiZ
The LNDTs don't usually get posted until after 23:00 PST.
| 92 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:45:03pm |
Plimer, Monbiot cross swords in climate debate
Source: Lateline
Published: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 11:38 AEDT
Expires: Monday, March 15, 2010 11:38 AEDT
| 93 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:47:10pm |
re: #82 UncleSam
Well, it looks like my posts stirred up a lot of, um, stuff, which is good, I guess.
I just think that people should think about this seriously, rather than blindly accept all the "We're all gonna die and the world will end" rhetoric and allow themselves to be herded like sheep.
Well thinking about it seriously means learning the actual science. Why not look into it. It is not as if it has been hidden. It is not as if there aren't dozens of legitimate sources posted here and in other threads to look at. It is not as if people like Obdicut, Freetoken, Sharmuta, Charles, myself and others haven't even painstakingly typed out the science facts over and over with supporting links many times.
So just look at it. If you want to think critically, then show you can.
| 94 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:47:11pm |
re: #87 Gus 802
There is some talk of a follow up conference in Mexico next summer. It will be a much better venue than Copenhagen where it is currently snowing and below freezing. Even a climate conference should consider the weather when scheduling big events.
| 95 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:48:42pm |
re: #72 UncleSam
Earth.
Yeah, we can create pollution, but the global climate is such an enormously massive and complex system that humans could not alter it unless we devoted every resource we have to doing so.
The climate changes due to solar cycles and other natural factors.
Why did the Ice Age end?
Was it because the primitive humans of the time built too many campfires?
I think the answer is, "No."
The climate changes due to natural cycles.
Right now, I'm freezing my ass off.
There are recording-breaking low temperatures all over North America.
In the seventies and early eighties, the big scare was The New Ice Age.
We were all going to freeze to death and have to live underground to escape the glaciers.
It's all a huge crock of crap.
Have you actually read any of the rebuttals to the lies and crap you're quoting as "proof" that AWG is some sort of vast conspiracy?
You know, for instance, the lie that all the scientists were warning about an Ice Age in the 70's? That's been actually disproved quite a number of times as pure hype. How about you read the debunking of it and stop regurgitating it?
How about you start doing that, mmm?
| 96 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:49:49pm |
re: #87 Gus 802
Well, the "hysterical mobs" aren't doing such a good job then are they? Doesn't look like much will come out of COP15 and there is resistance towards the more stringent mitigation as proposed by G77/China and AOSIS.
No one in his right mind expected anything to come of Copenhagen.
I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about two decades or more on when things really start to get bad, nothing has been done and people are looking for other people to blame.
| 97 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:50:22pm |
re: #94 Bagua
There is some talk of a follow up conference in Mexico next summer. It will be a much better venue than Copenhagen where it is currently snowing and below freezing. Even a climate conference should consider the weather when scheduling big events.
Slow is good since it will in the long provide a more pragmatic and practical document. Nations and states are acting unilaterally as we speak as are corporations. Contrary to popular belief Kyoto places the responsibility on the specific nations and don't set or create design standards or methods.
| 98 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:51:47pm |
How many of you guys slamming me have ever taken courses in climatology?
I have, at UC Berkeley.
And I say AGW is a crock, in my considered opinion.
You can disagree with me, but don't call me a moron.
| 99 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:51:56pm |
re: #96 Cato the Elder
No one in his right mind expected anything to come of Copenhagen.
I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about two decades or more on when things really start to get bad, nothing has been done and people are looking for other people to blame.
That's the problem with COP15 and that it's become to politicized with a great deal of grandstanding. To many chiefs showing up and a lot of rhetoric and yes, as you state, a lot of blaming going on.
| 100 |
checked08 Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:52:35pm |
re: #82 UncleSam
Right on! Wake up sheeple!
/
Anyways, if you liked potholer54's video on the stolen e-mails, you should check out his "made easy" series.
[Link: www.youtube.com...]
| 103 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:53:37pm |
re: #102 Sharmuta
Everyone is a scientist on the internet.
Not me! I'm an actor. I took two acting "courses."
/
| 104 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:54:54pm |
re: #46 SanFranciscoZionist
I can't even think of anything to say. These people are disgusting.
GAHHHH LAURA INGRAHAM. :( Words cannot describe how her nasty, catty, sleazy media persona puts me off my lunch. I find her far more unpalatable than Ann Coulter, because Ann Coulter always seemed to me to be like a pro wrestling "heel". She's playing a character that she has no attachment to, and almost does it with a wink to the audience. (Michael Moore, for fiarness, also seems to be playing a character of himself in much the same fashion) It's a work, a stunt to sell books with names like SATANIST: HOW THE GAY LIBERALS GREW HORNS AND SKEWERED AMERICA ON THEIR PITCHFORKS. I would not be surprised if her hair was a wig. I would not be surprised if she pulled off her mask to reveal she was Mick Foley.
Laura Ingraham seems way more sincere in her nastiness, and thus far more icky.
(also, righteous upding for Terry Pratchett)
| 105 |
Bagua Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:54:57pm |
re: #103 Gus 802
Not me! I'm an actor. I took two acting "courses."
/
I'm a ventriloquist, and I collect stamps.
| 106 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 10:58:11pm |
re: #98 UncleSam
How many of you guys slamming me have ever taken courses in climatology?
I have, at UC Berkeley.
And I say AGW is a crock, in my considered opinion.
You can disagree with me, but don't call me a moron.
Again: Your claims have been completely discredited over and over again.
Have you read the rebuttals? Are you ever going to try to learn about them?
I ask you in earnest.
| 107 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:00:00pm |
re: #63 LudwigVanQuixote
That would be my favorite beer :)
I do like my Chimay Grande Reserve. :D You've tried the other Trappists, yes? My favorite trippel isn't actually Chimay, it's either Westmalle's Tripel or Tripel Karmeleit.
Currently digging on Blue Moon's Grand Cru, which is surprisingly good for being an American grand cru brewed by Coors.
| 108 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:00:34pm |
re: #98 UncleSam
How many of you guys slamming me have ever taken courses in climatology?
I have, at UC Berkeley.
And I say AGW is a crock, in my considered opinion.
You can disagree with me, but don't call me a moron.
