May 2012 Open thread

Comments

  1. #1 Girma
    May 20, 2012

    Climate pattern of the 20th century!

    http://bit.ly/HRvReF

    What do you think?

  2. #2 John
    May 21, 2012

    Duly noted. I wasn’t aware his comments were being removed from this thread.

  3. #3 bill
    May 21, 2012

    You spelled that wrong, bentax – I’m sure you meant ‘realgits’

    Yep, you’re the winners in your own minds; which represents the sum-total of locations where you’re perceived as such…

  4. #4 bill
    May 21, 2012

    Gee, you must be just about to win, bendax, because we’re all laughing…

  5. #5 Wow
    May 21, 2012

    > as well as the died-in-the-wool AGW believer

    Yeah, how can someone believe in the evidence of AGW when there is so much made up stuff against it?!?!

    > getting the deltoids leave their comfort zone

    Yeah, being uncomfortable with rabid lunatic raving is SOOO closed-minded.

  6. #6 Wow
    May 21, 2012

    Yawn.

    When you’ve got something worth reading beyond the first five words, denier, come back and try then.

  7. #7 Marco
    May 21, 2012

    Ah, another one who brings up “the null hypothesis”. Tell me, Brent, what IS that null hypothesis, and why should we take that as THE null hypothesis?

    It is my experience that people who proclaim that we should start with “the null hypothesis” have absolutely no idea what the concept of the “null hypothesis” really is and how it should be applied. For them, it just ABC (anything but CO2).

  8. #8 Richard Simons
    May 21, 2012

    I see Marco beat me to it. Brent: most people who introduce the term ‘null hypothesis’ on blogs use it incorrectly. All you have done is to demonstrate that your understanding of statistics is no better than your undestanding of physics.

  9. #9 Bernard J.
    May 21, 2012

    If stupidity was a crime, these trolls would get life.

    Or, in some jurisdictions, death.

    Instead, they do their best to visit it on those who are unable to defend themselves.

  10. #10 Bernard J.
    May 21, 2012

    [That should bring the crazy ants swarming out from their nest...]

  11. #11 Marco
    May 21, 2012

    As expected, Brent has an overly simplistic idea of “the null hypothesis”. In all fairness, it is a common mistake, in part because medical science almost always has the “no effect/difference” as its null hypothesis.

    In reality, however, the “null hypothesis” does not necessarily mean “no effect/difference”, but rather it refers to the current ‘dogma’. For example, in the old, old days the null hypothesis was “the earth is flat”. The current null hypothesis is that the earth is a oblate spheroid (within acceptable bounds). Somewhere in-between we went through a phase where the null hypothesis referred to the earth as a sphere.

    Similarly, the current null hypothesis is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and that further accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will increase the temperature of the atmosphere. Our best estimates put that warming at 2-4 degrees per doubling. The alternative hypotheses that this warming is smaller or larger are the one’s that mostly fail the statistical tests.

    We already have statistical evidence that the global temperature today is much different from that a century ago (as in “statistically significantly different”). We also have evidence that this ‘small’ difference is highly relevant, with melting glaciers, arctic sea ice, and Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. In medical science your null hypothesis would already be rejected, and the warming effect of CO2 and major consequences already accepted as the new null hypothesis!

  12. #12 Wow
    May 21, 2012

    The Null Hypothesis would be:

    Is the assumption of CO2′s effects as modelled wrong? I.e. could this be just a sampling issue.

    And that has been tested.

    To better than 5% the data PRECLUDES the null hypothesis.

  13. #13 chek
    May 21, 2012

    Lambert keeps skewing the debate

    No, knucklehead you keep breaking the terms of your permissions on his blog – which is to stay confined to your own eponymous thread that you earned – because, as far as I can see, your anti-science drivellings are the same old dull, boring, denier piffle as they ever were.

    You learn absolutely nothing, nor do you try to, nor even think that you should. You can’t even post a simple link in the correct format.

    Take it elsewhere Brenty. There’s a whole wide internet out there and somewhere where they’ll bask in your fatuous ignorance and possibly be impressed by your pitiable blogscience. But I’m reasonably sure any residual amusement here has worn off.

  14. which is to stay confined to your own eponymous thread that you earned

    Actually, that thread was closed two years ago. Brent is banned here, period.

  15. #16 Bernard J.
    May 21, 2012

    In other news [Peter Gleick has been cleared of forging the documents sent to him by Heartland](http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/21/peter-gleick-cleared-heartland).

    In hindsight, one wonders to what extent the unrightous umbrage that Heartland adopted after they leaked like a sieve, underpinned their bad judgement with the Unabomber billboard. If there is a link, then Gleick should have no regrets at all РHeartland has unravelled ever since his expos̩, and continues to do so.

    HI and the rest of the Denialati would do well to remember that the meek will inherit the Earth, no matter the state that self-indulgent ideologies and corporate interests leave it in after the limited interval of time that they thieved it from posterity.

