August 2013 Open thread

More thread.

Comments

  1. #1 Karen
    September 5, 2013

    chek, how long is your hair and what colour is it ?

  2. #2 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    #97

    But that is you, “Karen”! You and all the rest of your denier chums are the real sheep. Look at you all, milling around in your sheep-pens like Nova and WTFUWT and all the rest. Baa! Baaa! So frightened by reality that you embrace foul politics, paid shills and do-it-for-free cranks – and reject science.!

    Baaa!

    Always remember that denial arises from fear. Deniers flock together and bleat fearfully at the science, encouraged by their manipulative and unscrupulous shepherds. They are the epitome of gullible stupidity, not of objective and independent thinking!

    As dear Lotharsson has mentioned in passing, it’s always projection!

    Baaa!

    ;-)

  3. #3 Berendaneke
    September 5, 2013

    BBD: “TL hasn’t banned the small army of socks that pop up and down here”

    And I tell you greenpissers which socks are meant:

    Harvey
    Lotharsson
    BBD
    Chek
    Stu
    Lionel
    Thomas

    Forza Abbott, the next Prime Minister of Oz

  4. #4 Berendaneke
    September 5, 2013

    I have informed my friends in Wagga Wagga that arctic sea ice extent rose dramatically compared with last year.

    Conclusion: Al Gore has lied that by 2015 there will be no arctic sea ice in summer. He lied as the IPCC has lied that by 2035 Himalayan glaciers will have disappeared due to “global warming”. hahahahahaha, what a ridiculously stupid lie by the IPCC greenpisser ignorants who spoil real science.

  5. #5 Berendaneke
    September 5, 2013

    Harvey: You should be more cautious to call US Presidents “war criminals”!!!!!!!!

    Are you accountable of what you excrement in your incredibly primitive and hateful words. You are a zero performer and ugly greenpisser who hates our western civilization.

    Piss off from here, you nasty troll

  6. #6 FrankD
    September 5, 2013

    Conclusion: Al Gore has lied that by 2015 there will be no arctic sea ice in summer.

    Freddie seems to have a problem with past and future tenses, and with indicative and subjunctive moods. Perhaps they don’t exist in his native language.

    Mind you I don’t believe Gore ever said anything about 2015, or that it would have particularly mattered if he had, since he is not a climate scientist, but I suppose a cite would be too much to ask. Kai, how about it?

  7. #7 Jeff Harvey
    September 5, 2013

    “Harvey: You should be more cautious to call US Presidents “war criminals”!!!!!!!!”

    Not at all, dopey. I call it as I see it. Nixon gave the orders to bomb Cambodia leading to half a million deaths. Ford gave the OK for Suharto to annex East Timor, leaving a quarter of the population there dead. Reagan armed, aided and abetted death squads across Latin America in the 1980s, calling mass murderers like Rios Montt the ‘moral equivalent of our founding fathers’. Bush Sr. invaded Panama, leading to an other 3,000 deaths, and then committed a whole gamut of war crimes in Iraq. Clinton was no better; bombing the Al Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant in Sudan in 1998 led to ‘several tens of thousands of deaths’in the country according to a German study., Bush junior and his neo-cons were probably the worst of the lot, overseeing mass murder on an industrial scale in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama has merely carried the torch of mass killing to the next presidency.

    Given that you are virtually brain-dead, Berendaneke, and clearly don’t understand anything about recent history, its a bit rich of you to lecture me on anything. Truth is that every US President since (and including) Truman could be indicted for crimes against humanity. Many of them should have dragged before the international criminal court, and would be if there was any justice in this world. Same goes for the leaders of many nations states, but since our lying governments perpetually lecture us about human rights, freedom and democracy, they tend to be more hypocritical than most, given their atrocious human rights records. Its all a farce. Look at Tony Blair – another criminal who should be being tried in the Hague.

    So yes, Berendaneke, IMHO many US Presidents are utter war criminals. Nothing less. And the record proves it. So you can take your opinions and put them where the “sun don’t shine”.

  8. #8 Jeff Harvey
    September 5, 2013

    Stu 2 asks a good question: what has happened to this blog?

    A good question. Two things: Tim Lambert is clearly very busy elsewhere and has not really been involved with it for a long time. For that reason there haven been very few defined threads; just open threads where the discussion goes everywhere. Second, its been largely taken over by an ignorant troll collective, involving people who clearly downplay (or deny) the effects of AGW and who cherry pick, mangle or distort the data to support their arguments. Many of these trolls are bombastic and try to give the impression of being deep-thinking intellectuals, but when called out resort to the usual smears, invective and vitriol that characterizes the anti-environmental community as a whole. I’ve lectured on it as universities and elsewhere for more than 10 years, and people like Luke, Karen, Berendaneke, Olaus etc. are straight out of the playbook. Each has their own defined style, if one can call it that, but ultimately they arrive in mass in order to encourage each other. Not one of them is a scientist or has been anywhere near a university lecture theater, workshop or conference, and none of them publish anything in scientific journals. That being said, they do not hesitate to smear, ridicule, and belittle senior scientists with years of experience in climate science. They get away with it because (1) they are anonymous, and (2) because, to be honest, the scientific community ignores them. They are laughingstocks for the most part. The only reason I write in here is because there are a few honest brokers who are interested in knowing more about the ecological effects of warming and other anthropogenic stresses. I am happy to discuss that, and leave the debate over climate forcing climate to the experts who broadly agree that the human combustion of fossil fuels is the primary driver. The fact that every major scientific organization on Earth agrees leaves the deniers out in the metaphoric cold. The consensus is a touchy subject with them, because it is their Achilles Heel (or one of many). You’d be surprised (or not) at some of their responses to it. One self-righteous legend in his own mind (Jonas) could only feebly retort that the conclusions reached by every National Academy on Earth was possibly based on the votes of just a few of its members. Seriously, he said this. Very little else needs to be said in response to this. Its pure desperation.