I disagree with you. And if you took a course in climatology, it doesn't seem to have done much for you. You're parroting the shallowest and silliest lines out there. No one here will be impressed by that.
| 109 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:01:54pm |
re: #108 SanFranciscoZionist
I disagree with you. And if you took a course in climatology, it doesn't seem to have done much for you. You're parroting the shallowest and silliest lines out there. No one here will be impressed by that.
Dude's coming in with old long-debunked rhetoric and wondering why it doesn't stick. It's like he learned all his comedy lines from Evening at the Improv in 1986.
| 110 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:03:46pm |
re: #103 Gus 802
Not me! I'm an actor. I took two acting "courses."
/
I was killing Commies under Reagan, back in the day. Black ops--I couldn't even begin to tell you about it.
Also, I'm in touch with some people who KNOW what's going on in Afghanistan--you know, the kind of people Obama can't even get a message to.
I speak six languages, have extensive combat skills, play concert cello--professionally for a few years--and have appeared on the cover of European Vogue. I can't tell you which issue, because it would compromise my black ops identity.
And did I mention that my IQ is 168?
| 111 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:06:11pm |
re: #98 UncleSam
I have an ivy-league doctorate in inter-dimensional travel, politics, and espionage. I also regularly eat caviar from the breasts of Swedish super-models, and drink the finest champagne from their navels./
You can disagree with me, but don't call me a moron.
I can do both, but so far have refrained from the latter.
| 112 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:06:31pm |
re: #109 WindUpBird
Dude's coming in with old long-debunked rhetoric and wondering why it doesn't stick. It's like he learned all his comedy lines from Evening at the Improv in 1986.
Reminds me of those kids in college who would look at you with big eyes and say things like "Americans are so HUNG UP about sex. In Europe, they know it's totally NATURAL." or "Like, religion is all about CONTROLLING people's MINDS," and expect you to be terribly impressed with them.
| 113 |
recusancy Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:08:31pm |
re: #112 SanFranciscoZionist
Reminds me of those kids in college who would look at you with big eyes and say things like "Americans are so HUNG UP about sex. In Europe, they know it's totally NATURAL." or "Like, religion is all about CONTROLLING people's MINDS," and expect you to be terribly impressed with them.
ha... that made me think of the south park where cartmen has to save the town from an infestation of college hippies.
| 114 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:08:43pm |
re: #110 SanFranciscoZionist
I was killing Commies under Reagan, back in the day. Black ops--I couldn't even begin to tell you about it.
Also, I'm in touch with some people who KNOW what's going on in Afghanistan--you know, the kind of people Obama can't even get a message to.
I speak six languages, have extensive combat skills, play concert cello--professionally for a few years--and have appeared on the cover of European Vogue. I can't tell you which issue, because it would compromise my black ops identity.
And did I mention that my IQ is 168?
I almost spit out my beer. :D I'm imagining a kindly schoolteacher spinkicking mafia thugs in the head, hurling Taliban guerrilas into ravines as if thay were tackling dummies, e-brake turning a Porsche 911 Turbo around an intersection in Rome while firing an Uzi out the driver's side window, and rappelling into an opera and rescuing the soprano before a sniper takes her out.
"POSTIVE ZION"
IN THEATERS
2010
| 115 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:09:32pm |
All you folks with your brilliant replies have converted me.
We're all going to roast to death on April 12th, 2011 at 1:32 PM, when it will be 162 degrees Fahrenheit in the shade.
Cheers.
| 116 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:11:29pm |
re: #112 SanFranciscoZionist
Reminds me of those kids in college who would look at you with big eyes and say things like "Americans are so HUNG UP about sex. In Europe, they know it's totally NATURAL." or "Like, religion is all about CONTROLLING people's MINDS," and expect you to be terribly impressed with them.
Hah, I remember thinking things like that! When I was 14 years old. And farting around on bulletin board systems on my Atari in the late 1980s.
My political knowledge mostly came from Megadeth albums at the time. My first taste of real political satire were Bloom County comics.
| 117 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:11:43pm |
| 118 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:12:38pm |
re: #115 UncleSam
All you folks with your brilliant replies have converted me.
We're all going to roast to death on April 12th, 2011 at 1:32 PM, when it will be 162 degrees Fahrenheit in the shade.
Cheers.
I'll call you a moron because you don't appear to be terribly interested in hearing how your talking points have been completely rebuffed by real research. You don't even respond to the idea that you might be interested enough to look it up.
So basically, yeah...you're an idiot.
| 120 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:14:11pm |
re: #110 SanFranciscoZionist
I was killing Commies under Reagan, back in the day. Black ops--I couldn't even begin to tell you about it.
Also, I'm in touch with some people who KNOW what's going on in Afghanistan--you know, the kind of people Obama can't even get a message to.
I speak six languages, have extensive combat skills, play concert cello--professionally for a few years--and have appeared on the cover of European Vogue. I can't tell you which issue, because it would compromise my black ops identity.
And did I mention that my IQ is 168?
Well, as a child I tutored Carl Sagan in astronomy and physics. He was my best student.
Being an adventurous chap, I jetted down to Argentina where I district commander of several clandestine commando units working to stop Communist guerrillas in the area. Having learned to fly while tutoring Carl Sagan I was able to fly the AAF A-4 Skyhawk and Mirage.
I speak 24 languages and am also a licensed podiatrist (MD) and also a virtuoso pianist and violinist and have played extensively in the European circuit. During that time I traveled extensively in Europe in my Aston Martin and was involved in many romantic relationships. At the same time I was able to enroll at Berlin Polytechnic and took two courses on meteorology and was a weatherman for a local cable station there for 4 months.
I have an IQ of 3,331.
So you must believe me! Climate change is a hoax!
| 121 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:14:16pm |
re: #115 UncleSam
What do you expect when you bring long debunked canards to the discussion and pretend to present them as serious arguments?
Note that I still have not called you a moron.
| 122 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:14:27pm |
re: #117 Slumbering Behemoth
With friggin' SLAYER!
Did I ever show you this? [Link: www.beerinator.com...]
| 123 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:14:29pm |
I suspected troll with the UC Berkeley name drop. Now I'm sure.
And yeah, you're a moron.
| 124 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:15:55pm |
re: #121 Slumbering Behemoth
What do you expect when you bring long debunked canards to the discussion and pretend to present them as serious arguments?
Note that I still have not called you a moron.
I called him a moron, and an idiot too. And I'll stand by it. =)
| 125 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:18:25pm |
| 126 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:18:41pm |
re: #114 WindUpBird
and rappelling into an opera and rescuing the soprano before a sniper takes her out.