    The thing is, during the handing-over the Denialati will find themselves as weak, or weaker, than the inheriting meek. Damascus will be behind them by then, though, and the meek are likely to have very long and clear memories…

  16. #17 SteveC
    May 22, 2012

    @ Bernard re Gleick: that’s ‘good’ news, in the sense that his assertions (that he hadn’t forged ducments) were correct all along.

    Knowing what sticklers they are for discovering the truth through sceptical enquiry, I fully expect people such as Curry and Watts to publish these findings at least as prominently as they did when the whole thing blew up, and to issue full apologies for any defamatory comment or suggestions as to his character.

    Must dash, time for my medication.

  17. #18 Anthony David
    Australia
    May 22, 2012

    With ENSO going neutral , Roy Spencer is going to have to invent a new entertaining polynomial fit for his unfolding UAH temperature curve,. Any suggestions, besides the correct one?

  18. #19 SteveC
    May 22, 2012

    PS not that sold on the new layout – links going awol, formatting haywire, but I guess the bugs will get ironed out over time.

  19. #20 bill
    Australia
    May 23, 2012

    Re new layout: no permalinks to comments? I hope that’s not a permanent state of affairs.

    Gee, and the Nat Geog yellow rectangle for a .ico file. This is all going to take a little getting used to…

  20. #21 John
    May 23, 2012

    In happy news, Heartland has no friends and no money.

    No, that was wrong of me to say that. Heartland does have one friend left in the whole wide world:

    >Other speakers were not concerned with civility, however. Britain’s leading climate contrarian Christopher Monckton got a standing ovation for telling a series of “birther” jokes.

    Never change, Monckton. Never change.

  21. #22 Lotharsson
    May 23, 2012

    > …no permalinks to comments?

    (etc.)

    Right now the new changes appear to be a major regression. (WTF were they thinking?)

    I’m *betting* that [markdown syntax](http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax) **won’t work**, there’s no preview option so I can’t check – and my Typepad account is apparently no longer useful.

  22. #23 Lotharsson
    May 23, 2012

    Let’s see if plain HTML syntax works:

    Roy Spencer is going to have to invent a new entertaining polynomial fit for his unfolding UAH temperature curve…

    Nah, all he has to do is keep fitting a cubic, and due to the rising trend it will continue to point down at the end. That should be enough to bamboozle the rubes…

  23. #24 Andrew Strang
    Australia
    May 23, 2012

    I think the new idea of un-numbered comments is brilliant – referencing upthread by new comment should be a breeze as will scanning long threads in general by position. Also appreciate the time-saving feature of hiding the comment count inside each post.

  24. #25 Tim Lambert
    May 23, 2012

    So I’m asking for permalinks to comments, comment numbering and markdown. Anything else? Hey look! Shiny avatars!

  25. #26 Bernard J.
    May 23, 2012

    Preview, preview, preview.

    Even though I’m a slack-arse using it.

  26. #27 chek
    May 23, 2012

    I’m old enough to remember when new and improved, surprisingly by current standards, actually meant better :)

  27. #28 Lotharsson
    May 23, 2012

    Bringing back the old authentication methods or some other form of federated authentication would be handy – it means a somewhat increased level of assurance that commenter(s) posting with the same password-authenticated identity at different times and places really is the same person (or are a collective deliberately attempting to give that impression ;-)

  28. #29 Lotharsson
    May 23, 2012

    Mildly interesting, in light of the frequent troll meme here along the lines of “warmists are increasingly desperate and isolated” – speaking of the current Heartland conference:

    But this year’s event had a sense of desperation. Speakers spoke about being “victimised” by “warmists” and “alarmists” – scientists and politicians who accept that carbon dioxide emissions from industry are a main driver of climate change.

  29. #30 lord_sidcup
    May 23, 2012

    Mustn’t overlook this gem from Heartland conference:

    The people that warm spells kill are already moribund.

    Nice.

  30. #31 David Duff
    http://duffandnonsense.typepad.com/
    May 23, 2012

    Alas, Lotharson, ‘The Graun’, one feels, is not exactly, or even slightly, neutral.

    I only wrote that somewhat feeble comment to see how this new system works. And by the way, who’s this Lambert person who has suddenly appeared . . . ?

  31. #32 DarylD
    May 23, 2012

    In other news today, “Desmogblog” Brendan DeMelle, has news of watt may be the last of Heartland Institute’s last “Denial -a-polooza ICCC” conference in Chicago, Illinois.
    ink:- http://www.desmogblog.com/joe-bast-announces-death-denial-palooza-final-heartland-iccc-conference

    However, as all cynics would say, one should not crow too
    soon, for the hydra of denialati have many more heads to be removed , before we can put that sky dragon to rest in the grave yard of denial.

    One head may be down, due to Heartland Institute scoring their own goal and yet there is another one hundred more to go.

    The only clear concise and logical choice now, if we want a sustainable future for those who will be living in 2100, is to abandon the addiction of fossil fuel energy and follow the Germans lead ASAP.

    Truth may have one this skirmish, since the other side literally shot itself in the foot, the heart and the head, with the billboard of shame. The truth is, it will be a very long hard road to victory, of banishing the denialati of ignorance and ridding our addiction of burning fossil fuel for cheap energy.