    Sure there are a few exceptions – you mention Judith Curry – but for every exception there are hundreds and hundreds of scientists defending the positions of their National Academies. Given the well organized and well funded denial lobby uses everything in its disposal, if there were more prominent scientific deniers we sure as hell would know all about it. But the denial lobby has effectively relied on the same bunch of people for over 20 years – the Idso’s, Balling, Soon, Balinuas, Carter, Ball, Michaels, Singer, Lindzen, Spencer, and a few others. Many of these scientists haven’t published much in many years and in some cases ever. But if you look back at the early 1990s the names were the same, with a few added.

    I will be honest with you and say that becoming a denier is a great way to advance one’s scientific career, especially if you’ve slogged away for years and been hardly recognized. It worked wonders for Bjorn Lomborg, who on the basis of a single, error-filled book became an instant celebrity. Up until the book he had published a single paper.

    I’m pretty sure that if I phone a right wing think tank and told them that I had had a soul searching conversion, and that I now fervently believed that deregulation of the economy was a good thing and that we should empower corporations more, that I would have a great chance of landing a very good position in one of them. Heck, I have 134 publications, over 3000 citations, and I was a former editor at Nature. A lot of people know me since I co-reviewed Lomborg’s book for the journal. Besides, there are virtually no ecologists or environmental scientists who support the corporate/think tank views on environmental issues. They would love to have some qualified scientists in these fields in their ranks; its great PR for them.

    You also asked earlier how we can deal with AGW is there is such acrimony between people in the different sides. But you are ignoring the fact that this is exactly what the denial lobby wants. They don’t need to win any scientific debates (they never will). They just need to sow enough doubt as to render any action to deal with GW mute. They are procrastinators; that is all they need to do. Delay/postpone/fudge. That is what they do.

  9. #9 Stu
    September 5, 2013

    Okay, all pretense is gone now. Luke, Olaus, KarenMackSunspot, Stu 2 are now openly and admittedly trolling. I’ll give Gordo the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s truly as dumb as a sack of hammers.

    To all the other ones: thank you for fully conceding the issue.

  10. #10 Lionel A
    September 5, 2013

    Harvey: You should be more cautious to call US Presidents “war criminals”!!!!!!!!

    Jeff pretty well nailed it in his reply but I’ll remind you of a suggestion I made up-thread which was to go and read Aussie reporter John Pilger, and yes I can quote from his books too (as I can from Dawkins, EO Wilson, Jared Diamond amongst others along those lines and numerous climate scientists).

    The ignorance of this nutter brigade here (that’s you, Luke, OP, Karen, el goldilocks etc) is so broad that one has to wonder if you ever got an education at all. If you had any experience of higher education then you would know about chasing down sources, it is amazing what one can learn through serendipity by exploring notes to texts, bibliographies and ‘Other Reading’. There is a joy in finding things out this way. It is a bit like those old text based computer adventure games where one follows a clue from one place to another and on to another etc. etc.

    In that spirit here is a starter on late 20th Century War Crimes found by searching on John Pilger, one page of suggestions from seventeen.

    My suspicion is that instead of studying texts you get your world view by reading opinion columns in the mainstream media and watching the likes of Faux New and its other counter-factual programming. That is why you like WUWT and Nova – no need to challenge the little grey cells.

  11. #11 Stu
    September 5, 2013

    @Jeff: Mossadeqh, bin Laden, the fun goes on and on.

  12. #13 Lionel A
    September 5, 2013

    Perhaps they don’t exist in his native language.

    Maybe he speak ‘Streetistan’.

  13. #14 Berendaneke
    September 5, 2013

    @Harvey, yes we know that greenpissers, pathological pacifists, lefties and other strange individuals like to call US Presidents “war criminals” although no juridical court has ever issued such a sentence, but on the other you greenpissers show infinite love and sympathy for mass murders like Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, etc.

    You greenpissers hate our western world and you adore the primitive other nations without democracy. YOU ARE ILL IDIOTS, just disgusting people. Piss off from here you traitors if western civilazation.

  14. #15 Berendaneke
    September 5, 2013

    @Harvey, your problem is that there is no unambigous proof that anthropogenic CO2 warms the air 2m above the surface by x degrees Celsius.

    All: “it’s always speculation”

  15. #16 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    “but for every exception there are hundreds and hundreds of scientists defending the positions of their National Academies. ”

    Oh fuck off Jeff. In reality the actual domain experts to the very important WG1 report for which all else is derivative is a handful for each section ! If you believe in the hundreds of scientists line you probably also believe in Jack’s Beanstalk.

  16. #17 Wow
    September 5, 2013

    France and Belgium have both called for GW Bush to be called before the Hague.

  17. #18 Wow
    September 5, 2013

    “Conclusion: Al Gore has lied that by 2015 there will be no arctic sea ice in summer. ”

    He never said it would.

    Lies? From trolling deniers?

  18. #19 chek
    September 5, 2013

    In reality the actual domain experts to the very important WG1 report for which all else is derivative is a handful for each section ! If you believe in the hundreds of scientists line you probably also believe in Jack’s Beanstalk.

    Deniers routinely make the claim, but strangely never offer any evidence for it. What we do know is that would-be challenges led by cranks like Happer at the APS peter out after little more than a grandiose press release.

  19. #20 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Luke

    You know very, very little about the physical science basis. You are a posturing liar with a grab-bag of stupid denier memes and a big mouth. You fool nobody except the muppets.