Actually, after whisking the girl to safety, I took her place on stage, received a thunderous standing ovation for my rendition of "Chiamamo Mimi", and then took out the sniper--dead shot between the eyes, not too bad with my line of sight being filled with the roses being flung on stage.
But really, teaching is where my heart is.
| 127 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:18:55pm |
re: #115 UncleSam
All you folks with your brilliant replies have converted me.
We're all going to roast to death on April 12th, 2011 at 1:32 PM, when it will be 162 degrees Fahrenheit in the shade.
Cheers.
Whatever you say.
Cartman.
| 128 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:19:27pm |
re: #115 UncleSam
All you folks with your brilliant replies have converted me.
We're all going to roast to death on April 12th, 2011 at 1:32 PM, when it will be 162 degrees Fahrenheit in the shade.
Cheers.
We've been nicer than we needed to be. You got us on a mellow evening.
| 129 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:19:47pm |
re: #124 Summer
I called him a moron, and an idiot too. And I'll stand by it. =)
Hey, I'm 2/3 of the way to the Triple Crown!
Thanks!
| 130 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:19:48pm |
re: #116 WindUpBird
Hah, I remember thinking things like that! When I was 14 years old. And farting around on bulletin board systems on my Atari in the late 1980s.
My political knowledge mostly came from Megadeth albums at the time. My first taste of real political satire were Bloom County comics.
I love Bloom County.
| 131 |
Gus Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:20:12pm |
re: #126 SanFranciscoZionist
Actually, after whisking the girl to safety, I took her place on stage, received a thunderous standing ovation for my rendition of "Chiamamo Mimi", and then took out the sniper--dead shot between the eyes, not too bad with my line of sight being filled with the roses being flung on stage.
But really, teaching is where my heart is.
Ziva!
| 132 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:20:18pm |
| 133 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:21:04pm |
re: #125 Slumbering Behemoth
Fuh. King. Awe. Some.
/did I mention that I happen to like Slayer?
They need to do more covers. Their version of In A Gadda Da Vida from the Less Than Zero soundtrack is genius. :D
| 134 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:21:27pm |
re: #129 UncleSam
Hey, I'm 2/3 of the way to the Triple Crown!
Thanks!
I'll finish it for you:
Since you refuse to acknowledge that your claims have been rebutted time and time again by actual flawless research, you're also a liar.
| 135 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:21:58pm |
re: #124 Summer
That's fine. I am unfamiliar with UncleSam, so I do not know what motivates his/her posts. I too was a skeptic/denier on certain scientific issues before I found credible resources with which to educate myself. Charles' work here has helped significantly in disabusing me of certain ignorant notions.
| 136 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:22:25pm |
re: #133 WindUpBird
Slayer's good, but Tool is more my style.
| 137 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:22:28pm |
re: #129 UncleSam
Hey, I'm 2/3 of the way to the Triple Crown!
Thanks!
Your rhetoric has no traction here. But that doesn't mean I don't love you! Just promise me you'll visit in 15 years or so, then we can determine who's right. ;-)
| 138 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:23:52pm |
re: #134 Summer
I'll finish it for you:
Since you refuse to acknowledge that your claims have been rebutted time and time again by actual flawless research, you're also a liar.
I may have many character flaws, but I'm not a liar.
And the research is far from flawless.
| 139 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:23:53pm |
| 140 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:24:26pm |
re: #136 Girth
Slayer's good, but Tool is more my style.
I am a rabid follower of Danny Carey, seen Tool twice live, with my eyes glued to him and his kit. Right now my locus of metal amazingness is Mastodon and Katatonia, but I'll always hold Aenima close to my heart, what an album.
| 141 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:24:45pm |
re: #139 LudwigVanQuixote
I love that back to the days of cutter john :)
The starchair Enterpoop. Ever on its way to the planet of permissive blonde stewardesses.
| 142 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:25:01pm |
re: #139 LudwigVanQuixote
I love that back to the days of cutter john :)
When he's got Opus and Hodgepodge perched on his wheelchair making Star Trek references, YES.
| 143 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:25:30pm |
re: #136 Girth
Slayer's good, but Tool is more my style.
Both excellent live bands. Never been disappointed.
| 144 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:25:59pm |
re: #140 WindUpBird
I had floor tickets to a Tool show a few years ago, but they canceled the show a few hours beforehand. I was so pissed. Never have gotten to see them.
| 145 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:26:08pm |
re: #143 Slumbering Behemoth
Both excellent live bands. Never been disappointed.
I fear two of my great regrets will be never seeing Slayer live, and never seeing Dio live. :(
| 146 |
Cato the Elder Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:26:23pm |
New axiom: Anyone who uses the word "sheeple" is likely violate Godwin's Law in the near future.
Good night, all.
| 147 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:26:56pm |
re: #144 Girth
I had floor tickets to a Tool show a few years ago, but they canceled the show a few hours beforehand. I was so pissed. Never have gotten to see them.
I saw them at festival shows back when they were supporting Undertow, so I really never got to see a TRUE Tool-as-headliner show. They were good! But short sets.
| 148 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:27:13pm |
re: #142 WindUpBird
When he's got Opus and Hodgepodge perched on his wheelchair making Star Trek references, YES.
Set phasers to liquefy :)
| 149 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:28:27pm |
re: #135 Slumbering Behemoth
That's fine. I am unfamiliar with UncleSam, so I do not know what motivates his/her posts. I too was a skeptic/denier on certain scientific issues before I found credible resources with which to educate myself. Charles' work here has helped significantly in disabusing me of certain ignorant notions.
That isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that he comes in here with completely discredited talking points which, if he actually was interested in the subject to learn something about it, he would have learned a while ago were worthless crap by this point.
They've been addressed again and again. And just like Creationists, they never, ever, listen to the evidence. All they do is clap their hands over their ears and keep shouting out the same fucking bullshit as if it makes it true.
It doesn't make it true. It's utter crap. They're liars. They just lie, and lie, and lie. They make claims that it's just about commies trying to take away your "freedom" and "money", they claim that everyone thought there would be an ice age in the 1970's, and they really don't listen to anything that tells them that all those talking points are made up bullshit.
I too was a skeptic for a while. Like Charles, I kept my mind open and listened and read on the subject. I didn't go around repeating the crap after I had been smart enough to read that some things I had been told were completely untrue. It took me all of a few minutes to read that there were serious problems with what I had been told.
