June 2012 Open Thread

More thread.

Comments

  1. #1 bill
    June 8, 2012

    I’m discussing it because ianam – i.e. someone worth discussing things with – responded to the point I was making that a political system that is capable of generating one victory for the likes of Walker is quite capable of generating another.

    That Walker is a creature of both the Kochs and Zombie Economics* should surprise no-one. The steps taken along the US elite’s ideologically-driven path to economic suicide – e.g. austerity and gutting worker’s rights (even electoral disenfranchisement) – should surprise no-one.

    And that some blatant moron should opportunistically claim all this has something to do with AGW should also surprise no-one.

    Because the kind of stunted intellect that is gleefully triumphant at the rise of the Walkers of this world is precisely the kind of stunted intellect that will gloat over any poll that ‘proves’ the science deniers are ‘winning’.

    Talk about Pyrrhic victories! But, being as thick as the proverbial short planks x2, you’ll just have to wait for History to rub your nose in that one.

    And then you’ll just deny it…

    *Nothing happened between the WSC of ’29 and the ascension of Saints Margaret and Ronnie in ’79. Nothing worth us knowing, anyway.

  2. #2 John
    June 8, 2012

    Look at it this way Bill – the deniers are currently so strapped of any of the fake stolen email style outrages they have become addicted to (coupled with the recent heatwaves, humiliation of Heartland, restoration of Gleick and Monckton’s new-found birtherism, which even the most hardline denier finds mildly alarming) that the best argument they can put forward is to pretend that a small state election was a referendum on AGW.

  3. #3 ianam
    June 8, 2012

    Because the kind of stunted intellect that is gleefully triumphant at the rise of the Walkers of this world is precisely the kind of stunted intellect that will gloat over any poll that ‘proves’ the science deniers are ‘winning’.

    Ah … thanks for connecting those dots.

  4. #4 Betula
    June 8, 2012

    Ianumb the poll gloater…

    “according to exit polls, 60% voters said that someone should be recalled only for official misconduct, and another 10% opposed all recalls”

    Who’s intellect is called out by Bill…

    “the kind of stunted intellect that will gloat over any poll”

    Finally sees the light…

    “Ah … thanks for connecting those dots.”

    Classic.

  5. #5 Betula
    June 8, 2012

    ianumb…

    I understand this Walker win really bothers you, sort of like a slap in the face…
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/06/06/barrett-concedes-wisconsin-defeat-gets-slapped/

    and now, understandably, you’ve become a gloating poll clinging denier…

    “people didn’t vote for him, they voted against his recall”

    Which of course means people didn’t vote against him, they voted for his recall….

    Brilliant.

    In addition, the voting numbers were a duplicate of the first race:
    http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/157378455.html#!page=6&pageSize=10&sort=newestfirst

    So what were these same people voting for the first time around ianumb? Oh, I know…perhaps they weren’t voting for him, they were voting for a Governor.

    What is it called when you keep doing the same thing and expect a different result ianumb?

    Ah, more dots connected….

  6. #6 Betula
    June 8, 2012

    Bill…

    “And that some blatant moron should opportunistically claim all this has something to do with AGW should also surprise no-one.”

    Yet some Moron would think I claimed such a thing but can’t back it up….

    Here’s what I said…..”So the people who are put into office have nothing to do with policies, including those that may have to do with global warming?”

    I don’t see anything about Walker or the recall in that sentence….. only that people vote for someone based on their policies. Do you deny that statement Bill? Are you a policy Denier?

    By the way, how does Scott Walker feel about the Global Warming issue?

    Oh my!

    http://www.scottwalker.org/press-release/2010/04/scott-walker-statement-global-warming-legislation-0

    Nevermind, it’s irrelevant.

  7. #7 ianam
    June 8, 2012

    “people didn’t vote for him, they voted against his recall”

    Which of course means people didn’t vote against him, they voted for his recall….

    That’s right, moron, they neither voted for nor against him, they voted for or against his recall.

  8. #8 John
    June 8, 2012

    Snivelly Betula denies claiming the election was a referendum on AGW and then, with requisite weasel wording, goes on to make that very claim.

    Logic can be a bit hard for him sometimes.

    And yes, it was irrelevant, proven by the fact Betula had to go back to 2010 for a statement on the policy that was apparently so pertinent it won him the election.

    Or it could just be Betula is simplifying things to suit his political, anti-science agenda. Who can say?

  9. #9 Betula
    June 8, 2012

    “Snivelly Betula denies claiming the election was a referendum on AGW”

    You read into things the same way you read into future climate change scenarios….you speculate and you believe, but you can’t claim it as being true because it hasn’t happened. For you, if means is, could means does, might means will, may means did….everything is a big misguided assumption.

