October 2012 Open Thread

More thread.

Comments

  1. #1 Lotharsson
    October 24, 2012

    And didn’t brave Sir Monckton run away from a previous debate with Peter Hadfield (potholer54) too?

    Aided and abetted by the gallant Anthony Watts, IIRC…

  2. #2 Lionel A
    October 24, 2012

    Bernard J, from your October 22, 2012:

    On the matter of deforestation I was recently researching carbon fuels derived from wood, and found that the extent of deforestation for tar, charcoal and wood gas production is much under-recognised.

    Interesting and I wonder if you have heard of the ancient forest that spans the Polish-Belarus border the Białowieża Forest.

    I have just picked up on this from a book by Alan Weisman The World Without Us where is described a world that could have been Tolkien’s Fangorn Wood, home of the Ents.

    I recall the magic of revered old trees in my Cotswold stomping ground and getting into the branches, during my teens, of the Tortworth Chestnut. A recent visit saddened me to see it falling into decay and fenced off. The nearby Forest of Dean was a magical place with old Roman era iron and coal minings and many erratics such as those extending from the Buckstone just north of Staunton and the trail we took to take in the Near Hearkening Rock, the Far Hearkening Rock and the Suck Stone then on to the Nelsonic memorial The Kymin (in recognition of Nelson’s services to woodland and of course England) and the Seven Sisters Rocks in the Valley of the Wye.

    Those who may wonder where they have heard of a Lithuanian named Jagiello before may be familiar with Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey-Maturin novels (Master and Commander etc) where in ‘The Surgeon’s Mate’ a Lithuanian cavalry officer by that name is introduced.

    Browsing ahead, as I oft do with newly picked up books I was saddened to read that the amount of plastic rubbish that is accumulating in the world and in particular causing havoc to wild life, and by extension us, has a very sinister and totally unnecessary element where plastic granules are used in cosmetics such as exfoliants. Such materials are just right in size to end up in foraminifera and other micro-organisms before working their way up, concentrating as the go, through the food chain. Is this one of the factors behind the strange beaching of many whale species which includes dolphins.

    Ladies, we humans are supposed to have body hair and TBH I find a hairless female body rather unattractive except for those poor souls who suffer from alopecia who have no choice.

    Also plastic granules have taken over from silicon based for surface treatments of materials, mostly metals.

    I suspect that the skin fillers used by cosmetic products also contain such materials. This reminds me of the days of rusting car bodies and Plastic Padding with the fine dust created whilst finishing. Oh forgive me world for I knew not what I did.

    Weisman writes about many other ways in which we are despoiling the planet and doing our best to exterminate most life.

  3. #3 Lionel A
    October 24, 2012

    I was aware previously of the accumulation of plastics rubbish in the environment and in the ocean with both the North Pacific Gyre and North Atlantic Gyre collecting garbage patches. The North Pacific Gyre gets a mention in my non-US edition of Oceanography (ISE): An Invitation to Marine Science by Tom Garrison.

    Those who display little understanding of how the Earth’s systems work would be well advised to find a copy of this very comprehensive and easy to understand work, or similar.

    I recently came across some academic naysayers on the topic of these garbage patches but cannot turn them up right now. I’ll try again later. They will probably turn out to be close ‘cousins’ of the likes of Pat Michaels & Co.

  4. #4 Bernard J.
    October 24, 2012

    Lionel.

    Your references to the Białowieża Forest and your own corner of the world speak viscerally to the forest-dweller within.

    Although I grew up Down Under I was born and spent a few years as a young lad in the northern part of the Netherlands. The forests there aren’t primal by any stretch of the imagination, but I was fortunate enough to live in an area where it seemed so to a very small boy, and I live in a dichotomous state where Australian sclerophyll vies with Fanghorn for my sylvan sympathies. If the day ever comes where I can take a sea voyage back to the Old Country one of my first destinations will be the forests – and the stone monuments of the region.

    On the matter of plastics, one of the underappreciated problems is that as it erodes into ever finer particles and sooner or later to real nanoparticle size, it becomes very efficiently adsorbent. Plastics gather up all manner of other human-manufactured chemical nasties and introduce them into the food web, in which humans sit at the centre. Just another legacy for which future gnerations will not thank us.

  5. #5 Olaus Petri
    October 24, 2012

    The sociology of knowledge or delinquent teenagers?

    http://climateaudit.org/2012/10/22/ipcc-check-kites-gergis/#more-17121

    ;-)

  6. #6 Jeff Harvey
    October 24, 2012

    Sigh. There’s putrid again citing more crap from a denier blog. Seems the guy cannot read the primary ltierature: only blogs that distort published work. McIntyre has too much tiome on his hands; well, at least when it comes to blogging. When it comes to doing what real scientists do (collecting his own data, analysing it, and submitting it to a reputable scientific journal) he hasn’t got any time. But then this is hardly news. Watts, Nova, Mountford, Moncton, Morano, Milloy and the rest of the deniers don’t do primary research either. They are consigned the the blogosphere. Somehow putrid seems to think that blog science is all there is, or else that is all that matters.

