April 2014 Open Thread

More thread.

Comments

  1. #1 bill
    April 28, 2014

    What is it with fluffers and cojones? ;-)

  2. #2 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    I see that Brad is still incapable of unselective quotation. And since he constantly advertises his reading here by his quoting there, bunnies have looked for themselves and they can see the depths of Brad’s dishonesty too.

    Brad is being as stupid as GSW.

  3. #3 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    And by endorsing GSW’s nutty denial of matters of fact, Brad has revealed that he too is a nutter who denies matters of fact.

    Not too clever.

  4. #4 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    Evidence denial by Brad continues, and now widens to include evidence of his evidence denial.

    Brad is fucked.

  5. #5 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    Why don’t you select this quote, Brad? Why are you so selective in what you quote Brad? What could the criteria for your selectiveness possibly be? Oh, what a mystery it is.

    * * *

    Who cares if conspiracist ideation doesn’t actually require that the conspiracy be imaginary?

    The point that matters is that there is *plentiful evidence* that a denial industry exists and that it is being covertly funded and there is *no evidence* that groupthink or a passive conspiracy of silence or an active conspiracy of scientific misconduct is “corrupting” climate science. That’s denialist tinfoil.

  6. #6 FrankD
    April 28, 2014

    BBD (previous page):And GSW, you are entitled to your little bit of schadenfreude…

    I suppose he is. But then we’re all entitled to a little of that.
    Starts with comment 39 – just ignore the pointless disruption of FrankSwifthack (no relation to me).

    Despite hints, then warnings, then having it explained in words of one syllable, GSW never did get that he was the butt of the joke.

    Unfortunately for GSW, the internet never forgets. And my freude over that schaden never seems to run dry. :-)

  7. #7 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    FrankD

    Ha! Thanks for the light entertainment. I’m sorry I missed that.

    Why does GSW come back?

    And returning to the present, why does Brad endorse his insane comments by selecting them for quotation elsewhere?

    It’s a mystery.

  8. #8 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    Update

    Brad is still trying to pretend that he isn’t a dishonest little shit who quote mines selectively. Poor Brad is fucked.

    The more so as he has just endorsed (by selecting it) a quote from GSW who is denying matters of fact. So we now have clear evidence that Keyes too, is denying matters of fact. That makes him a crank who can be mocked, openly.

    I wonder if he will select this to quote? Or this:

    Who cares if conspiracist ideation doesn’t actually require that the conspiracy be imaginary?

    The point that matters is that there is *plentiful evidence* that a denial industry exists and that it is being covertly funded and there is *no evidence* that groupthink or a passive conspiracy of silence or an active conspiracy of scientific misconduct is “corrupting” climate science. That’s denialist tinfoil.

    * * *

    Brad’s selective quotation has got him into rather serious trouble.

  9. #9 chek
    April 28, 2014

    Keyster’s meme is that all quotation is selective, therefore quote mining is as valid as any other selection for its purpose with no regard required for the intent of the original text.
    Have I got that right?

  10. #10 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    It’s the same kind of “reasoning” that led Brad to assert that a sock puppet wasn’t a sock puppet in his special case, but merely a nom de guerre.

    Just more specious fucking nonsense from a sociopath who, like all sociopaths, genuinely believes that rules are for the little people.

  11. #11 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    It’s high time Eli pulled the plug on Brad.

  12. #12 Lionel A
    April 28, 2014

    The Brad trainwreck is well illustrated on the Free speech thread at
    And Then There’s Physics
    .

    Does BK like making himself such an obnoxious nuisance where one, by one, blog by blog, people cease being interested in what Brad must think is ‘The Greatest Show on Earth’? Maybe he is angling for a show slot on some Murdoch like media outlet. At least Delingpole is so absurd he is sometimes amusing, Brad not so much.

  13. #13 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    You are making a prat out of yourself, Brad.

    RTFL. Previous page.

    Look at the SI for Brulle (2013) for the “increasing evidence”.

    Just because you are denying matters of fact (and generally don’t have a fucking clue) doesn’t mean you are correct.

  14. #14 BBD
    April 28, 2014

    Lionel

    Brad is a sociopath. He cannot stop being what he is, which is why he gets banned so often and why everybody despises him.

    Poor Brad.

  15. #15 willard
    neverendingaudit.tumblr.com
    April 28, 2014

    Please, gents.

  16. #16 BBD
    April 29, 2014

    I see GSW is now opening his mouth elsewhere but he has not answered a question here.

    What about your apparent denial of matters of fact?

    When are you going to give us a simple, yes or no to whether you deny the matters of fact about the covert funding of the denial industry evidenced by the existence of Donors Trust, Donors Capital Fund and set out in eg. Brulle (2013)?

  17. #17 Lionel A
    April 29, 2014

    I could put these thoughts over at Eli’s but I consider that thread is becoming a drag on Eli.

    Keyes’ faffing about fully authentic poster ID’s is rather odd., considerng wjhat we now know as to the veracity of his own handles. He is clearly so self obsessed that he has not bothered to go behind the monikers of the posters he has castigated for deception in this way. If he had he would have discovered that he has no grounds for such slights.

    On the other hand, if one has taken the time to look behind the not necessarily and probably not true identity that claims to be, or not as the case may be, Brad Keyes and thus visiting his ‘Blogger Profile’ then it becomes clear what axe he is grinding.