    A tough and sorry way to go through life….but you wear it well.

  10. #10 Betula
    June 8, 2012

    “That’s right, moron, they neither voted for nor against him, they voted for or against his recall”

    Who’s his? Who’s him? Did the ballot have names on it or was it a straight yes or no choice next to the word recall?

  11. #11 ianam
    June 8, 2012

    It doesn’t matter, you dishonest anal discharge, because it was a recall election, which affects how people vote. And I didn’t gloat over a poll, you dishonest sack of pus, I merely pointed out what the poll indicated … and exit polls are relevant to why people vote, whereas polls are not relevant to whether there is AGW.

    Even Tim Curtin has more intellectual integrity than Betula.

  12. #12 ianam
    June 8, 2012

    you can’t claim it as being true because it hasn’t happened.

    The same could be said of eclipses or Venus traversals before they happen. Of course only stupid and dishonest people use this “it hasn’t happened line”.

    All your posting here does is alert people to the fact that you’re a dishonest scumbag, Betula; it does not further your interests in any way.

  13. #13 ianam
    June 8, 2012

    It’s remarkable that a lying evil sack of filth and slime like Betula, gloating over Walker’s win, accuses me of gloating over … what? My loss? I have nothing to gloat over; the election was a disaster for my interests. The demise of public labor unions is a disaster for my interests. The realities of AGW and the politics around it are a disaster for my (and the rest of humanity’s) interests. The Citizens United decision was a disaster for my interests. I do not gloat, I despise … I despise garbage like Betula for what they have done, while they gloat over it.

    Here is the sort of non-gloating analysis about Wisconsin that I read, Betula. Go ahead and gloat over your success, you filth.

  14. #14 Betula
    June 8, 2012

    ianumb…

    I knew you were a moron, but wow, such an angry moron…

    Yes, you are a gloating poll clinging denier. You seek satisfaction in posting and clinging to a poll as a way to justify what has happened…. you can’t except how out of touch you and your union loving progtards are with the rest of society….you’re in denial and need to flash a poll for comfort and reassurance.

    Sort of like the way you have to convince yourself you’re not a moron with the ianam moniker. How’s that denial working for you?

    Get used to it.

  15. #15 chek
    June 8, 2012

    Betty, I think I can safely say nobody cares what you think, or how your thoughts form your ‘opinions’ – received as they patently are. No, the reason nobody cares what you think is that you have never, ever shown yourself to be capable.

    How’s that working out for you?

  16. #16 bill
    June 8, 2012

    I spend a fair bit of time in the field, Betty, and, returning from expeditions in foetid, swampy locations, I’ve subsequently discovered more intelligent things than you concealed in my socks.

  17. #17 ianam
    June 9, 2012

    As I said, the lying hypocritical scum gloats. I know how that’s going for him … it makes him feel so good, because he is evil unscrupulous garbage. Used to it? I am used to it … remember, I expect the worst.

  18. #18 John
    June 9, 2012

    Betula won’t say Walker’s anti-science stance won him the election outright because he knows this is wrong. He’d prefer to smugly insinuate this in his weasley, slimy manner, which is exactly the gormless tactic we’ve all come to expect from hardcore science denialists.

    The sad reality is that the majority of the public see climate change policy as a federal issue, and exit polls show alarmist Obama leading 54% (of course his AGW policies would have nothing to do with that, would they Betula?)

    As stated before, Walker’s anti-science stance in this recall election was completely irrelevant and it is a key act of desperation to pretend otherwise. I don’t see much honesty or logic, just ad hom and blind ideoogical obsession.

    “Except” it Betula.

  19. #19 David Duff
    This Septic Isle
    June 9, 2012

    Oh dear, Australian climate science appears to have been well and truly ‘gergised'(*). Even worse, it has been ‘gergised’ by that absolute rotter, Steve McIntyre. Oh, the shame! Never mind, er, ‘mates’ I think you call each other ‘down under there’, it happens to us all. British climate (non)science was similarly ‘gergised’ a few years back when we all got to read their naughty little fibs.

    Gergise: v., meaning, to pick your favourite proxy data sets to suit your theory.

  20. #20 bill
    June 9, 2012

    Boooooring.

  21. #21 David Duff
    This septic Isle
    June 9, 2012

    I know you are, Bill, and I’m sorry for you but you don’t have to keep telling us – it’s, er, boooooring!