    He’s wrong, but he’s lazy and he’s not an academic. He needs deniers to simplify complex science for him to the most basal level. And one that reflects his own political beliefs. Hence why just about every link he has ever pasted up here comes from one of the denier sites I have described.

  7. #7 Wow
    October 24, 2012

    “Plastics gather up all manner of other human-manufactured chemical nasties and introduce them into the food web, in which humans sit at the centre”

    We may have to, for the sake of our health, become vegetarian in the future.

  8. #8 Nick
    October 24, 2012

    “IPCC check-kites Gergis?” The penny stock miner is digging his own hole again.

  9. #9 Lotharsson
    October 24, 2012

    Here is a news bite for the climate change cult economist’s.

    Somewhat cherry-picked, methinks (and whodathunkit?!). This article has some info about carbon taxes and energy price rises:

    Sydney households were whacked with a horrific 17.9 per cent increase in the price of electricity in the latest September quarter. As bad as it is, it’s not that much worse than the 15.1 per cent served the previous September quarter, and it’s much less than the 21.7 per cent served up in the September quarter before that.

    Melbourne households have endured a 13.6 per cent increase in electricity prices – well short of previous September quarter jumps of 19 and 21 per cent. Canberra families got 19 per cent this year – not too different from a previous 18.1 per cent.

    Nationwide electricity and gas price rises have added 0.25 and 0.33 points to the consumer price index in the past two September quarters. The latest increase of 0.44 points isn’t that much bigger. It’s 0.11 points bigger than last year’s increase and 0.19 points bigger than the one before that. The difference is a long way short of the 0.70 impact from the carbon tax forecast in the lead up to its introduction.

  10. #10 JohnL
    October 24, 2012

    Mike Mann is suing National Review and Competitive-Enterpise-Institute, story at Glen Laden’s Blog.

    http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/10/23/breaking-michael-mann-suing-national-review-and-competitive-enterprise-institute/

  11. #11 chek
    October 24, 2012

    Excellent. It’s about time the liars and slanderers were compelled to explain themselves under oath.

    I’d also hazard a guess the discovery phase will also allow Dr. Mann to peek under some rocks that some may wish hadn’t been exposed to the light of day.

  12. #12 chek
    October 24, 2012

    Heh. I see the delusional Watts and Horner are whistling in the dark and braying that discovery is going to help their side.
    Morons never learn.

  13. #13 Lotharsson
    October 25, 2012

    …and braying that discovery is going to help their side.

    Looks like the same cognitive issue that allows them to claim that uncertainty in climate science means things will be better than (say) the median expectation, never worse.

  14. #14 Olaus Petri
    October 25, 2012

    We seek him here, we seek him there,
    Those Climies seek him everywhere.
    Is he in heaven?—Is he in a Model?
    That demmed, elusive El Ninoel.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/forecasters-surprised-by-el-nino-turnaround/4332260

    ;-)

  15. #15 Wow
    October 25, 2012

    If the head of the IPCC made a report stating that the Heartland Institute were a Kiddie Porn hub, would the HI just accept the truth of that statement or would they sue for defamation (just like Lord Monkfish does ALL THE FRIGGING TIME, welll he **threatens** to sue, never does)? And if they sued, would they open up all their storage to the world so that we could find out if the allegations are true?

    If these clowns don’t have enough info to make their statement at the moment they MADE the statement, they can’t as for discovery of Mann’s letters to prove their case: they have admitted they HAVE NO CASE.

    Ergo, defamation case proven.

  16. #16 lord_sidcup
    October 25, 2012

    More cognitive dissonance from Petri. Yawn.

  17. #17 John
    October 25, 2012

    The court case is interesting. It reveals the deniers to be so intellectually barren that all they are really interested in is picking through private emails that they believe support their conspiracy theories.

    Surely if Mann were so guilty of what they claim, they wouldn’t need to do that. But deniers aren’t interested in science, just attacking scientists for political purposes.

    The case may not even make it to trial. I suspect the National Review may just offer him wads of money and retract the claims. Their only other option is to go to trial, lose, and then deniers can add the US legal system to their nutty little whitewash conspiracy.

  18. #18 chek
    October 25, 2012

    Spot on, Wow.
    But of course they’re still pandering to their own delusion that somehow ‘secret’ papers will be found proving that Chairman Gore and his Politburo of Libruls are behind the whole scam in pusuit of Weld Gummint.
    Clowns indeed.

  19. #19 John
    October 25, 2012

    And didn’t brave Sir Monckton run away from a previous debate with Peter Hadfield (potholer54) too? Perhaps the Gib Chronicle should be made aware of Sir Monckton’s previous brave retreats.

    Christopher Monckton is too much of a coward to debate in a forum that relies on facts and evidence, and not his impressive speaking ability. A forum where his interlocutors demand inconvenient things like “sources”.

  20. #20 Wow
    October 25, 2012

    “and not his impressive speaking ability”

    Not really.

    He has an impressive lack of shame and an impressively impervious ego.

    But that only makes it easy for him to say what’s necessary rather than true and for those who WISH to believe him, there’s no need for any speaking ability.