    Winston Churchill : “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.”

    “Meanwhile, the House should prepare itself for hard and heavy tidings. I have only to add that nothing which may happen in this battle can in any way relieve us of our duty to defend the world cause to which we have vowed ourselves; nor should it destroy our confidence in our power to make our way, as on former occasions in our history, through disaster and through grief to the ultimate defeat of our enemies.”

  32. #33 Chris O'Neill
    May 23, 2012

    Dumb:

    who’s this Lambert person who has suddenly appeared

    The same person for whom a silly old duffer said:

    I reckon he’s seen the light and left you lot to swing in the wind!

  33. #34 Gerald
    Melbourne
    May 23, 2012
  34. #35 Chris O'Neill
    May 23, 2012

    Grima:

    What do you think?

    I think anyone who writes “PhD” on their blog graphs has an inferiority complex.

    And by the way, HadCrut3 is no longer the most accurate global temperature anomaly estimate.

  35. #36 chek
    May 23, 2012

    Let’s not let the Duffer forget that whatever he may think as to his imagined compromises that the UK’s Guardian reports may contain, he prefers to get his versionof events from someone to whom Heartland pays almost $90 grand for $40 ‘web services’.

    Of course to someone with all the limited know-how epitomised by the Duffer, ‘web services’ is the equivalent of ‘zero gravity brain surgery assisted by faeries’, so no problem whatsoever is perceived in Dufferworld.

  36. #37 Lotharsson
    May 24, 2012

    …one feels…

    Given that your feelings on certain topics have been repeatedly and devastatingly shown to be inconsistent with reality, your feelings are probably not particularly useful data points.

  37. #38 DarylD
    May 24, 2012

    Say Tim, I like the new look.

    Question, is it possible to add a democratic troll, thumbs up/thumbs down voting system a la “The Conversation” ?

  38. #39 Typical Lurker/BPW
    May 24, 2012

    Really Mr./Dr. Lambert? Do tell, what did I write to deserve you deleting? The truth? Fucking hilarious. And please spare me explanation if the reason is I was “abusive”.

    You have my email address, I would love to hear the reason.

    Funny thing is, I am not a “denier”. Just despise arrogance and, especially, hypocrisy regardless of position. I am a centrist. But there seems to be much more on one side–yours–than there is on the other. Though, to be fair, both have there share.

    Anyway, sad you find it necessary to delete me. Tells me something(s).

    (BTW chose the wrong name for the wrong blog FYI. Used Lurker in a debate with Franky Swifthacker at the Bunny-Boy place. Just thought I would come clean on that. Bad form you know… My real name is Bill Walsh. Like the coach.)

  39. #40 bill
    Australia
    May 24, 2012

    I reckon the revamp is Scienceblogs wide, Daryl, and I’d be surprised if Tim is much in control of it.

    For whoever is handling the new format, I’m still concerned about the apparent lack of ‘permalinks’ available for the comments, which also means links in existing comments referring to previous comments are now defunct.

    And I really don’t like the lack of a preview option.

    Any idea, Tim, of whether our new eminent host – National Geographic – is likely to become a bit more concerned about, um, tone? ( In the circumstances it may prove to have been a good move for Pharyngula to have (largely) left Sciblogs, for instance.)

  40. #41 MikeH
    May 24, 2012

    A Guardian report on the nutter’s conference.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/22/heartland-beating-climate-conference

    Going to Heartland conferences was always a bit like entering the portal to an alternative universe. Speakers and audience are almost entirely male, white and getting on in years.

    … and far right politically.

    Britain’s leading climate contrarian Christopher Monckton got a standing ovation for telling a series of “birther” jokes.

    This following is a classic. You could not make this stuff up.

    John Dunn, a Heartland policy adviser, sees his role as fighting “enviro-fascist madness”. In his speech, he sought to ridicule recorded evidence of growing drought and heatwaves due to climate change. “Warm is good for people, and it’s particularly good for people as they get older,” said Dunn. “The people that warm spells kill are already moribund.” He went on to say that only extreme cold caused extra deaths.

    The next speaker called for the return of the insecticide DDT, long banned in the US. “It’s cheap, it’s effective and it’s perfectly safe for humans and for all wildlife.”

    The reporter did not say if Monckton drank some on stage.

    But this year’s event had a sense of desperation. Speakers spoke about being “victimised” by “warmists” and “alarmists”

  41. #42 Wow
    May 24, 2012

    “The next speaker called for the return of the insecticide DDT … “It’s cheap, it’s effective and it’s perfectly safe for humans and for all wildlife.” ”

    Apart from insects, right?

    PS it’s not banned, never been banned and only misuse of DDT is banned.

  42. #43 Wow
    May 24, 2012

    “what did I write to deserve you deleting? The truth?”

    Hmm. You didn’t write the truth, so it couldn’t have been that.

    “Funny thing is, I am not a “denier”.”

    Yes, all deniers deny that too.

    “I am a centrist.”