    You know this. We know this. Time to move on. Go back to wherever you came from. Or have you been banned there? Is that why you pitched up here? Is that it?

  20. #21 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    The Freddy/Kai/Boris/Berendaneke troll has been profoundly tedious since appearance weeks ago. It still repeats stupid denier memes long debunked as if this constituted an argument or even a discussion. It doesn’t.

    For pity’s sake go and waste your breath elsewhere.

  21. #22 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    It’s interesting watching Luke pick up the terminology as he goes along. Lotharsson used the term “domain expertise” recently, and now it reappears in Luke’s mouth. Luke thinks we don’t notice such things, but Luke has no idea what he is dealing with!

    :-)

  22. #23 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Actually, I tell a lie!

    :-)

    It was FrankD!

  23. #24 chek
    September 5, 2013

    Interesting too after SpamKan’s revealing little outburst over rhwombat’s avatar the fixation on what Rorschach blots are, rather than what they’re for.

    As the old joke goes, “You’re the one who keeps showing me the dirty pictures

    For the record,to me it depicts someone rock climbing, but perhaps RW can clarify before I appear to be yet another nutter.

  24. #25 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Weirdly, I too see someone scaling a rock face, shot from above!

    Is this a consensus?!

    :-)

  25. #26 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    “Deniers routinely make the claim, but strangely never offer any evidence for it.” – well that shows you know nothing doesn’t it. As I said you probably believe in Jack’s Beanstalk.

    BBD has a massive tug “It’s interesting watching Luke pick up the terminology as he goes along.” The level of BBD’s fuckwittery. Could have answered some of my pertinent questions about the massive holes in the hypothesis.

    “but Luke has no idea what he is dealing with” yes I do – a bunch of stupid cunts. This is BBD “you’re dealing with the big boys now”, “I’m gonna shred you” and then he came a gutser. Fucking clown. Shouldn’t you be getting some sleep so you can take little fuckhead Johnny to school tomorrow. “Daddy why are you so cross and mean in the morning” “Well Johnny I’ve been up all night be called a cunt and saving the planet from evil fossil fuel users. Now shut up while Daddy looks at a graph. Did you like the handful of sticks I got you to play with?”

    Anyway make way – we’re probably due for another 500 word chew-your-arm-off in boredom rant from grandpops eco-Jeff. “But but but I know about the devastating consequences to species – look this meadow butterfly is appearing 0.064373478 days earlier each decade. I’m at a university you know. And I go to eco-conferences where we have the biggest tugs ever” DO fuck off Jeff.

  26. #27 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Got you again, Luke!

    You need to get a grip on that reflexive outburst thing!

    My best advice:

    - Avoid participation in business negotiations

    - Avoid card games where money is at stake!

  27. #28 el gordo
    September 5, 2013

    ‘I’ll give Gordo the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s truly as dumb as a sack of hammers.’

    That’s not fair, years ago at Deltoid I was nominated a ‘concern troll’ and that still stands in my book.

    I have always been a denier of AGW warming, there is no doubt, but nevertheless I’m a big supporter of the approaching mini ice age theory.

  28. #29 Jeff Harvey
    September 5, 2013

    First, our resident psychopath says: “you greenpissers show infinite love and sympathy for mass murders like Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, etc.”

    Ya gotta love this false analogy. There’s no need for me to explain in detail the serial crimes committed by the US over the past 60 years. The evidence speaks for itself. The only refrain dickwads like Berendaneke have is to dredge up this kind of shit. If one dares criticize vile acts committed by ‘our side’, then one MUST by definition support vile acts committed by officially designated enemies. Thats their logic. They have nothing else. Funny that Berandaneke doesn’t mention US support for Saddam through the period he committed his worst crimes. And how the US and UK supported Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in 1982 after Cambodia was invaded by Viet Nam. There are many similar examples. Funny he doesn’t mention Mbutu, Marcos, Suharto, Montt, Pinochet, the Duvaliers, the Shah, and a long list of other torturers and mass murderers who were aided, abetted and supported by the US for years in full knowledge of their crimes. But then again, Berendaneke is as thick as two planks.

    As for our polite resident legend in his own mind (Luke), witness his feeble attempt to dismiss official positions of every National Academy in every nation on Earth as well as other very prominent scientific bodies in their position on GW (e.g. that the combustion of fossil-fuels and attendant increase in atmospheric concentrations of C02 is the main driver for increasing surface temperatures). Instead, Luke has a rather unhealthy fixation for Joanne Nova and greatly exaggerates her influence on the GW debate. He also seems to think that real science is discussed over there; my brief sojourns to that den if iniquity reveal a bunch of lunatics.

    Luke, face the truth: you’re a dipstick.

  29. #30 el gordo
    September 5, 2013

    ‘Actually, I tell a lie!’

    Well, you have been severely brainwashed so we’ll take your plea into consideration.

  30. #31 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Oops, missed a bit:

    and then he came a gutser.

    No I didn’t Luke! You are lying again! But there’s nothing left in the silly denier memes bag, is there Luke?!

    Oh noes!

    :-)

  31. #32 Jeff Harvey
    September 5, 2013

    One last point Luke: your flippant butterfly remark just proves my last point. You really are a dipstick. Can’t debate yourself out of a soaking wet sack of paper. If this is the best you can do, and if this is the intellectual depth you think flourishes over at Nova’s blog, then you can have it.

    Yup. You’re a dipstick alright. And worse.

  32. #33 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    Oh no – Jeff’s droning on again. It’s Vogon poetry. “very prominent scientific bodies” – full of old codgers who don’t know shit about climate.