This guy, however, kept repeating the same bullshit. We've addressed these issues here ad nauseum. He just isn't interested. To him, it's all a plot about taking away your freedom and money - he said that himself. That not only makes him an uninformed and disinterested party to the truth, but it also makes him a fucking moron to think that it's one grand conspiracy theory.
And again, it makes him a liar for continuing to repeat those claims over and over again.
He's scum, and I make no bones about calling him that.
| 150 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:28:38pm |
I haven't been to a concert in a year and a half. I should really find a good show to see soon.
| 151 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:29:18pm |
re: #148 LudwigVanQuixote
Set phasers to liquefy :)
Heehee! Favorite Bloom County moments ever: Dethtongue/Billy and the Boingers saga, everything involving Bill the Cat as Oral Bill the televangelist, Oliver Wendell Jones rewriting Pravda headlines, Steve Dallas trying to quit smoking and going on a rampage holding an axe in his teeth trying to kill Opus. :D
| 152 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:29:23pm |
re: #138 UncleSam
I may have many character flaws, but I'm not a liar.
And the research is far from flawless.
ok so rather than just repeating the same crap, that you have yet to back up, when you have something actually scientific to say, like a plausible understanding of mechanism backed up by actual data, come back and play with the grown ups.
In the mean time we have little time for those who refuse to look at science or bring science into a scientific discussion.
| 153 |
Girth Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:30:16pm |
re: #149 Summer
You don't even need science to refute that stuff, simple logic will suffice.
| 154 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:30:47pm |
re: #145 WindUpBird
Never seen Dio live either (and I am just old enough that I could have), but I've seen Slayer several times. Definitely worth the price of admission.
I had been a Slayer fan for many years before seeing them live for the first time. Waiting for the show to start, I told my buddy that this would be my first Slayer show. He replied "Oh, you're a virgin". Very apt description.
| 155 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:33:58pm |
re: #141 SanFranciscoZionist
The starchair Enterpoop. Ever on its way to the planet of permissive blonde stewardesses.
Actually, it was "The wild sorority girls of the planet Playtex."
Just for your information.
[Link: assets.gocomics.com...]
| 156 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:34:48pm |
re: #151 WindUpBird
Heehee! Favorite Bloom County moments ever: Dethtongue/Billy and the Boingers saga, everything involving Bill the Cat as Oral Bill the televangelist, Oliver Wendell Jones rewriting Pravda headlines, Steve Dallas trying to quit smoking and going on a rampage holding an axe in his teeth trying to kill Opus. :D
Remember the sequence when the business majors take over the arts building on campus, and take Opus hostage?
| 157 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:35:06pm |
re: #149 Summer
That isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is that he comes in here with completely discredited talking points which, if he actually was interested in the subject to learn something about it, he would have learned a while ago were worthless crap by this point.
They've been addressed again and again. And just like Creationists, they never, ever, listen to the evidence. All they do is clap their hands over their ears and keep shouting out the same fucking bullshit as if it makes it true.
It doesn't make it true. It's utter crap. They're liars. They just lie, and lie, and lie. They make claims that it's just about commies trying to take away your "freedom" and "money", they claim that everyone thought there would be an ice age in the 1970's, and they really don't listen to anything that tells them that all those talking points are made up bullshit.
I too was a skeptic for a while. Like Charles, I kept my mind open and listened and read on the subject. I didn't go around repeating the crap after I had been smart enough to read that some things I had been told were completely untrue. It took me all of a few minutes to read that there were serious problems with what I had been told.
This guy, however, kept repeating the same bullshit. We've addressed these issues here ad nauseum. He just isn't interested. To him, it's all a plot about taking away your freedom and money - he said that himself. That not only makes him an uninformed and disinterested party to the truth, but it also makes him a fucking moron to think that it's one grand conspiracy theory.
And again, it makes him a liar for continuing to repeat those claims over and over again.
He's scum, and I make no bones about calling him that.
Good for you.
I should say though that when I first started posting here, I was one of the most respectful of lizards to all. I would even sir and ma'am back in the day.
Then I started trying to educate people about physics.
Then for pretty much the same reasons, I began to want to pull out my hair. In short order, I began to want to strangle the insulting ones. I mean how many times could I explain the same stuff over and over and over. How many times could link after linke be put up. And honestly, when they really don't want to talk science they just insult you, or your research.
Or they quibble as if they know it or have some deep understanding of the philosophy of science that prevents them from accepting the facts as presented.
But mostly it was the insults.
Then I started just telling the worthless idiots that they were idiots. And they are. Their stupidity affects everyone on this planet. If we do not act and idiots like them help to prevent action, then our generation will be cursed and many of our children or grand children will die.
So they are not just morons. They are dangerous morons who are endangering, my family, my country and my planet with their stupidity and lies.
It felt good.
| 158 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:36:42pm |
| 159 |
SanFranciscoZionist Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:36:50pm |
re: #156 SanFranciscoZionist
Remember the sequence when the business majors take over the arts building on campus, and take Opus hostage?
"Is this the Democratic National Convention?"
"Nope. Meadow Party."
"Oh yeah? Who have you guys got to go up against Reagan in the fall?"
"A dead cat."
(Mondale-hat-wearing guy shrugs and follows them in.)
| 160 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:38:38pm |
| 162 |
Summer Seale Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:44:07pm |
As I said in the new thread just now: I have to finish some work and stuff before I curl up for the night so I'm gonna bow out. I flamed the guy, he's a dork, and now I should finish work and get to sleep. =)
| 164 |
UncleSam Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:47:31pm |
re: #162 Summer
As I said in the new thread just now: I have to finish some work and stuff before I curl up for the night so I'm gonna bow out. I flamed the guy, he's a dork, and now I should finish work and get to sleep. =)
For someone who seems to have a lot of hate in your heart, your identifying icon pic of a heart seems to be rather ironic.
| 165 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Wed, Dec 16, 2009 11:49:36pm |
| 166 |
UncleSam Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:00:53am |
Well, it seems that the "Hate UncleSam" festival has kind of faded out.
Thank you, Charles, for providing such a lively forum.
Good night night, and best wishes to all, especially my critics.
