Nexus 6 on Steve McIntyre

Nexus 6 puts Steve McIntyre’s paranoia into pictures.

Comments

  1. #1 Barton Paul Levenson
    January 7, 2008

    Damn, sites like that are dangerous! I was laughing out loud at work! I’m going to get caught goofing off if this continues!

  2. #2 Lance
    January 7, 2008

    Stick figure graphics accompanied by lower quality remarks.

  3. #3 Peter Bickle
    January 7, 2008

    Hi all

    Considering this is a science site there is not much discussion on this.
    Steve Mc is getting under the skin a bit as there is a lot of banter at his expense.
    Come on Tim, start adding posts proving that GW is all man made. Stop attacking people, you are a gutless coward like your pompous cricket captain, Ricky Ponting.

    Regards
    Peter Bickle

  4. #4 guthrie
    January 7, 2008

    Peter- we don’t need to post anything. You need to go and read the reports that can be found here:
    http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm

    In fact maybe that would make a nice easy lot of posts- put up bits of the IPCC report and see if anyone wants to take a tilt at them.

  5. #5 David Kane
    January 7, 2008

    Hope that the Deltoid community does not object to my thread-hijacking, but it sure would be nice to start a conversation about the recent National Journal article on the Lancet surveys. I would also like feedback on my article from TCS Daily. Perhaps Tim could start a new thread devoted to these topics? I am sure that there are many members of the Deltoid community with something to say on the topic . . .

  6. #6 Eli Rabett
    January 7, 2008

    Been there, done that, no arrows.

  7. #7 Thom
    January 7, 2008

    David, how about this for a comment. The National Journal article leans dangerously into the area of editorializing. Lots of innuendo and a whole kitchen sink of speculation. As it is, the writer only gets away with it because he is a well-known journalist and I’m not into criticizing every instance that a journalist screws up.

    Like plumbers and doctors, journalists are allowed to miss the mark on occasion. Well, maybe not doctors.

    Nonetheless, Lila Guterman did a much better job in Columbia Journalism Review. But that’s to be expected. She’s an actual science journalist, who understands things like peer-review and problems that pop up in published studies.

    As for your article in Tech Central Station….The fact that you would publish something on a web site set up by a PR firm that was created by guys who started the smoker’s right movement….Well, need I continue?

  8. #8 Eli Rabett
    January 7, 2008

    David, been there, done that too. You managed to push it all over the right wing blogs. The interesting point is that beyond the strong imputation of fraud in the NJ article there is nothing. So, are you signing on to the accusations of fraud?

    BTW, to see how weak the NJ article is look at the discussion on volokh

  9. #9 Tim Lambert
    January 7, 2008

    David, I will have a post in due course. In the mean time, you can discuss it on the Open Thread. I’ll post a question for you there to get things going.

  10. #10 Hank Roberts
    January 8, 2008

    > smoker’s rights

    That’s far too vague. You’re referring to the “my right to smoke ends at the bottom of your lungs” movement, set up when the epidemiology on sidestream or ‘second hand’ smoke began to be impossible to argue with scientifically.

    Thus the PR.

  11. #11 JB
    January 8, 2008

    Re: David Kane’s thread hijack.

    As a former Jr high teacher, I would normally advocate ignoring such efforts to gain attention.

    But I must admit that it is thoroughly entertaining when Tim, Robert, D-squared et al highlight “issues” with Kane’s revolutionary, head-exploding mathematics.

  12. #12 Ian Gould
    January 8, 2008

    “Considering this is a science site there is not much discussion on this. …. you are a gutless coward like your pompous cricket captain, Ricky Ponting.”

    Peter Bickle ladies and gents, leading by example and raising the level of discourse.

  13. #13 Chris O'Neill
    January 8, 2008

    “you are a gutless coward like your pompous cricket captain, Ricky Ponting.

    Regards Peter Bickle”

    With regards like that, who needs insults.

  14. #14 Ian Gould
    January 8, 2008

    Actually, the current Cricket controversy is a pretty good analog for what’s happening in the AGW debate.

    Australia (the climate scientists) are massively dominant on the playing field.