    Unlike you leprosy afflicted dickless wonders here on Pitcairn Island, Jo baby gets traffic while you don’t. Anyway I only go over there coz she looks hot – I don’t give a stuff what she says really.

  33. #34 chek
    September 5, 2013

    “Deniers routinely make the claim, but strangely never offer any evidence for it.” – well that shows you know nothing doesn’t it.

    On the contrary The Lukes, it shows you’re all puff and zero evidence.

    As I said you probably believe in Jack’s Beanstalk.

    “What you say”, The Lukes, carries less weight than a photon going flat out.
    You came here with diddlysquat and you’ve contributed even less.

  34. #35 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    BTW Luke

    I can’t seem to see you over at Nova’s but I really haven’t looked very hard.

    Can you link to the last thread and comment you made there?

    I’m interested to see you in action in a different environment.

    Thanks.

  35. #36 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    Listen to BBD splutter “but sir I didn’t – but but but” Grow some balls you little fucker. DO you like me towing you around the pond. Now shut the fuck and change Johnny’s nappy.

  36. #37 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    But chek had to respond. See all you cunts just can’t help yourselves responding. Little kiddies stamping their feet. The difference between this a serious blog where inmates might know something is that I would be drowned out by the detailed scientific discussion.

    But you guys are wannabe flakes. You’re actually playing tag with me. Is this the level of your pathetic fuckwittery.

    And playing dicks with some guy called Karen. More your expertise.

  37. #38 chek
    September 5, 2013

    Anyway I only go over there coz she looks hot

    Actually, she’s rather plain even by MILF standards. You really need to get out of that basement and meet some real people, not expend all; those tissues over your TV goddess memories of many a yesteryear ago.

  38. #39 chek
    September 5, 2013

    I can’t seem to see you over at Nova’s but I really haven’t looked very hard.

    The Lukes are conceivably crackpot and fixated enough to be Mr. Evans Codling.

  39. #40 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Dear Luke

    I can’t seem to see you over at Nova’s but I really haven’t looked very hard.

    Can you link to the last thread and comment you made there?

    I’m interested to see you in action in a different environment.

    Thanks.

  40. #41 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    @ bag of hammers

    Well, you have been severely brainwashed

    But when we test your hypothesis we find that I can provide physical mechanisms for my arguments and you can’t So who’s been brainwashed?

    Seriously. Ask yourself.

    ;-)

  41. #42 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    chek DO NOT say bad things about my Jo – she’s very attractive. Don’t be offensive.

  42. #43 chek
    September 5, 2013

    Seriously. Ask yourself.

    If there’s one thing I’ve learned BBD, it’s that cranks and driven nutters don’t do self-examination. Purely my opinion of course, but any avenue that might lead them to doubt themselves is securely closed off, as we can see by the reaction (i.e. ignoring) reasoned evidence..

  43. #44 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    my Jo – she’s very attractive.

    If you say so, but did she ban you Luke?

    When did you last comment there?

    I looked back to 30/08 and no sign of you at all.

    Can you link to the last thread or comment you made there?

    Thanks.

  44. #45 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    chek

    I know, I know. It’s like talking to the cat. But still, one does it!

    :-)

  45. #46 Jeff Harvey
    September 5, 2013

    “See all you cunts just can’t help yourselves responding. Little kiddies stamping their feet”

    Look in the mirror, pal. You’re the kid stamping his feet. Good grief, read your posts. Nothing but invective-filled tantrums.

  46. #47 Jeff Harvey
    September 5, 2013

    “very prominent scientific bodies” – full of old codgers who don’t know shit about climate

    Gimme some evidence for this vacuous remark, Luke, you stupid clot. Or is it like everything else you say – off the top of your head.

    Besides, talk about calling the kettle black. Singer, Lindzen, Spencer, Ball, Carter, et al. Can’t get much older codgers than this bunch of AGW deniers

  47. #48 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    Sock puppetry, Luke?

    Dead agrostologists society

    ? :-)

  48. #49 chek
    September 5, 2013

    Ah well, we can but hope that Tony de Stupid loses and on Sunday night they’ll all climb into their bathtubs and slit their wrists in protest.

  49. #50 Luke
    September 5, 2013

    They’re still following me around. Desperate and dateless.

    Jeff the eco-scientist of world fame is bothering to chase me around. What a tool.

    Look boys there’s a rabbit.

  50. #51 BBD
    September 5, 2013

    No answers *again* Luke!!

    :-)

  51. #52 chek
    September 5, 2013

    One wonders if the word ‘disintegration’ means anything to The Lukes or his credibility.

  52. #53 Stu 2
    September 5, 2013

    Chek@#49.
    Tony Abbot will undoubtedly win his own seat on Saturday. Whether the coalition wins is a different issue.
    This is not an American presidential campaign, it is an Australian election and whichever party wins the most seats is the winner.
    It is quite obvious by the Rudd/Gillard antics that a prime minister can be changed without a vote from the electorate.
    I believe Rudd’s seat is more precarious than Abbots?

  53. #54 BBD
    September 6, 2013

    Sock 2

    This isn’t about elections. It’s about physics.

    * * *

    A suggested modification to Lotharsson’s Law:

    It’s always projection and politics.

  54. #55 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    “And playing dicks with some guy called Karen. More your expertise.”

    lol……. so say’s the fat fuck pretend biker with the ruptured arsehole !!!!!!

    Tell me Puke, how could you have an infatuation for Jo?

    In your home video you obviously have a relationship with a little gay boy that wears a dog collar…. lol

    Leave me out of your rants from now on, and please answer BBD’s question’s.