UncleSam
| 167 |
djughurknot Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:02:17am |
re: #165 Slumbering Behemoth
Heh. I'm a big black metal/death metal fanatic myself. If I'm gonna start yanking YouTube stuff, though- I'll reach for Bill Bruford playing some of King Crimson's finest.
| 168 |
lostlakehiker Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:02:45am |
re: #43 LudwigVanQuixote
This nonsense is going to continue.
There are too many vested interests for the noise to not settle down. What truly shocks and appalls me though is that some years ago, both parties had the good sense to keep politics separate from science.
There was a period after the second world war where the science was the science and scientists advised Washington. The scientists might not have always been listened to, but the congress critters and presidents never had the nerve to try to tell the scientific community what science was.
After the war, it was understood that the side with the best scientists won. With the space race and the cold war this was even more strongly reinforced. It took the GOP alliance with the religious right to bring that down.
The GOP is largely to blame for bringing back the notion that science is up to a vote by politicians.
No science can ever be decided by what is popular. It tells us all sorts of things that we sometimes do not want to hear.
The real problem is that now, science is something that the average jackass on the street feels he can expound upon whether or not he has looked inot it or even knows the most basic parts of it. OK that is fine, perhaps there were always fools like that, but the political parties once had the sense to be above that and not pander to it.
Not so anymore. The thinking really is that they can make the science go away. But, I have to wonder what the heads of the GOP are really thinking. They can't all be that stupid. Surely they have to realize that the science community is not lying, while the special interest groups in the energy industry are clearly biased. Surely the heads of the GOP have to realize that the science really will not just go away and that the warnings are dire.
So how can they possibly go on and deny the science so vociferously?
The only possible explanation is that the GOP really is that craven and that evil that they really don't care. Perhaps they think that they need to just win now and when the problems come, the scientists will fix things magically. But we keep telling them that we won't be able to, that once the ball starts rolling enough, there is nothing we can do.
No. Arrogance, foolishness and stupidity. The GOP deserves to be castigated utterly.
The Dems a little less, because they acknowledge the science, yet still can't seem to find the courage to take real action. In the long run, the Dems will be cast as they always are - a bit better ont eh science, but too weak and divided and lacking focus to do their jobs. The GOP will be seen as the obstructionist and opportunist party of fools who made it impossible for America to act in time.
And a curse on both of them.
The Left has silenced all discussion of IQ. Why should the Right not expect to get lucky shutting science up? Science is under attack from both sides because the tellers of inconvenient truths are unwelcome.
| 169 |
djughurknot Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:03:29am |
re: #166 UncleSam
Well, it seems that the "Hate UncleSam" festival has kind of faded out.
Thank you, Charles, for providing such a lively forum.
Good night night, and best wishes to all, especially my critics.UncleSam
"Hating UncleSam"- is that akin to hating America?
(as liberals such as myself are seemingly so wont to do?)
;)
| 170 |
lostlakehiker Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:07:34am |
re: #72 UncleSam
Earth.
Yeah, we can create pollution, but the global climate is such an enormously massive and complex system that humans could not alter it unless we devoted every resource we have to doing so.
The climate changes due to solar cycles and other natural factors.
Why did the Ice Age end?
Was it because the primitive humans of the time built too many campfires?
I think the answer is, "No."
The climate changes due to natural cycles.
Right now, I'm freezing my ass off.
There are recording-breaking low temperatures all over North America.
In the seventies and early eighties, the big scare was The New Ice Age.
We were all going to freeze to death and have to live underground to escape the glaciers.
It's all a huge crock of crap.
I made this point before, but I'll make it again. Just for you. Your logic was all the rage when the passenger pigeons were exterminated. Nobody could believe that puny little man could just wipe them out.
The bison herds were endless and inexhaustible. Only by heroic efforts of Teddy Roosevelt and like minded conservationists did we manage to save the species.
As our power grows, old limits to the harm we can do by playing with matches fail. We now have matches and gasoline. A bit of caution would be in order.
| 171 |
UncleSam Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:09:17am |
re: #169 djughurknot
"Hating UncleSam"- is that akin to hating America?
(as liberals such as myself are seemingly so wont to do?);)
Oh, yes!
Hate me, hate America.
I am, after all UncleSam.
Just kidding.
Love liberals with a sense of humor.
Thanks and good night.
| 172 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:15:10am |
re: #165 Slumbering Behemoth
Carey is an excellent drummer. Dailor ranks up there as well.
Haake pwns the goat skins.
Dailor is currently my favorite drummer, and Haake is pretty rad, saw Meshuggah live not so long ago ^^
As a drummer myself, my favorite drummers are (in no earthly order)
Brann Dailor
Sean Reinert
Danny Carey
Dave Weckl
Jean-Paul Gaster
Mark Zonder
Michel "Away" Langevin
Phil Collins
Neil Peart
Gavin Harrison
John Tempesta
Scott Rockenfield
Manu Katche
Jeff Burrows
BEAT DA SKINZ
| 173 |
Slumbering Behemoth Stinks Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:26:14am |
re: #170 lostlakehiker
As our power grows, old limits to the harm we can do by playing with matches fail.
We are Behemoths what Stride the Earth. Not Gods with the power to break the very Laws of Reality, but Mighty Beasts that shape the world we live in.
To claim that our influence on our surroundings is slight and insignificant is to claim that Humanity's Achievements are worthless Flotsam.
| 174 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:37:39am |
re: #173 Slumbering Behemoth
Brann Dailor (Mastodon)
Sean Reinert (Cynic, Death)
Danny Carey (Tool)
Dave Weckl (Chick Corea)
Jean-Paul Gaster (Clutch)
Mark Zonder (Fates Warning, Slavior)
Michel "Away" Langevin (Voivod)
Phil Collins (Genesis)
Neil Peart (Rush)
Gavin Harrison (Porcupine Tree, OSI)
John Tempesta (Rob Zombie, Testament, others)
Scott Rockenfield (Queensryche)
Manu Katche (Peter Gabriel, many others)
Jeff Burrows (Tea Party)
| 175 |
windsagio Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:42:42am |
re: #151 WindUpBird
(many hours late)
"Bill's bazooka barfing" is like the best line written in any comic, ever!
| 176 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:31:12am |
re: #175 windsagio
(many hours late)
"Bill's bazooka barfing" is like the best line written in any comic, ever!
hahahaha "I gave away every marlboro I own!"
| 177 |
Varek Raith Thu, Dec 17, 2009 5:10:57am |
re: #47 UncleSam
Well then, after reading all of your posts on this thread, this is definitely you. All of what you've said has been said and debunked countless times. Your refusal to actually learn anything on this subject reflects poorly on you. Also, people wouldn't be so harsh on you if you discussed your position with actual science instead of pure opinion.
| 178 |
jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 7:43:18am |
Oops:
From: Phil Jones
To: "Michael E. Mann"
Subject: Re: have you seen this?