  22. #22 chek
    June 9, 2012

    McIntyre v., trans to feign expertise on a subject one has no knowledge of or education or training in. Used as in the following examples:
    (i) The plumber had completely mcintyred the diesel injection system beyond repair.
    (ii) The electrician proceeded to mcintyre the computer network, which was subsequently down for days.
    (iii) Stevie had mcintyred the entire series in the belief that science was just number crunching.

    davidduff n. – an airhead, ass, berk, blockhead, booby, chump, coot, cretin, dickhead, dickwit, dimwit, dipstick, divvy, dork, dunderhead, dwee, fool ,fuckwit, gonzo, halfwit, imbecile, lamebrain, moron, nincompoop, nitwit, numbskull, numpt, oaf, pillock, plonker, schmuck, simpleton, twit, wally. One who hasn’t the first clue about a given subject.

    Example: The davidduff paid up even though the garage had totally mcintyred his car.

    Even though his television was now mcintyred beyond repair, the davidduff considered the bill good value as the technician had been very polite..
    .

  23. #23 Betula
    June 9, 2012

    John…

    “Betula won’t say Walker’s anti-science stance won him the election outright because he knows this is wrong.”

    In other words, Betula never said it….but we like to assume he would, therefore he did.

    Well said John, at least I know where your head is…

    http://gallery.photo.net/photo/206063-lg.jpg

  24. #24 bill
    June 10, 2012

    chek, much as it’s a fine list, by his own admission the real thing used to specialise in hawking mcintyred motors to those too daft to see through the faux-genial manner… we’re talking something altogether darker than the merely dense here.

  25. #25 DarylD
    William Lamb's Town Down Under
    June 10, 2012

    Ah sadly, “Old Duffer” and “Betula” , being of unsound delusional mononeurons, locked into the one thought, one track a time mobius loop of denial, are proudly following the clueless traditions of the last King of “Hy-Brasil” ;)

    Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8IBnfkcrsM

  26. #26 John
    June 10, 2012

    Betula denied claiming the election was a referendum on AGW and now denies denying it. His argument is eating itself.

    And McIntyre must be right. After all, Duff believes it and since when has he just gullibly swallowed anything? Well, except for sea rise, cosmic rays, imminent cooling…

  27. #27 Betula
    June 10, 2012

    DarylDumb believes Erik The Viking was an Al Gore Documentary……the irony alone is funnier than anything in the movie.

  28. #28 Betula
    June 10, 2012

    John…

    I can’t argue with your imagination, it’s doing a fine job by itself.

    To ease your pain, try telling your imagination to copy and paste what it is that’s bothering it and then post it so it can prove to itself that it’s wrong.

    That’s about all I can do for you in your unfortunate situation….if you can’t do it, the only other suggestion I have is a psychologist.

    You’re welcome.

  29. #29 bill
    June 11, 2012

    This perennial Al Gore thing you all have – deep down you all want him, don’t you?

  30. #30 Bernard J.
    June 11, 2012

    I suspect that Betula has phytothphora.

  31. #31 Bernard J.
    June 11, 2012

    …for which I counter-recommend a mycologist – Betula’s pathology is deeper than could be addressed by his own personal psychologist…

  32. #32 bill
    June 11, 2012

    That’s a point Bernard!

    And how ironic – Betty, despite your anti-PC zealotry you may yet succumb to Pc*. For a start, and it’s important that you answer honestly here, do your sweaty feet smell sort of like cheese and off red wine?

    mycology – isn’t that an I-phone app?

    *Phytophthora cinnamomi is usually abbreviated to the initials. Botanist’s joke. We need to get out more.

  33. #33 Betula
    June 11, 2012

    “I suspect that Betula has phytothphora”

    Need to do a better job of looking up those big words Bernard…it’s spelled phytophthora. Next time ask me first, I’m an Arborist and will be glad to help…

  34. #34 Betula
    June 11, 2012

    Bill..
    “We need to get out more.”

    That’s a big part of your problem….you live in a bubble.

  35. #35 Lotharsson
    June 11, 2012

    You really, really hope these guys are badly mistaken about the risks – and if so that they’re overestimating, not badly underestimating it.

  36. #36 chek
    June 11, 2012

    Betty said: you live in a bubble

    Yes, y’see Bill you evidently don’t live in the real world as helpfully spoonfed to Betty by his preferred crank sources, and are blissfully unaware of the global-scale conspiracies to be found under every rock if you only had the eyes to see, like wot special awakened people like Betty here has.

    You couldn’t make it up. as they say.

  37. #37 bill
    June 11, 2012

    Betty has repeated my own joke back to me. I am, of course, crushed.

    An Arborist, eh? Maybe it’s cranial borers you’ve got, mate…

  38. #38 Bernard J.
    June 12, 2012

    Oh please Betula, are you now trying to argue from authority? Well, I can do that too.