    Oddly enough, those people most out of whack are the most likely to believe themselves “centrist”.

    “Though, to be fair, both have there share.”

    And this is the reason why: they can then diss EVERYONE ELSE, because “I’m not on one side, *I’M a centrist!”. Oddly enough, they’ll only complain about “both sides being just as bad” to the people who don’t believe in a Great Conspiracy to push AGW.

  43. #44 Bob
    May 24, 2012

    After a long absence, Denial Depot is back! Joy!

    PS Yes, I am over a month late to the party, but my point (“Joy!”) stands.

  44. #45 Typical Lurker/BPW
    May 24, 2012

    You know what’s funny Wow, you are such an arrogant idiot that you actually think your post makes sense. Since every one of the previous was deleted, it’s rich that you even comment. Shall we go back and discuss your ridiculous assertions about Gleick being found innocent by a court? No? Didn’t think so. I am on board with AGW being real. Not that it matters. What I despise is arrogant assholes like you and Dr. Harvey and your laughable hypocrisy.

    Our host has a funny way of maintaining his house. I will choose not to participate when only part of the discussion is allowed through.

  45. #46 Typical Lurker/BPW
    May 24, 2012

    Oh, to be clear, that post was meant for Tim only since I had assumed he would simply delete it as he had all the rest. Not that I care that you read it, but the sentiments were directed at him, not you. Out of context to say the least. But have your fun Wow. You’re still a laughable zealot.

  46. #47 chek
    May 24, 2012

    Cut the poor victim me crap TypLurk/BPW.
    Scienceblogs is in the process of a format changeover and many posts on many fora have gone missing, not just yours here.

    You may deny being a denier, but that same typical aggressive, paranoid, victim nonsense cap sure is a snug fit.

  47. #48 bill
    Australia
    May 25, 2012

    As one of the owners of a ‘shiny avatar’ I wish to report that I have no idea how it got there – random accounts of mine just appear sometimes in the oddest places (WUWT!).

    Is the new format based on a WordPress template, perhaps?

    The good news / frustrating thing is that comment numbers are all there in the html – chek’s above is ‘comment-57313′ for example.

    ‘Typical Lurker’ – Yes, it’s all about you, isn’t it?

  48. #49 bill
    Australia
    May 25, 2012

    On another note: Gareth’s place also doesn’t have a preview function – by far the best option, surely – but it does allow for the tweaking of comments for a few minutes after posting (provided no-one else has!)

    Also, if you’re asking for a wish list, nesting comments in sub-threads is a great way to let various dialogues run their course.

    Still, it’s probably still less ‘aaargh’ than commenting at Eli’s! ;-)

  49. #50 John
    May 25, 2012

    To get an avatar use Gravatar.com

  50. #51 Gaz
    Sydney
    May 25, 2012

    Hey, I’ve decided to be a centrist too!
    From now on, I only half believe in gravity, so when my doctor next tells me I should lose weight I’ll tell him to stop being a medico-fascist alarmist..

  51. #52 ianam
    May 25, 2012

    “I will choose not to participate”

    If only. You’re dumber than a sack of rocks, Bill, and no one cares about what you have to say, it being utterly worthless.

    [From WordPress: "You are posting comments too quickly. Slow down." Uh, but I didn't post previously. This changeover is abominable and I hope NatGeo fires whoever is responsible and finds someone competent.]

  52. #53 hardindr
    May 26, 2012

    Not sure if anyone will see this, but I thought Tim Lambert would be interested:

    http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/my_break_with_the_extreme_right/singleton/

  53. #54 bill
    Orstralya
    May 26, 2012

    Um, Ianam, that was the Typical Lurker, who apparently believes all these recent glitches are specifically aimed at him…

    I’ve also had a post disallowed for posting ‘too many comments’ when I’d put one on one thread and had just attempted to put another on a different thread. that’s pretty common behaviour in these parts!…

    BTW all: Has the masthead for the site proper always said ‘Deltoid – Just another site?’

  54. #55 Typical Lurker/BPW
    May 26, 2012

    So hard not to engage with such amusing responses…

    Chek,
    Bullshit. Even after the format change I had comments in moderation deleted by our host. So, you can try that approach, but I know it holds no water.

    Ianam, you are in fact a complete moron. You prove that on a regular basis with your intellectually bankrupt rhetorical approach of calling anyone you don’t agree with stupid. Automatic fail. As far as my comment being worthless? In response to the laughable assertion presented by Bernard, that Gleick has somehow been “cleared”, I think my pointing out, accurately and with proof, that he–Gleick–is both a liar and a criminal, is worthwhile to the discussion. You just don’t like it. Neither did Jeff Harvey who thinks he is a hero. Smells like hypocrisy is cooking in his kitchen on a regular basis.

    Gaz, not that you care, by centrist I mean that I am neither left nor right. Socially liberal, fiscally conservative. Unlike so many here, I see the world in shades of grey, not black and white. Hard to understand, I know. So your snark is nothing but that and yet another worthless response.