    He has no special ability there.

  21. #21 Lotharsson
    October 25, 2012

    But that only makes it easy for him to say what’s necessary rather than true and for those who WISH to believe him, there’s no need for any speaking ability.

    And that explains why he’s so at home with the Republican Party in the US who have been almost completely taken over by the rabid “Tea Party” folks who are largely untethered from reality.

  22. #22 Wow
    October 25, 2012

    Just had a thought. What with all the Republican/Rightwing haterade on Julianb Assange for “RAPE!!!”, how does that fit in with the GOP stance on how nice rape is if it ends up giving you a babbie as God Intended ™:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/25/real-republican-party-rape-platform

  23. #23 MikeH
    October 26, 2012

    Climate Code Red (Dave Spratt) has a summary of a recent James Hansen debunking of Patrick Michaels. Click through to read Hansen’s excellent presentation.

  24. #24 Lionel A
    October 26, 2012

    Short-cut link to Hansen’s response to Pat Michaels’ deception (PDF) Comments on Assertions of Pat Michaels at Grover Norquist’s
    “Wednesday” Meeting, 5 September 2012
    .

    Michaels is life Jim but not as we know it for it is in an un-evolved from neolithic form i.e. being propelled by motives so stone age.

  25. #25 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Not that I think its a big deal, but the Nobel Peace Prize Comittee appears to have commented on the Mann thing:

    http://www.examiner.com/article/professor-mann-claims-to-win-nobel-prize-nobel-committee-says-he-has-not

  26. #26 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    What do you think of this liar, Olap?

    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/Letter_to_McCain.pdf

    Right there, it says:

    His contribution to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 – the correction of a table
    inserted by IPCC bureaucrats that had overstated tenfold the observed contribution of the
    Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets to sea-level rise – earned him the status of Nobel Peace
    Laureate. His Nobel prize pin, made of gold recovered from a physics experiment, was presented
    to him by the Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Rochester, New York, USA.

    So now that you have been shown the evidence, will you act with even a scintilla of integrity and admit your error, or will you continue to act as the complete lying asshole that we know all deniers are?

  27. #27 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Now lets see if Watts is a lying sack of crap:

    Nobel Committee: The organization won it. It’s not a personal prize to people belonging to an organization.

    Complaint: As a result of this research, Dr Mann and his colleagues were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

    Dr Mann and his colleages ARE an organisation.

  28. #28 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Dear Wow, was your emotions a rebuttal of this conclusion, or did I miss anything?:

    “I contacted the The Norwegian Nobel Institute to find out if Mann was indeed a Nobel Laureate, winner, etc… My questions were:

    1. Was Prof Michael Mann ‘awarded’ a Nobel Prize of any sort at any time? Is he a Nobel Laureate as implied elsewhere in his legal brief?

    2. Did he receive a certificate “for contributing to” the IPCC Nobel Peace Prize? Is the photo of the certificate authentic? [see photo]

    3. Is there a difference between stating you “were awarded” the Nobel Peace Prize as indicated by Mann in his legal brief and “contributing to” as shown in the attached photo of the certificate?

    Geir Lundestad, Director, Professor, of The Norwegian Nobel Institute emailed me back with the following:

    1) Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
    2) He did not receive any personal certificate. He has taken the diploma awarded in 2007 to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and to Al Gore) and made his own text underneath this authentic-looking diploma.
    3) The text underneath the diploma is entirely his own. We issued only the diploma to the IPCC as such. No individuals on the IPCC side received anything in 2007.

    Lundestad goes on to say that, “Unfortunately we often experience that members of organizations that have indeed been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize issue various forms of personal diplomas to indicate that they personally have received the Nobel Peace Prize. They have not.”.

  29. #29 Karen
    October 27, 2012

    Geir Lundestad, Director, Professor, of The Norwegian Nobel Institute emailed me back with the following:

    1) Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
    2) He did not receive any personal certificate. He has taken the diploma awarded in 2007 to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and to Al Gore) and made his own text underneath this authentic-looking diploma.
    3) The text underneath the diploma is entirely his own. We issued only the diploma to the IPCC as such. No individuals on the IPCC side received anything in 2007.

    Lundestad goes on to say that, “Unfortunately we often experience that members of organizations that have indeed been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize issue various forms of personal diplomas to indicate that they personally have received the Nobel Peace Prize. They have not.”

    hahaha, wotta jerk !!!

    lol……prints his own certificate….LOL LOL LOL

  30. #30 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    1) Michael Mann has never said he was personally awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
    2) He has not said he was awarded any personal certificate.
    3) He has never claimed he recieved a gold pin as mark of the NPP personally from the president of the Nobel Committee.

    But deniers will go “SQUIRRELS!!!” rather than admit they’ve got bugger all and a far worse set of liars among them.

  31. #31 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Olap and Spots:

    1) Was Monckton ever a member of the House of Lords?
    2) Has Monckton ever found a cure for AIDS?
    3) Was Monckton ever given a Nobel Peace Prize?
    4) Was Monckton ever Mrs Thatcher’s Science adviser?