    I’m an ecologist, and I’ve worked (and decontaminated) in phyto-blighted forests. I do actually know how to spell it – but I was too busy changing your name from ‘Betual’, another mistyping spoonerism that I regularly come up with, to notice the other mistake.

    But if muddle-fingered typos are all that you can come up with, keep at it. I notice that you never address anything scientifically-based – ceratinly, when it comes to global warming, you’re conspicuous by your absence in posting anything that resembles a coherent and defensible argument.

    Bill.

    The borer would have starved.

  39. #39 Bernard J.
    June 12, 2012

    Lotharsson (June 11, 4:35 pm).

    As you and other regulars probably know, I am ever more convinced that the planet’s already committed to a serious ecological collapse. It’s not pessimism – just a familiarity with the numbers.

    I’d say that there’s about a 75% likelihood that by 2025 human’s will have brought the planet to a place where, even if they were all instantaneously teleported away, the biosphere will undergo – or rather, be showing the not-so-early-ish signs of undergoing – profound irreversible reorganisation and simplification.

    As I’ve noted on Open Mind, these signs will be certainly ever more evident at various times after 2025. Note, when I say at Tamino’s, “‘Great Extinction’ events”, I’m referring to the middle/end of such an occurrance, and not the beginning. We’re already into the beginning…

    If one were to define a ‘tipping point’ in terms of the latest time at which humans should have been fully/ and globally engaged in a war-footing program to reverse our biospheric degradation, I reckon that the turn of the millenium – 2000 AD – is a good (if somewhat arbitrary) landmark. Our social/political cultural inertia is such that even if gains could still be made today, by the time we get around to enacting them it’ll be over Red Rover.

  40. #40 Nifty
    June 12, 2012

    Cheer up Bernard J. 12:56am. It’ll never happen.
    There is no tipping point – except perhaps in the feeble mind of “Flannery of the overflow”.

  41. #41 Karen
    June 12, 2012

    Oh Barnterd, you are my qualified hero.

    hahaha wot a dunce you are, tea leaves, tarot cards, micheal mann and the great CO2 mythology.

    Phd, pluckwit

  42. #42 bill
    June 12, 2012

    Well, that was articulate.

  43. #43 Bernard J.
    June 12, 2012

    Bill:

    Well, that was articulate.

    One expects nothing more coherent from Sunspot, who would be more apply named ‘Sunstruck’.

    The feller’s never once responded with a sensible argument, so he’s not likely to start now.

  44. #44 P. Lewis
    June 12, 2012

    NOTT-202, a promising medium- to long-term material for CO2 capture and storage.

    Won’t obviate the necessity for minimising CO2 emissions though.

  45. #45 chek
    June 12, 2012

    I think what Karenspot might be trying to articulate is Clarke’s third law: “.Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”.

    Which to the Karenspots of this world, most of the already surrounding science and technology might as well be tarot’n’tealeaves as far as they’re concerned. The level of understanding is similar.

  46. #47 Betula
    June 12, 2012

    Haven’t heard from John since I asked for a simple cut and paste…. did the psychologist admit him?

  47. #48 John
    June 13, 2012

    I apologise Betula. Your charge that I was inventing the very arguments you yourself made and that I need a psychologist were so personally devestating (and lacking only the killer blows of “seriously, get a life!” and “lol get over yourself loser haha” that surely would have caused me to take my life, and perhaps that of a loved one) that for the past two days I have found myself bedridden and crying uncontrollably.

  48. #49 bill
    June 13, 2012

    It’s all a bit like being sneered at by yeast, isn’t it?

  49. #51 DarylDeal
    William Lamb's Town Down Under
    June 13, 2012

    Ah, Betula June 10, 3:36 pm, thanks for the compliment!

    At school, they often called me “Hey Stoopid”, now calling me “Dumb”, puts me in the schools highest and best class, the “Genius Class”.

    That being so, even my old summer science school teacher, the late Julius “Why is it so” S-M, helped us all to understand the simplicity of the “Second Law of Thermodynamics”.

    Many of his surviving lectures, can be found on “youtube”, too.

    I feel though, given your total lack of understanding of basic physics, from first principles, viewing all his lectures, would in all econometric probability, exceed the maximum storage capacity of your mobius loop mononeuron.

    Sadly, it appears the understanding of the basic laws physics and the properties of matter, has so far eluded the limited memory capacity, of your sole flashy mononeuron.

    I also believe, Amazon Books, has a number of good books for beginners like your self, such as “Science is Simple; Over 250 Activities for Preschoolers” link: http://www.amazon.com/Science-Simple-Over-Activities-Preschoolers/dp/0876592728/ref=pd_sim_b_3

    Booktopia Australia, also sells the same book too. : link http://www.booktopia.com.au/science-is-simple/prod9780876592724.html

    Cheers ; )

  50. #52 chek
    June 13, 2012

    Undoubtedly good news, as a reading of this thread at Real Climate shows.