    Since nothing I wrote pertained to AGW–other than I believe in the physics of it–the term denier is useless in this context. But that doesn’t matter, does it? If one disagrees with any aspect of the Deltoid version of the world, that person must be a D-K afflicted, denying, stupid idiot.

    You guys are funny. Keep it up. I love the entertainment.

  55. #56 chek
    May 26, 2012

    TypLurk/BPW @ 08.57 “I think my pointing out, accurately and with proof, that he–Gleick–is both a liar and a criminal, is worthwhile to the discussion.”

    As things stand, your opinion and personally awarded “conviction” mean nothing except frothing hot air.
    No charges and hence no ‘conviction’ have ever been laid. End of story.

    In the meantime, the public interest can heartily thank Dr.Gleick for exposing a plan by right wing nutters to subvert the body politic by indoctrinating schoolchildren with their anti-scientific and insupportable propaganda.

    And btw, comments of mine are also ‘missing’ here and elsewhere. The difference is I accept it’s due to a technical glitch. You, being you, seem to prefer to choose to interpret it as suppressing your worthless hyperbolic opinions. As with most deniers in my experience, I tend to think it panders to therir persecution complex as if such uninformed manufactured views carry any additional weight due to their being suppressed

    Fortunately, most sane people grow out of believing they’re living in a James Bond novel by the time they’re fourteen.

  56. #57 Bernard J.
    May 27, 2012

    Atypical lurker had a tanty about being “deleted”.

    If he had read about the merger with NG, he’d have known that there were warnings that comments would be lost in the process – Greg Laden even posted about this beforehand. I had posts several innocuous deleted from Deltoid; I haven’t spat the dummy and succumbed to paranoia – BPW should grow up and grow a brain.

    And is his a sock? The whining sounds familiar…

  57. #58 bill
    'Straya
    May 27, 2012

    You guys are funny. Keep it up. I love the entertainment.

    Hang on; don’t we know this guy? Didn’t he try out the same schtick a while back with an acronym that we were supposed to discern meant something along the lines of ‘You Are all Funny as Hell’ which was apparently meant to be devastating?

    The routine hasn’t got any better. Belligerent Concern / Tone Trolling 101. Next.

  58. #59 Mack
    May 27, 2012

    Bernerd, As Clint Eastwood would say….”adapt, modify, overcome.” :)

  59. #60 BPW
    May 27, 2012

    Chek,

    Nope, not my opinion. Truth.

    He committed a crime. Period. Not in dispute. He hasn’t been charged, but it is not in doubt. Should you want, I will document it for you. I already have. I will again.

    Gleick exposed nothing that wasn’t already known. Heartland is a right wing think tank. So what? We knew that. As for no charges, you are right, but that does not change the fact that he committed a crime. Period. Like it or not.

    If the comments missing were typical, why didn’t Tim just tell me that? You can see I asked. I think that particular string was deleted for other reasons. I could be wrong.

    Bernard…grow up etc? I don’t read what you are referencing. But if that was the case, I specifically asked Tim. No response but to post one of my questions to him out of context. As I stated, he deleted several in moderation unless that was part of the glitch. If so, fine. Just say that.

    I laugh because I don’t remotely fit into your comfortable position off “denier”, primarily because I am not. To the contrary, I care about the planet. I have kids. But I’m not over the top. I just respect the environment and think many of you have the opposite effect you are looking for and I wish you could see that. I really do.

    bill, you got me.

  60. #61 BPW
    May 27, 2012

    bill,

    It wasn’t ” funny as hell”.

  61. #62 BPW
    May 27, 2012

    And, bill, it was actually directed at one person, not all.

  62. #63 BPW
    May 27, 2012

    bill, just saw your comment about it being “all about me”. Really? None of this is about me. ZERO. What the fukkkkk?

  63. #64 BPW
    May 27, 2012

    bill, just saw your comment about it being “all about me”. Really? None of this is about me. ZERO. What the fukkkkk?

    I do the best I can. But I have to live.

  64. #65 John
    May 27, 2012

    Gleick wasn’t cleared of identity theft, he was cleared of creating the strategy document as per Heartland’s ficticious claims. BPW’s argument is a strawman, and sadly I don’t see him accusing Hearland of criminal defamation and lying. Touche!

    Gleick’s actions, while ethically questionable, exposed Heartland as the vile corporatist thinktank we expected them to be. It goes much deeper than “Heartland is a right wing think tank”. It exposed their payment of cretins like Bob Carter (exposing his lie that he receives no payment from special interest organisations) and their plans to brainwash children with ideologically driven dogma.

    If this realease was so harmless, why did Heartland feel the need to lie about the source of the strategy document? I seriously doubt there are many deniers who really believe in their hearts that Gleick faked it. The attacks on Gleick are a seriously desperate distraction tactics.

    Now we are in the delightful position of watching Heartland destroy themselves from within with their own bitter hatred. Deniers are really getting desperate at the moment.

    Addendum: For the record I class myself as centrist too, which is why I find BPW’s lashing out at Peter Gleick and commenters on this website most bemusing. Or maybe that should read amusing.