Date: Wed Mar 31 09:09:04 2004
Mike,
(snip)
Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it
wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either
appears
I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.
Cheers
Phil
| 179 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 8:17:53am |
re: #178 jimbouie
Oops:
From: Phil Jones
To: "Michael E. Mann"
Subject: Re: have you seen this?
Date: Wed Mar 31 09:09:04 2004Mike,
(snip)
Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it
wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either
appears
I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.
Cheers
Phil
Right, because you know, maybe part of his work as a reviewer is to make sure that bad papers are rejected.
So let me explain something. If he went to town in his review, that means he found a lot of errors, so many that he wrote a very lengthy rejection about everything that was wrong the paper.
| 180 |
Deseeded Thu, Dec 17, 2009 8:32:50am |
Just wanted to steam out a bit:
Science doesn't have "sides". When it gets sides, it's propaganda. Deniers are no more in bed with Saudi Arabia than believers are in bed with Hugo Chavez.
Based on the content of both Saudi Arabia and Venezuela in Copenhagen, science is being done a serious disservice.
| 181 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 8:49:07am |
re: #180 Deseeded
Just wanted to steam out a bit:
Science doesn't have "sides". When it gets sides, it's propaganda. Deniers are no more in bed with Saudi Arabia than believers are in bed with Hugo Chavez.
Based on the content of both Saudi Arabia and Venezuela in Copenhagen, science is being done a serious disservice.
The very fact that the politicians are doing anything other than taking this seriously is a disservice to science.
Science should never be political. Science is about what is demonstrably true, not about what is popular, or politically expedient.
In fact, it the whole point of the scientific method (with multiple observations from independent sources) to take human bias out of the picture as much as possible. The fact that any of these politicians even thinks that they have the right to think that their agendas are more important than the facts is part of the folly of the world.
This is happening. It is demonstrably happening now, in front of our eyes. Choosing not to believe it will not change that. Speechifying will not change that. All of this bullshit will not change that.
In the end, it is an insane arrogance of these people who deny or delay for political reasons, to think for even a moment that the laws of physics will suspend themselves until it is more politically or economically convenient.
Normally, this would be a Darwin award. In factually, it is exactly a Darwin award, where someone does something insanely stupid and then pays for it, because you know, those laws of physics are really merciless. The problem is that those of us who would not like to get the award are stuck sharing the same fate as the morons.
| 182 |
jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 8:58:21am |
re: #179 ludwigvanquixote
Right, because you know, maybe part of his work as a reviewer is to make sure that bad papers are rejected.
So let me explain something. If he went to town in his review, that means he found a lot of errors, so many that he wrote a very lengthy rejection about everything that was wrong the paper.
re: #179 ludwigvanquixote
Thanks for the explanation. Unfortunately for your scenario, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis recently put out a statement saying that CRU did indeed have the Siberian data wrong. Mainly because they only used stations confirming warming, and ignored a greater number of stations which didn't confirm warming and an overall picture that did not substantiate AGW. Which would indicate Jones wasn't exactly operating from a position of certitude. More likely, he actually was "censoring scientific journals".
| 183 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 9:06:11am |
Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis
Because you know the Russians don't have oil barons of their own?
Are you going to believe a fleet of Nasa satellites coupled with a fleet of European satellites - oh and the Russian scientific community, or are you going to believe this bullshit?
Let's take a look at stuff going on in Sibera shall we?
At about six minutes into this you can see a Russian scientist light a gout of methane flame coming out of the ice.
I am so fucking tired of people who believe what they want to believe and refuse to look at nature.
| 184 |
lostlakehiker Thu, Dec 17, 2009 9:49:17am |
re: #179 ludwigvanquixote
Right, because you know, maybe part of his work as a reviewer is to make sure that bad papers are rejected.
So let me explain something. If he went to town in his review, that means he found a lot of errors, so many that he wrote a very lengthy rejection about everything that was wrong the paper.
The inconvenient truth here is that people's talents are all over the place, and not all in math and science. The AGW crowd is giving evidence before a jury that is just tone deaf to their music.
It's not fair to call the deniers morons. Many of them are bright in their own way, and would perform Shakespeare better than us wonks. But they're in a fix when it comes to the science. There's no use telling them to inform themselves on the technical questions, that it's simple, that with a little study they'd see. People told them that about calculus, physic, and chemistry, and it didn't pan out.
We can't win by calling them names. They know they're not stupid, and they fondly imagine that that means they're not hopeless at the things they're hopeless at. Maybe some of us can't sing but think we can---we all know the type.
What we can do is to point to the unchallenged and unchallengeable basic facts. Glaciers in retreat. Ice shelves falling apart in Antarctica. Arctic sea ice thinner than ever and on its way to going-going-gone, summers. Rivers and lakes that freeze over seasonally doing so later and breaking up earlier. Plants establishing themselves higher on the slopes of mountains with a treeline than they used to. Migrating birds wintering further north than they used to.
As this and that high-altitude species disappear from the mountains of Texas and New Mexico, that's proof that something has happened that didn't happen 400 years ago, or 800, or 2000, or 8000. All that time, the pika and the chipmunk have been there. But the way things are going, pretty soon, not any more.
All these things are things that do not depend on regression analysis, filtering, 10-year moving averages, computer models, and the like. They are arguments that any bright ten year old can understand, and arguments for which the deniers have no answer. None.
They're not our best arguments. The real main course dinner is the CO2 infrared absorption spectrum, positive feedback loops from albedo changes, etc. But we cannot expect our jury to sit still and listen closely to this forensic evidence.
So we should just mention, well, we did this solid work, if you're interested. But over here is the video of the butler standing over the victim, with pursed lips as a drift of smoke clears from his gunbarrel. That's our second-best reason why we think the butler did it.
| 185 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 9:59:52am |
re: #184 lostlakehiker
I have been patiently typing out the explanations of all of that from the simplest level to the most complex for over a year here. I honestly think that my collected AGW posts here would make a reasonable first course in AGW with some editing.