    Watts and McIntyre seem to be getting increasingly shrill, illogical and desperate since the wheels came off and the Heartland circus rolled into the ditch beyond recovery.

    The ‘auditor’ and his monkey’s latest line in stories about their layman science fantasies may impress their stable of equally ignorant foaming numpties who need to be fed every couple of days, but will have no other impact whatsoever in the real world.

    That warm feeling that you’re currently bragging about Petri is, you may recall, just like you get when you piss your pants, but won’t last quite as long.

  51. #53 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012

    Seems like the right wingnuts like Olaus live, eat, breathe and exist on WUWT and other anti-enrvironmental anti-regulation blogs for their worldviews. Forget the primary literature; to these dinbgbats it does not exist. Only right wing blogs purveying a bullshit blizzard will do for them.

    BTW, just finished reading Merchants of Doubt by Oreskes and Conway and its outstanding. It exposes the climate denial lobby as just another extension of the tobacco lobby, the acid rain denial lobby, the CFC-ozone depletion denial lobby, and the DDT is safe lobby which also links to various think tanks and a fervently libertarian political ideology with roots in the cold war and an irrational fear of communism. Essentially, the same people have played a prominent role in denying a range of environmental threats over more than 30 years, and much of this has been chaneled through the idea that only the market can address policy related issuues. Anyone arguing that regulations limiting corporate activity are needed are derided as communists, watermelons etc. by this sordid lot of crazies. The idea that the market can produce failures – in other words, serious environmental problems – is downplayed or ignored altogether.

    Oreskes and Conway have done a meticulous job of explaining the strategies of anti-environmental lobby,the prominent people involved (e.g. Seitz, Singer, Jastrow et al) its political aims and its huge funding sources, in their book. I’ve read a lot of literarture over the past 10-15 years in this area, and I have presented many lectures on this topic in universities in different countries, but this book might be the best of the lot.

  52. #54 Olaus Petri
    June 13, 2012

    Jeff and chek, why all this anger? :-)

    Orseskes is a merchants of fear, like you guys. No wonder you like her. Could she forsee the protocols of Gleick and Conserned Scientist? ;-)

  53. #55 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    Jeff reminds me of a born again christian ex junkie waving a book about something that can’t be seen, measured, or proven.

  54. #56 John
    June 13, 2012

    If it isn’t Karen “Agenda 21! Free energy is being supressed!” Bracken and Olaus “It’s all a scam!” Petri lecturing us about conspiracy theories!

  55. #57 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    yawwwnnnn, I see your still hallucinating John, reading up the thread it seems Betula has been trying to get you to see a professional, to no avail.

    So Johny do you still think the Arctic will be ice free in 2012 ?

    and……..HAS ANYONE FOUND THE MISSING HEAT YET ????????

  56. #58 chek
    June 13, 2012

    You really have nothing but an incomprehensible mish-mash of greviously uncomprehended talking points floating around trying to catch one of your all-too-rare neurons, dontcha, ‘Karen’?

  57. #59 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    I have to admit watermelon that I do find it amusing addressing the co2 loonies in here as they do others. Actually it is funnier watching you all sook about it.

    This is the only website I visit whereby I must lower my IQ to 25 to be on par with you all in order to communicate.

    I think I read about this technique in a mag called the Mental Monthly while I was getting a pap smear.

  58. #60 chek
    June 13, 2012

    Come now ‘Karen’, anybody who in all seriousness claims that someone on the rational ‘side’ ever said that the “Arctic will be ice free in 2012″ is either a dishonest bag ofscum and/or is struggling to raise their IQ up to 25, not lower it.

  59. #61 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012

    *Orseskes [sic] is a merchants [sic] of fear*

    Putrid, until you learn a little more about the ways in which the world works, your comments deserve to end up on the s*** heap. You haven’t a clue about the various lobbies and how they have tried to undermine the health and societal risks posed by tobacco, acid rain, ozone depletion, loss of biodiversity, pesticides, various forms of pollution and climate change. The same deniers and think tanks have been relied upon as ‘experts’ in many of these areas for years. Few if any of them have any relevant qualifications. Like them, you and your freakish brethren (Jonarse, Flatula, Sun-Karenspot, Duffer, Pent-up-axe, et al) are driven by your far right political beliefs which you feebly try to camouflage as ‘science’. Oreskes and Conway cover this in detail in MoD. The debate in these diverse scientific areas has never been about scientific accuracy but about the role of government in public policy. You clowns wear your libertarian hearts on your sleeves, and it bleeds through in everything you write. You can’t believe that markets ever need to be regulated. Now we have Singer telling Romney to throw his weight behind a fossil-fuel dependent economy. If you bother to get off your butt and read MoD, instead of sniping away at the sidelines, you might learn something. However, you fear information. Knowledge. You are content to stay in the D-K shadows.