    For the record, BPW, we’ve had tone trolls and concern trolls before and I can spot them at one hundred paces. The cries of “I’m a believer!” and “you’re not doing our cause any good!”. The bitter attacks on people like Gleick while ignoring much more serious criminal activity such as the CRU email theft.

    For some ghastly reason I can’t find any record of dear BPW lecturing the Watts-ites about their abuse of scientists or support of criminal activity.

    What a lying hypocrite!

  65. #66 John
    May 27, 2012

    Of course, what really gives BPW away is the same besieged, victimised mentality all deniers possess. I’m sure we’ve all had commenting issues – I know I have – but the only people complaining they are being supressed are Tim Curtain and BPW. Go Figure.

  66. #67 Marion Delgado
    May 27, 2012

    I mostly read science blogs and the comments on news stories, and I wondered if the sense of entitlement I get off of many commenters in those venues is unique to science controversies – reading another blog I noticed it isn’t.

  67. #68 John
    May 27, 2012

    Our merry band of deniers have received the help of some high-profile support in their campaign to suppress science that clashes with their faith.

    Still not as funny as Monckton, though.

  68. #69 bluegrue
    May 27, 2012

    @Tim

    please check your spam bucket, I’ve sent you an e-mail that could easily end up there (unknown author + attachments).

  69. #70 ianam
    May 27, 2012

    @John
    That Chick Tract even features fat Al Gore … saying “None of us believe your Bible” (but the real Al Gore does).

  70. #71 Gaz
    May 28, 2012

    Lurk: “Gaz, not that you care, by centrist I mean that I am neither left nor right.”

    So what did you mean by this: “Funny thing is, I am not a “denier”. Just despise arrogance and, especially, hypocrisy regardless of position. I am a centrist. But there seems to be much more on one side–yours–than there is on the other. Though, to be fair, both have there share.”

    Seems to me, Lurk, that you were referring to AGW, hence your reference to “denier” and “one side” and “the other”.

    If you weren’t talking about climate science, then what the heck were you talking about?

  71. #72 Chris O'Neill
    May 28, 2012

    Our merry band of deniers have received the help of some high-profile support:

    Back in the Dark Ages, when the Catholic Church ruled the world, no-one dared question their wisdom when they said: “Do pennance! The world will end before the year 1000!”

    which was followed, after some anti-science, by a long religious diatribe.

    Tribalists don’t get irony, or anything else.

  72. #73 bill
    May 28, 2012

    No! This isn’t your planet! Jesus created it. He controls its climate – not mankind.

    Global warming experts pray to Ixchel [?!?*] and Gaia for guidance.

    England still exists. Ask any Muslim.

    …and then there’s the creepy sub-Viz comics graphics. Oh, and, good grief – they’ve even pixellated the ‘naughty bits’ on the Willendorf Venus. What can you say?…

    I always find these things to be a profoundly disturbing insight into some very sick minds indeed that have latched onto religion as a means of normalising their paranoiac persecution fantasies.

    *I’d lay $20 that most ‘global warming experts’ have never heard of Ixchel!

  73. #74 Tim Lambert
    May 28, 2012

    This Chick tract parody is better than any of the real ones.

  74. #75 Brent
    May 28, 2012

    I just challenged a Senior Warmist to state his falsifiability criteria for AGW. Would anybody like to join in her at the Deltoid Faith Forum?

    You will declare AGW to be false in the event that:
    (i) Snowball Earth returns.
    (ii) The southern icecap once extends to South Georgia
    (iii) The Greenland Strait is once iced over
    (iv) The Thames freezes once at Tower Bridge
    (v) The monthly UAH-MSU LT anomaly stays below 0.8C from 2013 to 2023
    (vii) The UAH-MSU LT 13-month running average stays below 0.5C from 2013 to 2023.

    Or you may choose the faith-based option:
    (viii) Under no circumstances whatsoever.

    Any takers?

  75. #76 MikeH
    May 29, 2012

    What a surprise. The Australian found to be lying about wind turbines again.
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/growing-health-concerns-pit-queensland-against-the-wind/story-e6frgczx-1226370596734

    Sorry Tim. This time you have been beaten to the punch. Their lies were quickly rebutted by Climate Spectator who did some fact checking.
    http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/queensland-health-rebukes-australian-wind-farms

    Seen on a T-shirt. “Is that true or did you read it in The Australian”

  76. #77 bill
    May 29, 2012

    Mike H: well spotted x 2.

    I’d buy one of those T Shirts.

    The Australian is now little more than a printed far-Right blog run by a cadre of zealots

  77. #78 Rog Tallbloke
    May 29, 2012

    Bernard J:
    [Paging](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2012/05/death_threat_denial.php) Rog Tallbloke. [Rog Tallbloke](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2012/05/death_threat_denial.php).

    You called?
    Tim L says:
    “The Canberra Times was correct to report that there had been death threats at ANU as Media Watch confirmed by talking to Will Steffen!”

    Australian National University former chancellor Ian Chubb has gone on record in the Australian today saying:

    “For the record, there were no alleged death threats except when journalists picked up the story.”