  55. #56 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    hi chek :)

  56. #57 Stu 2
    September 6, 2013

    Jeff Harvey,
    Thank you for your response.
    I guess the major reason this blog has degenerated is Tim Lambert’s absence.
    I am wondering why people like you and Lotharsson defend exactly the same behaviour that you criticise.
    Most of the time it looks like this blog is barracking for different football teams and sledging each other according to which team they barrack for.
    And BBD @#54 if you’re referring to me then I disagree with you. Chek’s acerbic comment @#49 was definitely about tomorrow’s election in Australia.

  57. #58 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    “This isn’t about elections. It’s about physics.”

    How long have you been here BBD?

    Lothy….. “Well, more precisely it’s supposed to discuss (bad) media reporting and politically motivated misuse and misrepresentation of science, but close enough.”

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2013/08/01/august-2013-open-thread/comment-page-44/#comment-165817

  58. #59 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    EDITORIAL: Reality intrudes on a hot dream
    The globe cools, and Al Gore’s ‘Climate Reality’ does, too

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/5/editorial-reality-intrudes-on-a-hot-dream/

    lol

  59. #60 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    oh….. I needed to add this

    “The scorekeepers of global-warming alarmism, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change, is about to release its fifth Assessment Report, which is said to admit that the planet has been cooling, not warming. A leaked draft version of the report concedes the very inconvenient truth, and casts doubt on the claim that man plays a role in triggering “extreme weather.”

    :)

  60. #61 chek
    September 6, 2013

    .. and thus we see how the moron contingent is controlled by opinionated rhetoric, because they’re too dumb and lazy to understand data,

    SpamKan really couldn’t illustrate it more clearly if they tried.

  61. #62 Stu
    September 6, 2013

    I guess the major reason this blog has degenerated is Tim Lambert’s absence.

    Yes. People that have admitted to trolling and/or sockpuppetry would be banned (Luke, Berenwhatever–it’s Freddy, mike, Karenwhatever, Olaus) and perhaps then we could address the issues.

  62. #63 Stu
    September 6, 2013

    @chek: who needs science when you can just read a totally unbiased doucherag editorial you like?

  63. #64 Lotharsson
    September 6, 2013

    …and then he came a gutser.

    I must have missed that bit. Perhaps because it was all in your head? (Come to think of it, that would explain a lot…)

    DO you like me towing you around the pond.

    The line is getting shorter and shorter and shorter…

  64. #65 Lotharsson
    September 6, 2013

    I am wondering why people like you and Lotharsson defend exactly the same behaviour that you criticise.

    Citation needed. Or clarification.

  65. #66 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    “I guess the major reason this blog has degenerated is Tim Lambert’s absence.”

    degenerated ?

    I wouldn’t say that Stu 2, previously Timmie ruled the blog in an extremely one sided manor, his realization that co2 wasn’t a powerful global incinerating toxic gas changed that.

    Previously people who didn’t fully support the co2222 meme would constantly have their post’s either disemvowel’d or deleted merely for speaking to other posters who spoke to them in the same tone, and of coarse the many post’s that demonstrated the abundance of weaknesses in the co22222 meme were dealt with severely.

    Thankfully, things are more even now :)

    Many of the people that posted here in the past have also woke up and have moved on.

  66. #67 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    ok……I know……..

    manner

  67. #68 Berendaneke
    September 6, 2013

    Stu, are you finally ready to admit that you are a member of Greenpeace?

    Please don’t lie for once. At least try to be honest and decent.

  68. #69 Bernard J.
    September 6, 2013

    On the matter of the election, there is no doubt about tomorrow’s result. The hasn’t been for several years, and I myself called it back in late 2010.

    Australia is a ‘small’ country and I’m only two degrees of separation from Abbott – he’s literally the friend of a friend. And going by this morning’s corridor conversation with that intermediate friend the Abbott camp is cock-a-hoop about taking over the government, to the extent that some are little different to the bargain hunters banging on the shop doors at an end-of-year sale. Watch some of the reactions tomorrow around 10:00pm…

    The sad thing is that this is not an election based on informed democracy. It’s about an economically-privileged, spoiled and self-indulgent populace ignorant of scientific and economic fundamentals, and who are largely willingly captured by a media monopoly designed to funnel wealth and power to a small cadre of privileged ideologues. Ironically Australia ceased to be the “Clever Country” at about the same time that the internet and mobile ‘phones gained wide traction – it’s as if the majority of people ceded their thought processes to advertising and search engines that return popular hits rather than accurate ones.

    Australia is a nation of TV zombies, rapidly losing the ability to critically and competently analyse issues and to maintain balance in their expectations of others compared with themselves. They complain about assistance to those in unfortunate circumstances, but are happy to hold out their hands for middle-class (and upper-class) welfare, for subsidies for large industries, for new football grounds but not for the arts, and all the while expecting that their taxes will be continually reduced. It’s the Magic Pudding all over again.

    And the Australian media across the board has has completely abrogated all responsibility for impartial scrutiny. The free runs that Abbott and the Coalition have had on dissing the science and the economics underpinning global warming is a classic example, but the media are as asleep on the job when it comes to unquestioningly promoting the logical fallacies of lobbyists, spin doctors, industry representative and other vested-interest groups. Even the ABC has capitulated in this. Some people suggest it’s all to keep controversy and interest in public consumption of media, but the sacrifice of the security of generations of future Australians does not justify this disgraceful behaviour.

    I said it years ago, but I’ll repeat it – denialism is not “correct”, and denialists have no moral mandate in spite of collecting the numbers, but denialism won the battle against science years ago because all that was necessary was to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt in the minds of the average stupid Joe and Jane on the street. We’ll all pay dearly in the long-term for this national self-indulgent ignorance, and I suspect that even then those who supported the anti-scientific nonsense will not shoulder the blame for their actions and decisions.