  32. #32 Marco
    October 27, 2012

    Points 2+3 are clearly false, so Geir Lundestad should be ashamed if he indeed claimed Mann himself made the certificate.

  33. #33 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Of course, since Olap and Spots like that lie, no matter who said it, they won’t decry it.

    Just look at their refusal to decry lord monckfish.

  34. #34 Lionel A
    October 27, 2012

    Oh these ‘ignoratti’, Karen-Spots-GSW-OP-Duff/Roddy etc, etc, are so tedious.

  35. #35 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Marco, I’m sure it doesn’t have to be Mann who did the addendum. Lots of spin on this one.

  36. #36 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Still avoiding, Olap?
    1) Was Monckton ever a member of the House of Lords?
    2) Has Monckton ever found a cure for AIDS?
    3) Was Monckton ever given a Nobel Peace Prize?
    4) Was Monckton ever Mrs Thatcher’s Science adviser?

  37. #37 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Hey, Olap agrees that this latest WTFUWT is just spin!

  38. #38 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    “Is he a Nobel Laureate as implied elsewhere in his legal brief?”

    No, since that isn’t implied in his brief.

  39. #39 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    “stating you “were awarded” the Nobel Peace Prize as indicated by Mann in his legal brief”

    Never happened in his brief.

  40. #40 MikeH
    October 27, 2012

    The Rabett has the skinny on “Mann and the the Nobel Prize” affair which is causing the idiots of the internet to wet their collective pants.

    Marc Morano has the denier mobile in reverse gear and is bravely running away. Idiots Karen and Olaus, apparently expendable denier cannon fodder are yet to told of the full scale retreat.

  41. #41 Lionel A
    October 27, 2012

    MikeH,

    You just beat me to that KO punch for OP&Co.

    Read, learn and inwardly digest you Morano Morons that comprise the ignoratti.

  42. #42 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    I’m not sure, but I have a feeling you guys are upset about something. ;-)

  43. #43 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Don’t worry, Mann isn’t the only one. Trenberth has a similar view on things:

    “AWARDS:
    New Zealand Research Fellowship 1968-1972
    NSF research grants 1978-1988
    NOAA research grants 1986-
    NASA research grants 1989-
    Fellow American Meteorological Society 1985-
    Fellow American Association for the Advancement of Science 1994-
    Honorary Fellow Royal Society of New Zealand 1995-
    NCAR Best Publication Award Nominee 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994
    NCAR Outstanding Education Performance Award Nominee 1996
    Keuhnast annual lecture, Univ. Minnesota 15 Oct. 1998
    American Meteorological Society Editors Award (J. Climate) 1989
    Jule G. Charney award, American Meteorological Society 2000
    Highly Cited Researcher (top 25 Geosciences), ISI. May 2002
    NCAR Distinguished Achievement Award Dec 2003
    Symons Lecture, Royal Meteorological Society, London 21 May 2004
    Fellow American Geophysical Union Dec 2006
    American Geophysical Union Editor’s citation for excellence in reviewing May 2007
    Massachusetts Marine Educators award of Certificate of Appreciation May 2007
    Nobel Laureate (shared) for Nobel Peace Prize 2007 (as part of IPCC) Oct 2007
    Yoshi Ogura Lecture, Univ. Illinois at Champaign-Urbana 30 Apr 2008
    Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Green Professionals 15 Oct 2008″

    http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/trenberth-cv.html

    Mind you fellas, I don’t think this is a biggie. You do though. ;-)

  44. #44 GSW
    October 27, 2012

    Olaus,

    You’ve been following the

    “Breaking: Mann has filed suit against NRO (now the laughing begins)”
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/23/breaking-mann-has-filed-suit-against-nro/#more-72909

    thread on WUWT as well. Not only does MM go around touting around his own special brand of self importance, he even managed to insert this Hubris into the statement of complaint! “As a result of this research, Dr. Mann and his colleagues were awarded the Nobel Peace prize.”

    Def. Hubris means extreme pride or arrogance. Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one’s own competence or capabilities.

    Indeed.

    ;)

  45. #45 GSW
    October 27, 2012

    Apologies Olaus,

    Know you’ve made the point already. I just pleases me to dwell on it a little longer.
    ;)

  46. #46 chek
    October 27, 2012

    “Mind you fellas, I don’t think this is a biggie. You do though

    No, it was you that made all the running on this. And like Morano, now the running away.

    “Dr. Mann and his colleagues “

    That would be the IPCC, which gave Dr. Mann (and his other lead author colleagues) a certificate in recognition of their contribution to the Nobel awarded to the organisation. Hence why Dr. Mann stated the award was shared.

    Mind you, even simple cognition has never been a denier attribute. Witness Olap’s chagrin at Dr. Trenberth’s long, long list of professional recognition over the years. I doubt if all the deniers clubbed together and threw theirs into a hat it would be even a tenth as long.

  47. #47 chek
    October 27, 2012

    I just pleases me (sic)

    Never was a truer word spoken.

  48. #48 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    “No, it was you that made all the running on this. And like Morano, now the running away.”