    By the way, I assume that you mean ‘merchant’ and not the plural, unless Professor Oreskes has clones. Put it down to your semi-literate musings.

  60. #62 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    hallelujah brother Jeff, lets all hold hand’s and sing a hindcast, or was that a forecast ? or a revelation ?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c7cYGDdXQjg

    Whatever the tune your singing Jeff it is really starting look ridiculous, even the carbon markets are something to behold, have you noticed that the charts look a bit like a temperature graph ?

  61. #63 bill
    June 13, 2012

    Pfffttt, phloooottt, * gurgle *, splobbb, Phhhwooshhh… – yes, it’s another round of spattering, sputtering efforts by Denial’s 3 Musketeers – Athos, Pathos and Bathos.

    Anyway – back in the real world, those who have read Oreskes and Conway should also consider David Michaels’ ‘Doubt is Their Product‘, one of the most shocking books I’ve read – not least because despite decades of being active in environmental causes it turned out upon reading it I was actually largely blissfully unaware not only of the mind-boggling extent to which ‘Product Defense Science’ has become normalised, but also of its many, many victories – as exemplified by the fact that, if you’re like me, you’ll not even have heard of about half the case studies in the book…

  62. #64 Lionel A
    June 13, 2012

    I don’t know how the sane around here can stomach exchanging blows with those like OP, Karen & Betula who have not yet graduated from that Kindergarten for Brownshirts.

    Chek, looks like you fell foul of the link dropper on this board:

    Undoubtedly good news, as a reading of this thread at Real Climate shows.

    Did you mean this one by any chance?

  63. #65 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    so bill, both you and jeff are into sci fi propaganda books eh.

    Save yourself some heartache and see if you arrange a bit of group therapy with johny and jeff

  64. #66 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    Lionel didn’t anyone tell you ? The study by Gergis et al. has been chucked in the bin and is going to be replaced with this http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/12/the-longest-most-high-resolution-most-inconvenient-paleoclimate-data-that-hasnt-been-published/

  65. #67 chek
    June 13, 2012

    Thanks Lionel A for re-posting the corrected working link – that’s the very one.
    One day I’ll get used to this new format.

  66. #68 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    chek
    11:11 am

    “Come now ‘Karen’, anybody who in all seriousness claims that someone on the rational ‘side’ ever said that the “Arctic will be ice free in 2012″ is either a dishonest bag ofscum and/or is struggling to raise their IQ up to 25, not lower it.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c7cYGDdXQjg

    It was your hero’s and leaders of the cult chekie, lol

  67. #69 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012

    *Lionel didn’t anyone tell you ? The study by Gergis et al. has been chucked in the bin*

    By who? Oh, you mean McIntyre, the same mining enbgineer guy with links to right wing think tanks and who doesn’t publish much in the scientific literature. In other words a pseudo. The same guy who mangled PCA in a 2005 E&E screed that made anothjer feeble attempt to discredit the work of Mann and colleages.

    Its hard to keep a straight face when Sunspot-Karen and the other libertarian twits here rely on blogs pushing corporate agendas for their ‘science’. And note that the blogs don’t do any original research – instead all they do is to take existing studies and data sets and f*** around with them to produce the desired results.

    Pathetic.

  68. #70 chek
    June 13, 2012

    “It was your hero’s (sic) and leaders of the cult chekie, lol

    No ‘Karen’, it was not.
    Your first task is to look up the defininition of ‘arctic’.
    Your second is to ponder your own stupidity.

  69. #72 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    “The Arctic is screaming,” said Mark Serreze, senior scientist at the US government’s Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado.

    And Nasa climate scientist Jay Zwally said: “At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3318239/Arctic-ice-could-be-gone-in-five-years.html

  70. #73 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012

    Karen-spot, you utter shmuck, the results of the study will almost certainly stand, a point your right wing hero even admits. And Karoly and the other authors noticed the so-called error before McIntyre did. I wait with baited breath for McIntyre to ‘audit’ and criticize a denial study that produces results in the other direction. He never will and I think its obvious why.The job of Mc, Watts and their brethrenIMHO is not to audit science but to do everything they can to promote a uni-directional view of climate science.

    Moreover, like other twits, you place all of your climate change denial egg sin one basket. You haven’t read much science in your miserable life. All you do is surf the denier sites, cut and paste their drivel, and make an idiot of yourself elsewhere. Some contribution.