    And pay we will, because a balanced capacity for governance in the Coalition disappeared about the time of John Hewson – since then it’s been largely populated with strident laissez faire maniacs and rabid conservative fundamentalists who want white picket fences and below-the-knee skirts everywhere, and free rein to chop, dig, and scoop every last resource that can be reached, without any thought for the future of anything except the ledgers of big business.

    Dunning and Kruger could set up a whole Institute to catalog the psychology and sociology of the decline of a previously-vibrant nation.

  69. #70 el gordo
    September 6, 2013

    ‘But when we test your hypothesis we find that I can provide physical mechanisms for my arguments and you can’t So who’s been brainwashed?’

    There hasn’t been any grants handed out for global cooling for three decades, which puts me at a scientific disadvantage, but finally the worm has turned.

    If Svensmark is correct, we are on the threshold of a revolution in climate science.

  70. #71 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    Quick, head to your bunker, the end of the world is near.

    and all because nobody would listen to barnturd.

    poor little barnturd, sob sob

  71. #72 Stu 2
    September 6, 2013

    Bernard J, look at what you have written here about your fellow Australians.
    “… the majority of people ceded their thought processes to advertising and search engines…”
    “…the average stupid Joe and Jane on the street?”
    “Australia is a nation of TV zombies, rapidly losing the ability to critically and competently analyse issues and to maintain balance….” ?
    “The decline of a previously-vibrant nation?”
    ———————————————————————–
    Where’s your proof of these assertions and what’s your alternative Bernard J?
    ———————————————————————-
    Lotharsson @#65. Read your own and Jeff’s posts. After lecturing to me and advising me to not engage in and therefore encourage poor behaviour, you then go ahead and do it yourselves and/or ignore remarkably similar behaviour from others ;presumably because you agree with their reasons for said behaviour. Ultimately it proves nothing anyway.

  72. #73 Lotharsson
    September 6, 2013

    The Heartland Institute is apparently about to spend a seven figure sum in a PR blitz surrounding the release of AR5.

    …which reminded someone of this epic takedown.

    Go read the whole thing. The first few paragraphs aren’t about Heartland per se, but then it gets on to that subject…

  73. #74 el gordo
    September 6, 2013
  74. #75 Lotharsson
    September 6, 2013

    After lecturing to me and advising me to not engage in and therefore encourage poor behaviour, you then go ahead and do it yourselves and/or ignore remarkably similar behaviour from others…

    I don’t think you fully understood what I said. I’ve re-read my comments and yours on page 44 and I don’t see where I did what your quote claims. The first relevant comment I find is on page 45 where I write this:

    So if you want to have a good faith discussion here, keep acting in good faith yourself and show that you don’t fit the bad faith profile, and have a conversation with those who respond in kind, regardless of all of the other simultaneous conversations going on.

    This is most definitely NOT advising you not to engage with the bad faith participants – as I had previously explained.

    One needs to distinguish between suggestions I gave you because you were apparently complaining that the signal to noise ratio was too low to meet your needs, and suggestions for behaviours that need to be manifested by at least some commenters in order to deal with the bad faith participants. These are two different things. The quote above is of the former type; the following is of the latter:

    Secondly, some “attacks” that one might consider “personal” are necessary because they are accurate, and that accuracy is the only way of countering bad faith.

    It is not possible to have a good faith debate without calling out bad faith participants and tactics (unless you have a moderator who simply removes the bad faith comments – and then you simply substitute a different set of noisy complaints from the bad faith participants for the ones you’ve avoided).

    This quote is not advocating against all engagement by anyone with people who are arguing in bad faith. It’s saying the opposite! And it’s pointing out that in the absence of strong moderation, the presence of that kind of engagement is a necessary feature if you want to have a blog where it’s possible for individuals to have good faith conversations they are interested in. The price you pay to have those conversations is that you tolerate that material – and maybe you even actively contribute to the health of the blog by participating in pointing out the bad faith tactics.

    (And I elaborated further in #61 and again at #81 on that page.)

    You appear to have not only misinterpreted my “advice” to address your signal to noise complaints, but to have read a generalisation into my suggestions that I wasn’t making and thus tried to apply it to other people such as Jeff.

  75. #76 Berendaneke
    September 6, 2013

    @Bernard #69

    blah blah blah blah

    how boring, unethical and false your whining is. get out from this blog to do everybody a favor. Nobody will miss you Greenpeace ideologists with your politically incorrect pagan faith in god gaia. piss off you enemy of decent science.

  76. #77 Berendaneke
    September 6, 2013

    Bernard, BBD, Lotharsson, Stu, Lionel, Chek, Harvey et al.

    You constantly demonstrate your inability to understand the reasons for the fierce opposition to your ideology of CAGW which you face here and elsewhere, eg from the next Prime Minister of Australia.

  77. #78 el gordo
    September 6, 2013

    “…the science of climate change is crap.”

    Tony Abbott

  78. #79 Bernard J.
    September 6, 2013

    Where’s your proof of these assertions…?

    It’s not as if it’s not there in our faces. Anyone who has taught at the tertiary (or even secondary) level for the last several decades will no doubt have seen a lamentable increase in the mediocre proportion of the educated public.