    Or Brave Sir Robin:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiY1ydLtn2w

  49. #49 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Wow and cheek, I really don’t see what I’m running away from? Trenberth’s CV?

    I’m sure its an honest mistake. Like I said, its not a biggie to me. If the Mann was half the Jeff in terms of self idolatry, I might have found it more troublesome. ;-)

  50. #50 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    ” I really don’t see what I’m running away from?”

    Your hysteria over a manufactoured cotroversy.

    And I guess that you are afraid of someone with a CV because

    a) It’s latin
    b) you haven’t got one :-P

  51. #51 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Hey, what about that Monckfish mate of Watts?

    His insistence on

    a) being a member of the House of Lords
    b) inventing the cure for aids
    c) being Mrs Thatcher’s science adviser

    is all a much higher class of self-idolatory that remains yet unexplored in your tiresome search for some relevance in your life :-)

  52. #52 chek
    October 27, 2012

    Looking to shame the visiting trolls into displaying some consistency, Wow?
    Consistency isn’t a talking point they’ve been issued with, so they just don’t know what to think.

  53. #53 GSW
    October 27, 2012

    Chek,

    “That would be the IPCC”

    Not in Mikey’s world it’s not. To quote the entire paragraph from Mann’s complaint in full.

    “2. Dr. Mann is a climate scientist whose research has focused on global warming. Along with other researchers, he was one of the first to document the steady rise in the steep increase in measured temperatures since the 1950s, As a result of this research, Dr. Mann and his colleagues were awarded the Nobel Peace prize.”

    “Mann and his colleagues” (that’ll be the et al). Mann et al, Nobel prize winners for inventing the hockey stick, at least in mikey’s world thats how it looks. He is a kidder isn’t he?

    Anyway chek, remember you lot are the “baddies” in all this with your enviro skull caps of doom!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU

  54. #54 chek
    October 27, 2012

    “Mann and his colleagues” (that’ll be the et al). Mann et al

    See what you did there? Or did you think we’re as stupid as you?

  55. #55 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Mann has written on his facebook page:
    Rumour has it someone wrote this:

    “Its sort of funny how the rabble don’t seem too interested in the fact that many other IPCC co-authors (e.g. University of Montana scientists Steve Running) have found the IPCC’s official commendation to lead authors (“contributing to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize”) translated to having been co-awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize”

    But like said, its not a big thing. Agreed Wow and Cheek? ;-)

  56. #56 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Sorry for my adding came inbetween. Remeber, it can false! ;-)

  57. #57 Jeff Harvey
    October 27, 2012

    Wow, you nailed it with this statement:

    And I guess that you are afraid of someone with a CV because

    a) It’s latin
    b) you haven’t got one

    Neither GSW or Olaus have any kind of pedigree in science. Their CVs, were they to tell us what they are, would be a joke. Its the politics of envy at work here, BIG time. Olaus just parrots anything his hero Jonas, said, hence the by now well worn out accusation of me exhibiting some kind of ‘self-idolatry’. Olaus only cottoned onto this remark when Jonas said it. Olaus is a grade-A schmuck who is hardly original.

    A colleague was correct when he said how much the deniers, withy their grade-school level science educations, loathe real bonafide professional scientists. Their disdain and contempt oozes from every blog where they parade their rank stupidity. The problem with blogs is that the deniers think they are making a big splash into the scientific arena. Who in the field of climate science or ANY science has ever heard of GSW or Olaus or Jonas or Karen and their acolytes? But on blogs they huff and puff and smear scientists with some misguided impression that the world is listening to them and more importantly taking their piffle seriously.

    Olaus, I know your heart beat increases every time I mention Jonas, but can’t you even think for yourself for once? As I said, you simply parrot the inane remarks of other deniers here.

  58. #58 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Agreed, Olap, like everything you’ve “brought to our attention” today, there’s fuck all in it.

    Well done for keeping up the zero-content of your posts, Olap :-D

  59. #59 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Hey, Git, what about “Lord” Monkfish?

    What do you say about his assinine claims?

    a) being a member of the House of Lords
    b) inventing the cure for aids
    c) being Mrs Thatcher’s science adviser

    Seeing as how you deniers are so hot on all this false flag waving.

    Or is that only for the fake outrage, not the real thing, huh :-)

  60. #60 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Hello Jeff! :-) Glad you could join us.

    Keeping in mind all the evil righ wing Elders you have found and slaughtered in your head Jeff, me think you deserve a post modern award too. ;-)

  61. #61 chek
    October 27, 2012

    Fake screptics, fake outrage, fake intellects and fake language. Post modern award(?) via a brainless post modern clown here, but way less funny.

  62. #62 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    What’s the problem, Olap? Can’t operate a printer :-)

    Get a grown up to help :D

  63. #63 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Wow, please let go of Jeff’s leg! Chek might get angry with you.

    Post modern awards seems rather spot on don’t you think. ;-)

  64. #64 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Oh you are such a wag. Oh, no, wanker, sorry, the spellchecker on the browser redid it, Olap :-)

    Good doggie. Beg for your master! :-D

  65. #65 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Why is it you can’t take some harmless news from a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate of 2012? ;-)

    All this anger, hate and frustration…

  66. #66 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    ‘sup Olap dog?