    I see all my previous comment to this thread were lost in the “technical Glitch” – I’m glad I saved the old page before Deltoid merged with another warmblog.

    It shouldn’t be too hard to work out the pattern in the ‘glitch’. It might even be worth a post at the Talkshop.

    (Screenshot taken)

  78. #79 Rog Tallbloke
    May 29, 2012

    Good stufff, I missed the pagination on the new format. That’s be why my inpage search didn’t find my previous comments.

    Pity the comments aren’t numbered any more – a feature I’d like on wordpress too.

  79. #80 Rog Tallbloke
    May 29, 2012

    Bill says:
    “You and your risible cronies have already caused untold damage via the delay to action you’ve gleefully helped to foster, of course, and your life is likely to become a very uncomfortable one when those particular chickens come home to roost…”

    If I was in ANU’s climatology dept that would probably count as a death threat. Lol.

  80. #81 bill
    May 29, 2012

    First complete error.

    I see all my previous comment to this thread were lost in the “technical Glitch” – I’m glad I saved the old page before Deltoid merged with another warmblog.

    It shouldn’t be too hard to work out the pattern in the ‘glitch’. It might even be worth a post at the Talkshop.

    Let’s remember: this was the man who arrived with -

    Has John Coochey’s comment regarding alleged ‘death threats’ against Australian climate scientists been deleted? It was here yesterday.

    How do I know this? Because the quote above comes from the first of all your comments on this thread that are still all there. Try clicking page 4.

    Again, all you’re demonstrating is that you routinely make claims without evidence, and that you’re then likely to compound your error by accusing others of malfeasance.

    We went over this before. Again, little man, 30+ scientists from all over Australia. We’ve got the bloody emiails an even the video.

    Twit.

  81. #82 bill
    May 29, 2012

    For the record, I managed to track down the original Canberra Times story (no longer on their website at the original link), as well as provided a walk-through of Media Watch’s clear refutation of The Australian‘s ‘it’s all about the ANU’ combined nit-and-cherry-pick here.

    Oh, and there’s this.

    Some people might seriously benefit from actually reading sources before making claims.

  82. #83 Lotharsson
    May 29, 2012

    For the record, there were no alleged death threats except when journalists picked up the story.

    Your quote appears to admit that there were alleged death threats.

    Or were you (earlier) arguing merely about the timing?

  83. #84 Bernard J.
    May 29, 2012

    I see all my previous comment to this thread were lost in the “technical Glitch” – I’m glad I saved the old page before Deltoid merged with another warmblog.

    It shouldn’t be too hard to work out the pattern in the ‘glitch’. It might even be worth a post at the Talkshop.

    (Screenshot taken)

    This is tea-through-the-nose-worthy.

    One really should adjust one’s tinfoil cap, look past the tip of one’s ideological nose, and engage one’s brain (such as it is) before opening one’s mouth to change one’s feet.

    Do consider blogging about it though – it would be great to have your paranoia and its subsequent excusing preserved in the carbonite of the Interweb.

  84. #85 chek
    May 29, 2012

    Given that climate change denial entirely rests on one or a variety of conspiracy theories (depending on the needs of the practitioner), Tallquack should be encouraged to blog away to his heart’s content and catalogue all his delusions for posterity.

    It’s not like the real world or the natural world gives a fcuk.

  85. #86 bill
    May 29, 2012

    Ah, Rog Tallbloke: He came. He saw. He scarpered.

  86. #87 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    Deltoid merged with another warmblog

    National Geographic is a “warmblog”? And Deltoid “merged with” it? This falls into the category of “not even wrong”.

    at the Talkshop

    Where they practice cargo cult science.

    It’s not like the real world or the natural world gives a fcuk.

    And yet the deniers have an effect. To paraphrase Einstein:

    [Our burning of fossil fuels] has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.

  87. #88 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    Billy Bob Hall: Yes, Bernard J. – May 21, 11:25 am

    Fullfilling Bernard J. – May 21, 11:30 am

    Let’s kill them all. Just like the 10:10 doctrine demands.

    Except that, of course, it doesn’t. That 10:10 ad was foolish, ill-advised, in bad taste, showed atrocious bad judgment … and was not a statement of policy doctrine, as everyone, especially dishonest swine like you, well knows. Nor, of course, did Bernard J. state any such policy doctrine … he did not recommend that stupidity should be a crime or that anyone should be put to death for it; you know that, I know that, everyone know sthat. OTOH, plenty of deniers have called for criminal penalties, death, etc. for climate scientists, and they mean it.

    Some of you people are just too much.

    As opposed to all of you. But regardless of who is “too much”, AGW is a scientifically established fact.

  88. #89 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    Here is some intelligent discussion of that ad … the opposite of what one can expect from folks like Billy Bob.

  89. #90 John
    May 30, 2012

    Any takers?

    No.