    But don’t take people’s words for it. There is hard data…

    The tottering state of science understanding in Australia was widely discussed several months ago, for example:

    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/07/the-five-dumbest-science-facts-believed-by-australians/

    http://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science/australias-science-literacy-falls

    http://theconversation.com/glum-and-glummer-australia-vs-us-on-science-literacy-results-16222

    The Index Mundi describes Australians as literate, although their definition is slightly nebulous. Still, even their data says that literacy is down:

    http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=as&v=39

    (or if Flash won’t work for you:

    http://postimg.org/image/xnhz3lrcp/)

    and I suspect that literacy sophistication would be plummetting, especially if the Australian trolls on this thread are any indication. More objective is the soon-to-be-released final outcome of an ABS survey which shows the population in quite a bad light:

    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/latestProducts/4228.0Media%20Release2002011-2012

    If one considers prose literacy as a coarse proxy for sophisticated thinking then at the current time we have less really debilitating literacy but also less high-level literacy:

    http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Chapter6102008

    or in crude words, there is a higher proportion these days of stupid people but not quite as many in the really stupid category. This is a very blunt proxy to be sure, but when it comes to political decisions ignorance and stupidity are largely congruent.

    Those underlying literacy trends are also reflected in these data:

    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4228.0main+features992011-2012

    and one doesn’t need to look at the third graph on that page to know that compared to older generations today’s young adults are far less likely to be able to multiply two two-digit numbers or to do long division (especially without an Excel spreadsheet or a mobile ‘phone), or to explain the concept of a logarithm, or to work out compound growth problems.

    …and what’s your alternative Bernard?

    1) Decent education

    2) a change in societal attitudes that includes a greater preparedness to think with the cerebrum rather than with the amygdala or “lizard brain”.

    We’re not complete hostages to our evolution, but these days we seem to be forgetting that being smart takes work.

  79. #80 Bernard J.
    September 6, 2013
  80. #81 el gordo
    September 6, 2013

    The regional cooling in the UK must be of great concern to the inhabitants of that small Isle, having never witnessed a tipping point of this magnitude.

  81. #82 adelady
    September 6, 2013

    having never witnessed a tipping point of this magnitude.

    Where’s the graph or other presentation to show where/when/ how this “tipping point” is showing itself? And what it’s magnitude might be.

    I’ve tried the Mean Maximum, Mean Minimum, and Rainfall amount versions of this page and they’re all much of a muchness. The recent years are very different from any earlier period – just look at the last 10 years and any previous 10 year period – and I cannot see where you’re getting this “tipping point” from.
    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/weather/climate-anomalies/#?tab=climateAnomalies

  82. #83 chek
    September 6, 2013

    Tipping point in the UK? We had a wobbly jetstream induced two week freeze over Christmas 2010 but if anything average winter and summer temperatures have been warm with warm air giving excess precipitation caused floods in some western areas, and droughts in the east.

    As a general rule of thumb, if Goddard says something, he’s mistaken/wrong /a liar. Given his past history, I prefer the latter description.

  83. #84 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    If Mr Abbott wins the vote I assume that there will be a shake up at the ABC and BOM, and a reevaluation of the gravy train science funding will be on the list also….

  84. #85 Karen
    September 6, 2013

    “Tipping point in the UK? We had a wobbly jetstream”

    Jeff Harvey is a spurt on the jetstream, he told us all it was going to collapse some time ago., seriously…. lol

    chekie honey, use the precautionary principle, put a helmet on :)

  85. #86 chameleon
    September 6, 2013

    Bernard,
    that is straight out creepy!
    No wonder the polls say what they say!

  86. #87 chameleon
    September 6, 2013

    Oh FFS!
    The moderation here is just plain ridiculous!

  87. #88 chek
    September 6, 2013

    So you weren’t interested in the Jennifer Francis talk about the jetstream posted a while back then Spamkan. It must get tiring avoiding every opportunity to learn something.

  88. #89 Stu
    September 6, 2013

    Stu, are you finally ready to admit that you are a member of Greenpeace?

    Never was, am not, will never be. Anything else, clown?

  89. #90 el gordo
    September 6, 2013

    Fascinating link, Adelady. Going on Goddard’s graph, showing a steep drop indicated regional cooling. If Goddard is wrong I’ll recant on the tipping point.

    Chek the run of cold winters is indicative of a change in the pattern and failing to see a clear signal I’m falling back onto what we know is happening.

    I accept the wayward jet stream is responsible, but where to from here?

    In Australia the weather is glorious at the moment, after mild winters here and in NZ, so naturally the common folk are talking about global warming. Even the incoming Oz PM said he knew it had been a warm winter.

    Its the same wobbly jet stream in the SH which is responsible, so this negative feedback dominates the AGW signal.

  90. #91 mike
    September 6, 2013

    BJ’s no. 69

    I dunno, BJ, I don’t want it to have it appear that I’m, like, too obviously enjoying the unseemly Schadenfreude of the moment, but–what the heck!–I’m gonna call-out your above, little fevered-cant greenshirt-rant as a real, humdinger “beaut”–let’s even call it a “milestone”–in this blog’s distinguished history of “meltdown” freak-outs.

    I mean, like, I especially admire, B. J., how you manage to keep your riled-up, fuss-budget rage, that’s fairly bursting at the seams of that last (no. 69), Jeremiah-wannabe, agitated-dork comment of yours so iron-sphincter constrained in language and so message-disciplined and so well-crafted and so…well…decorous!, despite all its huff-and-puff high-dudgeon!

    I mean, like, your last, BJ, was so, so much better than, let’s say, that amusing, little, “F”-bomb-laden, vulgar, pinko-pissy, valedictory (sort of) comment of wow’s that was the best part of his histrionic, door-slamming departure scene, here, a couple of a months or so ago.

    Indeed, BJ, I’d like to commend your no. 69 to the other Deltoids, as a model, as they, too, begin to realize that they’re lookin’ to be weaned from the public-tit, big-time and real-soon, and there, then, in them arises the felt-need to give vent to their sore-loser, parasite-foiled outrage at the cosmic injustice of it all in frantic, primal-scream, self-therapy comments of their own. In other words–good stuff, BJ!