    Sniffed Watts’ crotch today? :-P

  67. #67 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Hey, Olap, why all the frustration? You don’t seem to be handling the acceptance of your assertion that you’ve said nothing important!!! :-D

  68. #68 chek
    October 27, 2012

    “All this anger, hate and frustration”
    And lying. Don’t forget Great Stupid Wanker’s addition (exposed above) to the little trilogy you’re engaging in.

  69. #69 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    Fellas, I come in Peace. ;-)

    No need to use profanities. That’s Jeff Bonaparte’s department.
    .

  70. #70 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Ah, the little Shitzu is back!

    With yet more empty words :-)

  71. #71 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Hey, if you came in peace why did you make all those accusations? ;-(

    Maybe you need to buy a dictionary! :-D

  72. #72 Olaus Petri
    October 27, 2012

    No respect whatsoever for a Nobel Price Laureate.

    :-)

  73. #73 Wow
    October 27, 2012

    Yes, we know you don’t have respect for people who are clearly better than you :-D

    However, they do not feel the lack of your approbation, so rest easy, Olap dog ;-)

  74. #74 Lionel A
    October 27, 2012

    GSW repeated from his [fill in the blank with whatever suits]:

    “2. Dr. Mann is a climate scientist whose research has focused on global warming. Along with other researchers, he was one of the first to document the steady rise in the steep increase in measured temperatures since the 1950s, As a result of this research, Dr. Mann and his colleagues were awarded the Nobel Peace prize.”

    Now go do some research into the history of climate change research and discover why that baloney is just that BALONEY! It was obviously created by somebody either totally ignorant or deliberately using ambiguous language.

    What a joke you ignoratti are!

  75. #75 GSW
    October 28, 2012

    I repeated it from [...Mann's statement of complaint...]

    http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/michael-mann-complaint.pdf

    Although there where some words missing from the earlier transcript. So,as an errata with the corrected paragraph in full,

    “2. Dr. Mann is a climate scientist whose research has focused on global warming. Along with other researchers, he was one of the first to document the steady rise *in surface temperature during the 20th century and* the steep increase in measured temperatures since the 1950s, As a result of this research, Dr. Mann and his colleagues were awarded the Nobel Peace prize.”

    ” It was obviously created by somebody either totally ignorant or deliberately using ambiguous language.”

    That would be Mann’s legal team. Mann must of OK’d it though? As you say, its BALONEY.
    ;)

  76. #76 Olaus Petri
    October 28, 2012

    GSW, If we didn’t know better, one could get the impression that sir Cheek and Wow are angry, hateful and intolerant men. ;-)

  77. #77 chek
    October 28, 2012

    GSW: “Although there where some words missing”

    But then that’s how you people operate, always have operated and always will.

  78. #78 GSW
    October 28, 2012

    Oalus,

    Indeed, amongst their other failings. Do you think they have realised that they are the “Baddies” in this yet? Defending the indefensible and pleasuring themselves with each new tale of impending doom (No matter how dubious or overblown it may be).

    Again,
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU
    ;)

  79. #79 Jeff Harvey
    October 28, 2012

    Yeh, GSW, there are baddies alright: those who f**** science to promote short-term political agendas. Those who don’t seem to give a damn that they are pushing our life-support systems towards a precipice, and that the consequences for humanity will be dire. Those are the real bad guys. The ones you in your profound ignorance support.

  80. #80 John
    October 28, 2012

    Why weren’t the deniers more skeptical of Monckton’s claims to be a member or parliament and Nobel Prize winner? Where was their skepticism then?

    A humiliating backdown from Monaro. The deniers’ entire case is built on lying and denying reality. It’s all they know how to do.

  81. #81 Jeff Harvey
    October 28, 2012

    Olaus, two points: first of all, why oh why cannot your comment on the primary literature? Too much for your simple brain? You and GSW appear to spend a lot of your time in anti-environmental blogs. Get a life, guys….

    Second point: you really appear to hate the fact that I am a bonafide scientist (and one of the large majority) who agree that the evidence that humans are forcing climate is beyond dispute. Hence your loathing of scientists. Moreover, when this salient little factoid is thrown at you, you are left with nothing more than feeble attempts at smears. I recall Jonas or one of his slavish admirers (you in all probability) vehemently attacking me and claiming that I am not a scientist. So I simply reply showing that I am in fact, a qualified scientist, and the response is immediate: “Look! He’s waving his CV in our faces! He is full of self-idolatry!”.

    If this is the best you can do to smear me, then it shows how desperate you are. I have repeatedly asked you to support your wafer-thin arguments with the primary literature, and you consistently avoid the question, instead producing grade-school level poetry and quips that you think are witty. GSW at least tried (feebly I will admit) to discuss science, although it was clear that his views were also not gleaned from the primary literature but from blogs (his ‘opinions’ on the pandemic amphibian decline and on polar bear demographics were proof-positive of that. Not a peer-reviewed study in sight. When I debunked his nonsense with studies by experts in the field, out came the knives and the vacuous smears and quips).