The bottom line is that the morons are well morons. They do not want to look at the science. They come back day after day saying the same stuff over and over again. You are not going to reach them. It honestly doesn't matter if they can memorize Shakespeare. Their ability to quote Lear will not avert catastrophe.
Their inability to think for themselves by actually looking at real evidence, and can you believe the notion, thinking through the logical consequences of that scientific evidence for themselves, makes them stupid. The basics of AGW are really easy to understand. There is nothing forensic about the notion that more CO2 means you trap more IR mean you get warmer. There is nothing difficult about the idea that less ice means you reflect less, means you get warmer and more ice melts.
This is easy for anyone who is willing to think to see and understand. That refuse to. That makes them stupid. If choose to actually learn the subject and think for themselves rather than parroting propaganda, they might stop being so stupid. But it is unlikely.
What you can do though is reach those who are willing to actually look at the evidence and think for themselves. In the course of my year writing here I have gotten through to a lot of people on this. We differentiate between the smart but misinformed and the stupid and unthinking.
There are those who will smart means agreeing with me and try to make a stink. No smart means being able to understand and follow basic concepts for oneself.
| 186 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:08:13am |
re: #183 LudwigVanQuixote
Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis
Because you know the Russians don't have oil barons of their own?
Are you going to believe a fleet of Nasa satellites coupled with a fleet of European satellites - oh and the Russian scientific community, or are you going to believe this bullshit?
Let's take a look at stuff going on in Sibera shall we?
[Video]At about six minutes into this you can see a Russian scientist light a gout of methane flame coming out of the ice.I am so fucking tired of people who believe what they want to believe and refuse to look at nature.
Excuse me, but while methane released from permafrost might or might not be important, what does that have to do with Jones "going to town" on scientific papers critiquing his Siberia data, especially considering later revelations of cherry-picking? Perhaps you've wandered away from the topic.
| 187 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:14:36am |
re: #186 Jimbouie
Excuse me, but while methane released from permafrost might or might not be important, what does that have to do with Jones "going to town" on scientific papers critiquing his Siberia data, especially considering later revelations of cherry-picking? Perhaps you've wandered away from the topic.
This is so silly it makes my head hurt.
Do you even understand what the process of "peer review" is?
And there were NO "revelations of cherry-picking." None. This is a distortion of the facts, and it's been conclusively shown over and over and over.
Seriously -- is there a point at which you'll stop repeating propaganda fed to you by ignorant and/or deceptive sources?
| 188 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:31:02am |
re: #186 Jimbouie
Excuse me, but while methane released from permafrost might or might not be important, what does that have to do with Jones "going to town" on scientific papers critiquing his Siberia data, especially considering later revelations of cherry-picking? Perhaps you've wandered away from the topic.
No you are the one wandering. Papers get rejected. You have not read those papers. Since we do not have them, you have no reason to say that they were good papers. Since most journals have more than one reviewer look at submissions, and since people with actual PhD.s who actually know the field are the reviewers, in general, that means that the peer review process is likely much more fair than you would be. You are already assuming that teh science from CRU must be wrong and that any paper on Siberia by them must be wrong and that any paper that contradicts them must be right.
That is not how science works. Science works by actually using those little things we call consistent application of facts and data.
You are simply being a propagandist - and not a very good one at that.
| 189 |
Slap Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:18:02am |
re: #172 WindUpBird
Rhythm guitarist/palsied bassist here. I love great lyrical drummers. Mine, in no particular order:
Bill Bruford
Ritchie Hayward (Little Feat)
Dave Mattacks (Fairport Convention, Richard Thompson)
Elvin Jones
Art Blakey
JIM KELTNER!!!!!!!!!
Jim Gordon
Stewart Copeland
Manu Katche
Omar Hakim
Robert Williams (the last Magic Band)
Terry Bozzio
Tony Williams
| 190 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:34:03am |
re: #187 Charles
This is so silly it makes my head hurt.
Do you even understand what the process of "peer review" is?
And there were NO "revelations of cherry-picking." None. This is a distortion of the facts, and it's been conclusively shown over and over and over.
Seriously -- is there a point at which you'll stop repeating propaganda fed to you by ignorant and/or deceptive sources?
There was a good example of Jones's and Mann's understanding of "peer review" when Climate Research published a paper skepitcal of their conclusions, Jones demanded that the journal "rid itself of this troublesome editor", and Mann advised that "we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers."
This show me that they've been perfectly willing to use the peer review process to censor their critics.
As far as accusations of cherry-picking, I find Steve McIntyre's measured critiques of Mann's "hockey stick" Yamal tree-ring conclusions more convincing than those of his defenders, so far. McIntyre has shown in the recent past he's no fool, discovering an earlier statistical error by Mann and a Y2K error by James Hansen of NASA, both of which led to corrections.
| 191 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:35:56am |
re: #190 Jimbouie
There was a good example of Jones's and Mann's understanding of "peer review" when Climate Research published a paper skepitcal of their conclusions, Jones demanded that the journal "rid itself of this troublesome editor", and Mann advised that "we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers."
This show me that they've been perfectly willing to use the peer review process to censor their critics.
What absolute crap! You didn't even watch the video I posted, did you?
Hint: it shows that your claims are not only false, they're pure propaganda with no relation whatsoever to reality.
| 192 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:39:25am |
re: #188 LudwigVanQuixote
No you are the one wandering. Papers get rejected. You have not read those papers. Since we do not have them, you have no reason to say that they were good papers. Since most journals have more than one reviewer look at submissions, and since people with actual PhD.s who actually know the field are the reviewers, in general, that means that the peer review process is likely much more fair than you would be. You are already assuming that teh science from CRU must be wrong and that any paper on Siberia by them must be wrong and that any paper that contradicts them must be right.
That is not how science works. Science works by actually using those little things we call consistent application of facts and data.
You are simply being a propagandist - and not a very good one at that.
Science works best when theories are presented honestly and with raw data and methods available so that others may try and duplicate the results. It doesn't seem that's been what's going on with climate science. As for the Siberian question...I'm waiting to see if and how it's refuted, and then I'll make up my own mind. Seems to me you're dismissing any skeptical argument out of hand, saying that all questions have been answered and any voice that "contradicts them must be" wrong.
| 193 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:41:46am |
re: #190 Jimbouie
Every single thing you said in that post was not true.
The National Academy had backed up Mann.