    A few problems with your analysis of “things”, though, BJ. That is, it was not “denialism” that frustrated your little make-a-greenwashed-buck/make-an-eco-gulag hustle. Sorry about that, guy–but you’re deluding yourself. Rather, you hive-bozo’s failed to “close the deal” for other reasons:

    -A signal reason you lefty nerd-pukes are about to be handed your smarty-pants pompous-asses, is that arrogant, total-turn-off, complete-asshole contempt and disdain of yours for the “little guys” you’ve been targeting as the “suckers” of your slicko enviro-scams. You know, BJ, how you aspiring Philosopher-Kings and Cull-Masters spout locutions like “…the mind of the average stupid Joe and Jane on the street” and all. That sort of thing–know what I mean, BJ?

    -Then there’s the total, off-putting, unsettling, geek-ball, space-alien invader weirdness of you hive-flakes. Again, BJ, drawing on your last comment, we find some good examples of the above with “…subsidies for…new football grounds but not for the arts…” and “…fundamentalists who want white picket fences and below-the-knee skirts everywhere…” Don’t you realize just how much you come across as a whiny, jerk-off, creep-out, weirdo, little, tentacle-writhing “EBE” when you say things like that, BJ? And “denialism” has nothing to do with it.

    -And, finally, there’s the one big reason, BJ, you lefty, “crusher” retards failed to “push the ball” into the end-zone (oops!–I mean “win the”premiere prix de luxe” at the local community hick-art exposition”–sorry for that regular-guy, low-class, stupid “Joe on the street”, ball-game, metaphor slip-up there). And that is? C’mon, BJ, you know the answer! Just say it! Don’t be afraid! That’s right, BJ! That’s it!!! Did everyone hear what BJ just said? O. K., BJ, say it again, but a little louder this time:

    “The reason we blew it Comrades, is because we FAILED TO PROVIDE LEADERSHIP FROM THE FRONT AND BY PERSONAL EXAMPLE!!!–WE FAILED TO PRACTICE WHAT WE PREACHED!!!!

    You know, Deltoids, it’s like the hoi-polloi saw us, pounding the pulpit and fulminating against demon-carbon, on the one hand, while, on the other, they saw us jetting about the globe, incessantly attending in-your-face, hypocrite, party-time, carbon-piggie, CO2-spew eco-confabs where we brazenly schemed and plotted ever more grasping, tax-payer rip-offs in the name of carbon-reduction, all the while failing to realize that the sly, cunning, despised peasant-types were actually taking careful note (who’d a thought “stupid” serfs to be capable of such a thing!) of the discrepancy between what we said and what we actually did.

    And then the uppity, insubordinate peons had the unmitigated gall to presumptuously tag the hive’s outlandish, obscene, conspicuous-carbon-consumption bacchanals as some sort of “proof” that we were running a CAGW, scare-mongering SCAM!, and all, and, with that, the unwashed, verminous, stupid, “Jane and Joe on the street”, rabble turned on us!!”

    Very good, BJ! A much better assessment of “matters” than your first, blame-the-deniers try. And, oh by the way, BJ, might we also conclude that “Joe and Jane on the street” aren’t so “stupid” after all. Right, guy?

  91. #92 chek
    September 6, 2013

    Chek the run of cold winters is indicative of a change in the pattern

    What ‘run of cold winters’ is that Gordon?
    I’d recommend rejecting anything Goddard touches/abuses/misuses and get the Met Office data direct as Adelady was sensible enough to do.

    Of course if you prefer fantasy and AGW denier drivel, go with Goddard.

  92. #93 el gordo
    September 6, 2013

    The tipping point was in 2001… at least in the UK.

    http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/clip_image0083.jpg

  93. #94 Stu
    September 6, 2013

    Jeff Harvey is a spurt on the jetstream, he told us all it was going to collapse some time ago., seriously…. lol

    Can we get some better trolls? This one seems to be broken. It’s stuck on full moron now.

  94. #95 BBD
    September 6, 2013

    Ah, Gordy, regional variability such as cool winters in N Europe is offset by warmer weather elsewhere – eg Australia, which has just had the warmest 12 months since records began!

    Goddard is an idiot and a liar who is misleading other idiots who cannot separate a (small) region from the globe.

    Regional variability != global climate!!!!

    Muppets!

    :-)

  95. #96 Stu
    September 6, 2013

    mike, do you think anyone actually reads your tripe anymore?

  96. #97 Stu
    September 6, 2013

    BBD, stop. Did you even look at that graph? As far as pathetic dishonesty goes, it’s a corker.

  97. #98 BBD
    September 6, 2013

    Try to understand the *facts* Gordy and “Karen”. Not lies from Goddard and WTFUWT.

    The facts.

    While some places were cold, the northern hemisphere was warmer than average in March, and indeed across the winter, consistent with long-term warming trends. The US National Climatic Data Centre (NCDC) has recently described such conditions as “pockets of cold in a warming world”.

    The last time the northern hemisphere recorded a month — any month — that was cooler than the 1961-1990 long-term average was in February 1994. The last time a whole northern hemisphere winter was colder than average was 1984.

    The facts!!

    Muppets!!

  98. #99 BBD
    September 6, 2013

    @ Stu

    Crikey! WTFUWT???!!!

    What bollocks these liars dish out. You’d have to be an absolute fucking moron to be fooled by that!

    Oh!

    :-)

  99. #100 adelady
    September 6, 2013

    Thanks for that. Not. I wouldn’t have looked except that you recommended it. Still, I suppose it gave someone with a ruler and one of those gigantic boxes of crayons an hour or so’s entertainment to draw all the various lines before they found the combination they liked best.