    You deniers are lucky in one thing though: on the internet you really aren’t accountable for all of the gibberish that you write. You are anonymous and posts are quickly forgotten. In the scientific arena, mud sticks. If you clowns were to go to a conference and to present a lecture on any field based on the state of your knowledge (or lack thereof) you’d be laughed out of the venue or else publicly humiliated. If you wrote an article and submitted it to a peer-reviewed journal (now that’s a scary thought!) then your ignorance would also be exposed, though to a smaller audience, because the study would inevitably be bounced after review from 2-3 experts and they alone would know the content of your drivel. But on blogs you can hide your stupidity behind anonymity and, again, blog posts are quickly forgotten. This is why your hero, Jonas (if anyone clings to another’s leg doggy fashion, it was you on HIS leg), consistently (and predictably) refused to answer my challenges with respect to him writing a manuscript or, better still, submitting a request to speak at a conference or workshop. He knew damn well that, in the tiny chance were he to be allocated a slot, then his cover would be blown and the numerous flaws in his ‘wisdom’ would be exposed to a large audience. End of story, Olaus.

  82. #82 Wow
    October 28, 2012

    “Why weren’t the deniers more skeptical of Monckton’s claims to be a member or parliament and Nobel Prize winner?”

    Monckfish told them lies they wanted to hear.

    Whereas Mann is telling them the truth they don’t want to know about.

    Simple, really.

    Just like the deniers.

  83. #83 Lionel A
    October 28, 2012

    GWS.

    That would be Mann’s legal team. Mann must of OK’d it though? As you say, its BALONEY.

    Sans vapid smiley use.

    By omitting a salient phrase you created a statement which changed the sense of the original – what you did was BALONEY

    What you, and others, are working this into is also BALONEY.

    What’s up, running out of SPAM?

  84. #84 Olaus Petri
    October 28, 2012

    Jeff, thanks for all the attention. I must be a very important person in your life, perhaps only second to yourself. ;-)

    And thanks for mentioning your CV. I had almost forgotten all about it.

  85. #85 Wow
    October 28, 2012

    Hey, we’re only here to help you, Olap :-) Why all the hate and tantrums :-)

  86. #86 Jeff Harvey
    October 28, 2012

    Shock! Horror! Our pontificating self-righteous moron is back! Claiming, amongst other things that I am not capable of reading, let alone interpreting the primary scientific literature! This is a real howler, coming from a guy that’s not a scientist and has never published a single scientific paper in his miserable life! ….or who has never attended a scientific conference! And he’s telling everybody here that he knows what he is talking about, that he’s up on the science, and that thousands of climate scientists with many more thousands of papers are wrong!

    So again, I reply that I read scientific papers every day as part of my research AS REAL , BONAFIDE SCIENTIST…otherwise I would never be able to publish in the peer-reviewed literature. Let me rub it tin, Jonas: I have 15 peer-reviewed papers this year. Just got one accepted in PLoS Biology (Impact Factor 12). Another in Annual review of Entomology (Impact Factor 12 as well). I now have 125 papers published in peer-reviewed journals on the Web of Science. What’s you tally again? Let’s see…ummm….

    000000000000000000.000000000000000000000

    Correct? So that makes you able to interpret the ‘primary literature’ does it? So now who’s making things up?

    Case closed. Expect the usual smears about me waving my CV but I don’t give a damn. At least I have a CV to waive. Jonas, Olaus, GSW and their hoard don’t. That’s what really pisses them off.

  87. #88 Lionel A
    October 28, 2012

    Argh! Dropped a htm char.

    This ‘ignorattitcollective’ remind me of this article containing a picture which is a dead ringer for who could be the icon for their cause clue; YDQYGRKNNEW, hint four off, and there are a number of jokes around which could well apply to these ignoratti too.

  88. #89 Olaus Petri
    October 28, 2012

    Yes Jeff, you have a CV in counting bugs, but what’s got to do with real climate science? You can’t even come up with relevent refs, when asked to. WUWT?

    Inventing stuff is your forte though, but that’s not something that is typical for biologists, but for unscientific activists. ;-)

    And dear, dear Jeff, I know you are a master of projections, but even you must confess that the angry one is YOU, and your minions, not me, Jonas or GSW.

  89. #90 chek
    October 28, 2012

    Olapdog, one doesn’t need a psychologist to recognise that the person forever mentioning a subject is the one obsessed by it.

    Hence your laughable projection which – by definition – you project onto others.We could count up how many times you mention “anger”, “hate”and the like, but frankly you’re a boring, emoting twat and not even worth the miniscule effort involved.

  90. #91 Lionel A
    October 28, 2012

    Re Jeff Harvey.

    I have 15 peer-reviewed papers this year. Just got one accepted in PLoS Biology (Impact Factor 12). Another in Annual review of Entomology (Impact Factor 12 as well). I now have 125 papers published in peer-reviewed journals on the Web of Science.