    India (the denialists) know they haven’t got a hope in hell of winning by playing according to the rules.

    So the Indians accuse Australia of not playing in accord with “the spirit of the game” and Steve McIntyre squawks about censorship and the Data Integrity Act.

    Guess who’s name is going to go down in the record book as the winners?

  15. #15 Peter Bickle
    January 8, 2008

    Hello all

    Ian, you forgot the part the umpires played in the result. This is all of the dodgy statistics used in formulating the results. Also, the Aussies are cheats.

    When you don’t get given 3 catches that were catches it is hard to beat Australia. Those 3 catches totalled about 250 runs.

    BTW, a real scorcher last year turned out to be considering it was going to be the warmest recorded. The temperture is straight lined for the past 7 years now, no upward trend at all.

    Regards
    Peter Bickle

  16. #16 JB
    January 8, 2008

    Peter Bickle said: “The temperture is straight lined for the past 7 years now, no upward trend at all.”

    I think what you meant is “flat-lined”. A vertical line is also straight.

    Also, for the record, it’s temperature. You don’t pronounce the “a” but it is still there. Kind of like the upward temperature trend. Some deny it, but it’s still there.

  17. #17 Marion Delgado
    January 9, 2008

    David Kane, you’re a liar, a fraud, a charlatan, a disgrace. Any time spent paying further attention to you, other than pointing out your ongoing disgraceful, lying, fraudulent behavior for the purposes of discrediting you to a third party who might not know better, is time wasted.

    I can summarize all future papers from you:

    1. David Kane revises his weasel attack, since the last 20 iterations were debunked.

    2. David Kane says this is what he was saying all along.

    3. In numerous tabloid right wing articles, David Kane accuses anyone not in step with the neocon project of any number of things – falsehoods, hiding data, using hidden methods to calculate results, etc.

    4. In numerous tabloid right wing articles, David Kane complains about lack of civility among scientists and on the internets generally.

    There. I have just saved everyone reading these comments several days of wasted time.

  18. #18 Chris O'Neill
    January 9, 2008

    The temperture is straight lined for the past 7 years now, no upward trend at all.

    Garbage is forever, forever, forever.

  19. #19 JB
    January 9, 2008

    Marion:

    While I basically agree with you that reading Kane’s posts is a waste of time, so is a lot of other entertainment.

    It is fun to watch David Kane try to get another foot in his mouth after he has already inserted the first.

    Just as it is entertaining to watch Bickle, Curtain, Harding, “per” and others here do the same.

  20. #20 dhogaza
    January 9, 2008

    BTW, a real scorcher last year turned out to be considering it was going to be the warmest recorded.

    Ah, true, 2007 is a stunning defeat for AGW theory because, instead of being the warmest recorded, it was only the SECOND warmest recorded (dead heat with 1998).

    So, let’s see, Bickle (posting pickled, I’m sure), claims warming has stopped because GISS data shows …

    1. 2005 was the warmest year
    2. 1998/2007 next
    3. 2002 and 2003 round out the rest of the top 5

    Climate science has been dealt a stunning defeat by pickled Bickle.

    The temperture is straight lined for the past 7 years now, no upward trend at all.

    Not true even without considering 2007, and even more clearly true when
    2007 is included.

  21. #21 Peter Bickle
    January 9, 2008

    Dhog, sticks and stones old chap.

  22. #22 Dave Briggs
    January 9, 2008

    What a difference 4 seconds makes! Sung to the tune of what a difference a day makes! LOL!
    Dave Briggs :~)

  23. #23 Eli Rabett
    January 9, 2008

    Old chips, do they pay Libraritarians so little that they have to eat old chips? Gadzooks. Yikes

  24. #24 dhogaza
    January 10, 2008

    Pickled Bickle says

    Dhog, sticks and stones old chap.

    Always an effective response when one posts data and a link to statistical analysis of said data.

    I’m sure you’ve convinced everyone that climate science is a fraud.

  25. #25 Barton Paul Levenson
    January 11, 2008

    Well, I tried to post a long, thoughtful post to Climate Audit and it got eaten by the spam filter. Clearly, there is a conspiracy to suppress us evil statist liberal AGW conspirators on that blog.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.