  71. #74 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012
  72. #75 FrankD
    June 13, 2012

    Karen, am I right in reading your recent series as saying you disagree with Zwally?

    If that’s right, what do you think the future holds for the Arctic – ice-free at some point, or recovering? If the former, when do you think?

  73. #76 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    your so cute when your angry jeff, lol.

    They tried to pump it as good science and knew that they were falsifying the data, it’s a common thing in climate science these days and someone has to point it out .

    Do you think they should be allowed to get away with it just because it helps to support your biased and irrational views ?

  74. #77 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    How do you explain this jeff ?

    http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png

    FrankD I have been through all that with Barnturd J in the March or April open thread, please feel welcome to peruse my views there.

  75. #78 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012

    Karenspot

    Who pointed out the errors? The authors themselves found them before Climate Fraudit did. And, as I said, don’t wait with baited breath for C(F)A to go over the few denial papers that have been published with a fine toothed comb. Its only science that supports AGW they go after. And above all, weblogs with agendas will certainly not do their own science. Heavens forbid, no. Their sole strategy is to hound scientists who produce results that don’t fit in with their narrative.

    This isn’t science. Its an inquisition with a brazenly political agenda.

  76. #79 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    Skeptics have been looking through the paper, and three weeks after it was published a team at Climate Audit (kudos to Jean S and Nick Stokes) uncovered a problem so significant that the authors announced that this paper is “on hold”. It has been withdrawn from the American Meteorological Society website. Bishop Hill has probably the best summary of what this means, and how it unfolded.

    When Steve McIntyre asked for the full data, she refused. Gergis has an activist past which she has recently tried to hide. She was proud to mention in her biography that her data has been requested from 16 nations: So requests from Tunisia, Cuba, and Brazil are OK; but Canada — not so much. Apparently she didn’t appreciate his expertise with statistics and told him to get the data himself from the original authors, and added ” This is commonly referred to as ‘research’. We will not be entertaining any further correspondence on the matter. “

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/06/300000-dollars-and-three-years-to-produce-a-paper-that-lasted-three-weeks-gergis/

    your a denier jeffie

  77. #80 Jeff Harvey
    June 13, 2012

    There’s Karen manipulating the science again.

    Try these:
    http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

    and

    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2012/06/Figure2.png

    and finally

    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

    Note how Arctic sea ice extent has fallen behind the 2007 low in early June: a result of exceptionally warm (record warm, in fact) conditions through much of May in the Arctic.

    Go away spotty. You are a disgrace.

  78. #81 Olaus Petri
    June 13, 2012

    Jeffie, I believe Josh catches the “Gergil-moment” perfectly:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/13/hump-day-hilarity-bringing-in-the-sieves/#more-65599

    That said, I find it a bit troublesome that you still haven’t shared any proofs confirming the existence of a right wing multi-billion denial machine obstructing climate science. Why not?

    Is Gleick still all you got?

  79. #82 John
    June 13, 2012

    The study by Gergis et al. has been chucked in the bin

    Sounds like Karenspot is trying to hide the incline!

    yawwwnnnn, I see your still hallucinating John, reading up the thread it seems Betula has been trying to get you to see a professional, to no avail.

    For anyone who hasn’t seen it, here is Karen’s website.

    So Johny do you still think the Arctic will be ice free in 2012 ?

    When did I say that Karen?

  80. #83 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    If we are talking about global warming then you have a problem jeff, it’s not global

    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

  81. #84 John
    June 13, 2012

    That said, I find it a bit troublesome that you still haven’t shared any proofs confirming the existence of a right wing multi-billion denial machine obstructing climate science. Why not?

    So you’ve read Merchants Of Doubt I’d be interested in hearing your criticisms of it at length.

  82. #85 Betula
    June 13, 2012

    John…

    “Your charge that I was inventing the very arguments you yourself made”

    Still can’t figure out how to cut and paste John?

    http://www.psychologyinfo.com/directory/

  83. #86 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    ohHH my gord, johny

    sorry cupcake, i’m an aussie

    Also all that political mumbo jumbo that loopy jeff was muttering about me is a good sign of a self inflicted methane overdose causing hallucinatory and fantastical delusions and assumptions.

    I have heard of mad scientist’s before, is the the club or just a sub branch ?

  84. #87 John
    June 13, 2012

    My mistake! It’s hard to tell you ranting conspiracy theorists apart. Next you’ll be telling me you’re not Sunspot and that you don’t believe free energy is being supressed!

    Betula, don’t you have some YouTube videos to leave comments at?