    Now OP and the other ignoratti,

    that prompted me to find out more, and it is comparatively easy to find out at least some of what has comprised Jeff’s life times work, for although I do not have any peer reviewed papers to my name I could understand much of what they contain and am willing to study further where my understanding is lacking. My motivation comes from a long standing urge, since consciously about six years old, to find out what makes things tick, all things. This has stood me well over time where I have had to engage in scientific aspects of engineering however this should not hide my long standing interest in what is now the wide compass of Earth Systems Science.

    Not currently being within academia access to papers is oft-times difficult but enough material can be found and studied so that a robust construct of reality can be achieved.

    I am currently studying the works of William Ruddiman which involves consulting many other sources I have here from Dawkins through E O Wilson (yes I know where these two disagree) to Feynman, amongst others, but also taking in histories of early cultures. Such is the nature of climate science, signals are coming from all quarters of life and from the environment in which it exists.

    Are you people aware of just how complex and still little understood most of the web of life is. It seems that you have just no idea of how we have decimated this web of life and rearranged the waters, rocks and soil on which, and under which, it lives. Decimated like no other evolved organism.

    I shudder to think how many unknown species, of unrealised importance, have been driven to extinction by our activities. There is without doubt another mass extinction under-way caused by US and which is one of the reasons why we are now considered to be in the Anthropocene Epoch. I write Epoch advisedly for our gross effects may be so severe as to warrant a more major division of geological time (Period, Era or even Eon) for the Earth will be a very different place when we are done, that is done what we are doing and done – gone extinct. But of course there will be no one around to worry about what type of geological time division should be considered.

    It seems to me that you are so ignorant that you cannot appreciate how ignorant you are and that is what needs to be addressed before anybody here is going to take you seriously.

  91. #92 Lionel A
    October 28, 2012

    OP

    Yes Jeff, you have a CV in counting bugs, but what’s got to do with real climate science?

    What’s up OP, you don’t have the education and intelligence to go find out how such work can inform on climate science, is that it?

    Here, I’ll give you a starter:

    consider what the changing behaviour, and also of their susceptibility to pathogens, of small creatures can tell us about increased, or decreased, warming and precipitation.

    Pathogens BTW are not Afghan fighters from the hills.

    Up to you to study OP, if you can.

  92. #93 Lionel A
    October 28, 2012

    Whilst the ignoratti continue with their bilge the bilges of New York are under threat.

    Sandy can be followed from Jeff Master’s informative site.

    Something, with slight edits, that I posted at CP this week:

    I wonder how many New Yorkers realise just how vulnerable their real estate is. Those faint of heart should not read Chapter 3 ‘The City Without Us‘ of Alan Weisman’s ‘The World Without Us‘, which title does the book a disservice for it hides the fact that this book contains many lines of argument across large time, geographic and human developmental compasses.

    Chapter 3 describes how vulnerable to flooding Manhatten is by virtue of its geology and man altered geography where many pre-civic streams are now buried underground along similar routes to those used for service tunnels and subways.

    The ever encroaching water table is only kept at bay by teams of engineers ensuring that underground waterways get cleared of rubbish such as plastic bags (plastic’s rubbish being a recurrent them later in the book) and all manner of other things carelessly disposed of by New York’s denizens.

    Other engineering teams ensure that the collection of 753 pumps keep pace with the influx of water from flooding underground streams, heavy overhead rainfall and storm surges alike. New Yorkers should hope that any back-up generators there are then are more robust than those at the Fukushima, and other, nuclear plant in the likely event of power failure. The fact that much refuse washed into sewers and drains by a heavy deluge can block water courses and throttle pumps, even though fitted with filters (which can get blocked) are another cause for concern.

    Those who has been to sea as crew of a warship know only too well how important it is to keep loose articles to a minimum less the hull be breached and auxiliary pumping necessary, a task which can involve divers braving all manner of hazards to unblock filters if clogged.

    One person who has spent many years mapping Manhattan’s soft under-belly is Eric W. Sanderson, cited in Weisman’s book.

    Oh how vulnerable, what we think of as, civilisation is. And the rough ride is only beginning.

  93. #94 Wow
    October 28, 2012

    You know what, Oh Lap dog’s master, we haven’t forgotten your running away from the denialosphere’s abortive groupwank over some of Mann’s credentials and the Nobel prize,

  94. #95 jerryg
    October 28, 2012

    Olaus: “And thanks for mentioning your CV. I had almost forgotten all about it.”

    Too Many words?

  95. #96 GSW
    October 28, 2012

    Jonas you’re back!
    ;)

  96. #97 chek
    October 28, 2012

    Back to your own thread Jonarse. The comparison to a stuck record may be lost on your young acolytes, but is still very apt.

  97. #98 GSW
    October 28, 2012

    chek,

    Come off it chek, he’s only telling it how it is, the truth, it’s not his fault you can’t handle it. (The Baddies never can) another clue for you.
    ;)

  98. #99 Wow
    October 28, 2012

    How what is?

    How a piece of fiction is?

  99. #100 Wow
    October 28, 2012

    That’s because you intrude where you have been told not to enter.

    Why do you disregard private property? Are you some sort of communist?

Current ye@r *