    When the world has shown nearly one degree of warming in 130 years (and most of that in the last forty with the warmest year in 2010) it is pointless in pretending, Brent, that there will ever be a time you will accept the scientific reality. Set all the hypothetical falsibility targets you want. When the inevitable happens you’ll blame the sun or accuse scientists of faking the data or move the goalposts to 1.0+ by 2020 on CET or claim it’s all “natual variability” or conject yourself a new theory you don’t really believe etc etc ad infinitum.

    Why would anyone accept the bet of someone who openly believes in scientific fraud? With someone who bases their scientific views on their political fears and their irrational belief that Al Gore wants to take their property away?

    Anyway, I’m sure that global cooling you gloatingly predicted about is about to start any day now.

  90. #91 John
    May 30, 2012

    Are you dumb, dishonest or both ?

    Go on. What is the one widely accepted theory that disproves AGW?

  91. #92 John
    May 30, 2012

    I should also point out that high-profile believers in AGW include Richard Lindzen, Fred Singer, John Christy, Roy Spencer and Christopher Monckton, in that they all accept that adding Co2 to the atmosphere will cause some warming.

  92. #93 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    Are you dumb, dishonest or both ?

    No, but you certainly are. AGW is an established scientific fact. And just the other day I read a comment by a so-called “skeptic” … wait … here it is Canman at http://www.desmogblog.com/us-and-them-psychology-behind-heartland-institute-billboards saying that “very few climate skeptics deny” AGW, it’s only “CAGW” they don’t accept. You folks should get your stories straight. But you can’t, because you are all a bunch of stupid ideologues with no concern with what is actually true; what a tangled web you collectively weave.

  93. #94 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    Meanwhile, of course, my point about Billy Bob’s transparent dishonesty about 10:10 and what Bernard J. said about the hypothetical consequences of stupidity being considered a crime goes unrefuted. As does my assertion that AGW is a scientifically established fact. It is, whether ignorant imbeciles like Billy Bob are aware of it or not, just as is evolution, the common descent of humans and modern monkeys from a common ancestor, a 14 billion year old universe, vaccines not being the cause of autism, lack of effectiveness of prayer, and numerous other things that ignorant people refuse to believe.

  94. #95 chek
    May 30, 2012

    And yet the deniers have an effect.

    I don’t disagree with that entirely (especially in the more virulent USA) but probably not as much as we may imagine through this sort of forum were we take an interest in such things.

    By way of illustration, many friends and acquaintances had heard of the Earth Day promotion to turn of their lights for an hour back in March. Schools and colleges in my local authority area had runners carrying a rechargeable torch from school to school to raise awareness. Hopefully, the very thought of it will have given Montford and his cretinous minions at least a few apoplectic aneurisms.

    By way of contrast, the flat-earthers of denial’s counter campaign, Human Progress Day’s campaign to turn on as many lights as possible was a gigantic, embarrassing flop.

    In other news….

    “You (sic) ‘no’ means that you consider AGW is unfalsifiable.

    Your abysmal comprehension skills are quite likely a root cause of your lack of understanding of AGW, but your inability to read is your own problem. Don’t compound it by putting your own dumb, ill-educated words in other peoples’ mouths.

  95. #96 Bernard J.
    May 30, 2012

    Yes, Bernard J. – May 21, 11:25 am
    Let’s kill them all. Just like the 10:10 doctrine demands. Some of you people are just too much.

    Ianam has already addressed the point, but I’ll reiterate – I simply said that if stupidity was a crime, the trolls on this thread would be guilty of the extreme presentation of such crime, to the extent that the severity would warrant the harshest penalties that crimes can attract.

    It’s to say that you’re about as stupid as one can be.

    This is different to saying that I believe that the trolls should be knocked off. If Billy Bob has been sequestered in the backwoods for so long that he can’t discern the difference, then the problem is his, not mine.

    Of course, being one of the Stupid crowd himself, BBH is simply proving that he isn’t capable of understanding the difference.

  96. #97 chek
    May 30, 2012

    I wonder which of us is rational.

    The one who trusts the overwhelming evidence of relevant peer reviewed science, the considered judgement of every National Academy of Science of every advanced nation, and their relevant scientific and professional organisations.

    The other is of course a loony who prefers to take his cue from tired old reactionary comedy writers and whacko conspiracy theorists and bought and paid for ex-TV weathermen. That’s you, that is.

  97. #98 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    especially in the more virulent USA

    Where I live and the effect is very pronounced.

    By way of contrast, the flat-earthers of denial’s counter campaign, Human Progress Day’s campaign to turn on as many lights as possible was a gigantic, embarrassing flop.

    Yes, of course, but the campaign to retard needed policy change has not been a flop … again, especially in the U.S.

  98. #99 ianam
    May 30, 2012

    Chek and John (again), it’s best to pretend that the forbidden troll’s posts don’t exist; when they are eventually removed, the only sign of them will be in your own posts.

  99. #100 Karen
    May 30, 2012

    I didn’t think this blog could get any worse ?

    But it has.

    Rediscovered photos reveal Greenland’s glacier history

    Ice retreat was as drastic in the 1930s as it is today.

    http://www.nature.com/news/rediscovered-photos-reveal-greenland-s-glacier-history-1.10725