  85. #88 Betula
    June 13, 2012

    Lionel A…
    “I don’t know how the sane around here can stomach exchanging blows with those like OP, Karen & Betula who have not yet graduated from that Kindergarten for Brownshirts”

    Would that be this kindergarten?…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-3aFeBR2ac

    Or this High School?…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaX0E5xcXGw

    You really are a clueless putz, aren’t you…

    May I suggest we move, as the Obama campaign slogan states, “FORWARD”… from all of these Nazi references Lionel…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_z_pHUKajc

    Jackass.

  86. #89 John
    June 13, 2012

    Oh good, Nazi allusions. Keep this up. This is sure to win the argument and make everyone take you seriously.

  87. #90 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    Are you a scientist John ?

  88. #91 John
    June 13, 2012

    No, but please, tell me how that invalidates my opinion.

  89. #92 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    It doesn’t invalidate your opinion, although jeff would say it does

  90. #93 Betula
    June 13, 2012

    John…

    “Oh good, Nazi allusions. Keep this up. This is sure to win the argument and make everyone take you seriously”

    You see Lionel, even John disagrees with your Nazi reference…”Kindergarten for Brownshirts”

    Looks like that psychologist may have helped after all…
    .

  91. #94 Ian Forrester
    June 13, 2012

    Karen said:

    If we are talking about global warming then you have a problem jeff, it’s not global

    As anyone who has read any real science knows karen is utterly deluded.

    Here is what is happening to the ice sheets in the Antarctic:

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Antarctica_Ice_Mass.gif

    If karen had done any reading at all of the science of Antarctic sea ice levels she would know that it is well known that sea ice will not decline because of a number of factors, all related to Global warming!

    It is always nice to see how the ignorant AGW deniers are so lacking in critical thinking and research skills.

  92. #95 John
    June 13, 2012

    Betula, yes I think Lionel’s comment was over the top, however, in Reality Land you generally don’t show disagreement with Nazi allusions by making more extreme Nazi allusions. That is worse.

    Just sayin’ bro.

  93. #96 Karen
    June 13, 2012

    “It is always nice to see how the ignorant AGW deniers are so lacking in critical thinking and research skills.”

    ahhahahaha, and Ian offers up a gif, lol

    a gif from sceptical science of all places, sheeez your desperate going there Ian,

    it has been pleasant in here tonight, no pungent odour from Barnturd J lol

  94. #97 Lionel A
    June 13, 2012

    Olaus

    That said, I find it a bit troublesome that you still haven’t shared any proofs confirming the existence of a right wing multi-billion denial machine obstructing climate science. Why not?

    Start here you oaf , what do you think Heartland were all about?

    And have a perusal of this web of fossil funded deception and the players

    Also what do you think Kochtapus means.

  95. #98 John
    June 13, 2012

    a gif from sceptical science of all places, sheeez your desperate going there Ian,

    So yeah, It is always nice to see how the ignorant AGW deniers are so lacking in critical thinking and research skills.

    SkS poses a large problem for deniers, because unlike WUWT which stumbles from meme to meme without rhyme or reason (so sad they’ve dropped the UHI stuff after Watts was forced to admit he was wrong), SkS collates the science into a large easy to read, user-friendly website with a single, coherent hypothesis. It’s no wonder Karen dismisses it out of hand.

    Just interestingly, Karenspot – you still believe that the modern warming was caused entirely by sun activity, as per your name and original claims?

  96. #99 Lionel A
    June 13, 2012

    OP

    That said, I find it a bit troublesome that you still haven’t shared any proofs confirming the existence of a right wing multi-billion denial machine obstructing climate science. Why not?

    Stop being such an FW and Google on Mashey and Kochtapus.

    Have a look at this web of fossil fuel funded deceit .

  97. #100 FrankD
    June 13, 2012

    @Karen: I have been through all that with Barnturd J in the March or April open thread, please feel welcome to peruse my views there.

    Oh, that’s right. That was where you claimed ice around Svalbard hadn’t got worse between 1947 and 2012, and then “proved” that by showing that it had got worse between 1947 and 1985 and then that it got worse again between 1985 and 2012. I’d forgotten that marvellous piece of idiocy was you. You deniers all blur into one these days.

    But you did not address my questions in your discussions with Bernard, so I’ll ask them again: “What do you think the future holds for the Arctic – ice-free at some point, or recovering? If the former, when do you think?”

    I wonder, are you still following sea ice as closely as then? Then you would know we are 1/2 a million sq km below the old record, and falling 20% faster than at any time in the last 30 years…
    http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/arctic.sea.ice.interactive.html

    “Morer and lesserer” was your evasion in April. So when will we get the morer, Kazza? Go on, make yourself a hostage to fortune…

Current ye@r *