There are more than Mann's hockey stick out there. We actually have a hockey team presented by dozens of different research groups. They all show a consistent story. They are not all lying. In fact none of them are.
As to tree rings,I will make a deal with you. If you take of the picture we show that we are the warmest we have been for over 1100 years. If you put them in, we are the warmest we have been for 1100 years.
In short so what?
Your nonsense does nothing to contradict the basic science. CO2 really is a GHG. We really are getting close to doubling the concentrations of it in the atmosphere. It really must have an effect.
So how about you look at the actual science. It has been presented here again and again. Look at. Not look at who you think is saying what, look at the actual science and think for yourself. Think about teh science itself.
For you to be right, all of those gigatons of CO2 must have no effect. How do you explain that away?
| 194 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:48:47am |
re: #192 Jimbouie
Do not even attempt to promote yourself to the level of a legitimate scientific skeptic. It is an ego trip on your part and insulting for those of us who actually do science to hear.
When and if you actually bring some science - and that means consistent data, observations and plausible mechanisms, that refute AGW, then you can be considered a skeptic. However it is very hard to argue with the thermometers.
Because of this legitimate scientific skeptics are a very vanishing breed. The real ones, at best propose other mechanisms that may be large and on the same scale as CO2's contribution. However, very very few people buy their claims and they have a significant difficulty proving their hypothesis are anything more than a hypothesis.
In the mean time, you are bringing no such thing. You are just bringing silly little smears and no content.
You're not going to look at any data. You are not going to look at any science, and you already decided that you believe the propagandists. Your stupid line about waiting to see if Siberia is important, after you saw a russian scientist fall over from a gout of flame coming out of a melt lake shows just how impervious to evidence you are.
Are frozen lakes supposed to burn dude? When that is spread over all of Siberia, do you think that might be an issue?
So don't don't waste my time. Don't waste anyone's time. You don't want to think, that is your choice. Future generations will curse you.
| 195 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:55:31am |
re: #191 Charles
What absolute crap! You didn't even watch the video I posted, did you?
Hint: it shows that your claims are not only false, they're pure propaganda with no relation whatsoever to reality.
Nope....I hadn't. Just did, though, and you guys are right and I was wrong. It wasn't an example of the peer review process being corrupted. Apologies for not watching the vid first.
| 196 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:58:29am |
re: #195 Jimbouie
Nope...I hadn't. Just did, though, and you guys are right and I was wrong. It wasn't an example of the peer review process being corrupted. Apologies for not watching the vid first.
Hmm. OK. If you're sincere about that, you might want to start reexamining your sources of information about global warming - because they're lying to you.
| 197 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:11:57pm |
re: #193 LudwigVanQuixote
Every single thing you said in that post was not true.
There are more than Mann's hockey stick out there. We actually have a hockey team presented by dozens of different research groups. They all show a consistent story. They are not all lying. In fact none of them are.
As to tree rings,I will make a deal with you. If you take of the picture we show that we are the warmest we have been for over 1100 years. If you put them in, we are the warmest we have been for 1100 years.
In short so what?
Your nonsense does nothing to contradict the basic science. CO2 really is a GHG. We really are getting close to doubling the concentrations of it in the atmosphere. It really must have an effect.
So how about you look at the actual science. It has been presented here again and again. Look at. Not look at who you think is saying what, look at the actual science and think for yourself. Think about teh science itself.
For you to be right, all of those gigatons of CO2 must have no effect. How do you explain that away?
Sorry, but I still don't see why all the resistance to releasing data and methodology, if the science is so solid.
| 198 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:18:43pm |
re: #197 Jimbouie
Sorry, but I still don't see why all the resistance to releasing data and methodology, if the science is so solid.
If you read the actual papers - any legitimate paper, you will find that the data and methodology is always - I mean always fully discussed. No one hid anything.
| 201 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:37:01pm |
re: #196 Charles
Hmm. OK. If you're sincere about that, you might want to start reexamining your sources of information about global warming - because they're lying to you.
Oh, I'm sincere. When you're wrong, you're wrong, and I certainly wouldn't have used those comments as evidence of censorship if I'd watched the video and learned of the controversy about the Soon and Baliunas paper.
| 202 |
Jimbouie Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:45:38pm |
re: #198 LudwigVanQuixote
If you read the actual papers - any legitimate paper, you will find that the data and methodology is always - I mean always fully discussed. No one hid anything.
If that's the case, why did Briffa stonewall McIntyre re: Yamal? It seems B's data and methodology weren't made available to M until B published in a journal (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society) that required it, and even then it took a year to happen.
| 203 |
Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:58:26pm |
re: #202 Jimbouie
If that's the case, why did Briffa stonewall McIntyre re: Yamal? It seems B's data and methodology weren't made available to M until B published in a journal (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society) that required it, and even then it took a year to happen.
This is NOT TRUE. Again.
So I guess you're going to just continue accepting at face value the words of the same people who lied to you about the Climate Research article.
Oh well.
| 204 |
freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 7:12:38pm |
re: #202 Jimbouie
If that's the case, why did Briffa stonewall McIntyre re: Yamal?
This has been discussed extensively around the 'net. Briffa made it quite clear that he did not have ownership of all the data. Furthermore, it became clear later that McIntyre actually had more of the data than he led others to believe.
You're really out of the loop on this one.
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Alone in a Bathroom: The Fear and Uncertainty of a Post-Roe Medication Abortion Angel tucked two white pills into each side of her mouth, bracing herself as they began to dissolve. Her deepest fears and anxieties took over. Angel had wanted to talk to a doctor before she took the pills to ... Cheechako
They Were Desperate to Get Pregnant. Then IVF Gave Them Extra Embryos. One morning last spring, Ashley Harrolle put her 1-year-old daughter down for a nap and went to the kitchen. She pulled up her fertility clinic’s contact information. It was time to make the call. In a freezer several hundred ... CheechakoJoe Bacon ✅
March FavoritesYou've seen these all already but looking back, just because. These are my favorite shots of this last month. That 1937 Zeiss Sonnar is such a gloriously wonderful bit of glass. Thanks for looking.
William Lewis
Russia’s New Combat Robots Blown Up by Drones Near Avdiivka When we landed on the moon, I thought about how science fiction had become real. Now, the robot wars have begun. It's more poignant somehow on the ground than in the missile wars we have in the air as ...
Rightwingconspirator
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
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