    Under ‘Blogs I follow’ for Brad Keyes we find The Friends of Carbon Dioxide

    He follows but does he believe what he reads there?
    Whatever, that in itself has been revealing.

  18. #18 FrankD
    April 29, 2014

    Chek: “I consider that thread is becoming a drag on Eli.”

    What, and its not a drag here? Seriously guys, anyone who gives a flying fuck about Brad Keyes or your mutual jelly wrestling championship can read it over there. Brad doesn’t post here, so why the fuck would you want to post about Brad here?

    Cluttering two blogs with his horseshit would rather seem to be feeding his trolling special strengthening medicine. So feel free to STFU about an uninteresting self-important cock, and post something interesting…

  19. #19 Lionel A
    April 29, 2014

    FrankD,

    Not Chek.
    I’ll own up to that one.
    Whatever I figured that pointing out the blogs the subject follows was worth a wider audience.

  20. #20 BBD
    April 29, 2014

    FrankD

    Agreed. It’s time to shut the door.

  21. #21 BBD
    April 29, 2014

    FrankD

    This is interesting in and of itself. A small recompense for the recent unpleasantness:

    A 5.3Ma record of sea level and temperature

    A taster:

    The researchers found, for the first time, that the long-term trends in cooling and continental ice-volume cycles over the past 5.3 million years were not the same. In fact, for temperature the major step toward the ice ages that have characterised the past two to three million years was a cooling event at 2.7 million years ago, but for ice-volume the crucial step was the development of the first intense ice age at around 2.15 million years ago. Before these results, these were thought to have occurred together at about 2.5 million years ago.

  22. #22 chek
    April 29, 2014

    I’m not sure what extraneous geological knowledge is necessary for that study to have more impact (it being well outside human existence) and/or relevance to our present, though obviously the finer discrimination between events is noteworthy and useful for its own sake..

    But I still find it mind-blowing looking at those layers upon layers of rock, knowing each represents eons of Lovecraftian-scale time.

  23. #23 Craig Thomas
    April 30, 2014
  24. #24 Bernard J.
    April 30, 2014

    Craig, that has to be one of the shortest abstracts ever!

    BBD, Rohling et al only goes to reinforce the fact that temperatures are warmer than they’ve ever been in human evolution, and that for > ~90-95% of that time the global temperature was much lower than now.

    Quite simply, we’re not adapted to the climate that we’re creating.

    Houston, we have another problem…

  25. #25 BBD
    April 30, 2014

    Why is GSW posting shite elsewhere when he has a question to answer here?

    Are you denying matters of fact GSW? See previous page.

    You are acting as though you are, so will you please confirm this by answering YES or NO.

    Thanks.

  26. #26 Lionel A
    April 30, 2014

    BJ (reminds me of that clever MASH, hope you don’t mind the comparison):

    …that numpty could be entertained with a piece of paper that has ‘PTO’ printed on both sides.

    Brilliant, but you owe me a new keyboard.

  27. #27 Lotharsson
    April 30, 2014

    I recall an old joke about a guy who died of thirst because the water bottle had “See bottom for instructions” printed on the cap, and on the bottom it said “Open other end”.

  28. #28 GSW
    May 1, 2014

    Did anyone else in the Uk notice the “Save The Children” adverts on the TV over Easter? I think they were part of this campaign:

    “UK child poverty”
    http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/about-us/what-we-do/child-poverty/uk-child-poverty

    The statement:

    “Families living in severe poverty often have to choose between heating and eating as they struggle to live on less than £15,000 a year for a household of a couple and two children.”

    featured in both the TV adverts and online link. It’s the choosing between “heating and eating” that caught my eye.

    Age Uk has similar concerns about fuel poverty in the UK:
    http://www.ageuk.org.uk/latest-press/archive/fuel-poverty-statistics–age-uks-response/

    “Worryingly, these latest figures show that the number of households in fuel poverty has remained stubbornly high. It is unacceptable that 4.5 million homes in the UK and 3.2 million in England are still struggling to pay for their electricity and gas – many of them older people who are particularly vulnerable to the cold.”

    Other than retardedly suggesting renewable technologies are going to solve the problem because they’re cheaper, do any of you see moral issues with Carbon tax/Emissions trading “tokenism”? -Unlikely to achieve very much, while increasing the burden on those already struggling.

    To be fair to Save the Children, they didn’t specifically highlight environmental taxes, just rising prices.

    This is an appeal in the UK obviously, quite a wealthy western nation, but I’m sure there are similar (worse?) issues/concerns in less prosperous countries.

  29. #29 BBD
    May 1, 2014

    GSW

    You are dodging the question still. What about your apparent denial of matters of fact?

    When are you going to give us a simple, yes or no to whether you deny the matters of fact about the covert funding of the denial industry evidenced by the existence of Donors Trust, Donors Capital Fund and set out in eg. Brulle (2013)?

  30. #30 BBD
    May 1, 2014

    In the light of your sustained intellectual dishonesty:

    Did anyone else in the Uk notice the “Save The Children” adverts on the TV over Easter? I think they were part of this campaign:

    “UK child poverty”
    http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/about-us/what-we-do/child-poverty/uk-child-poverty

    The statement:

    “Families living in severe poverty often have to choose between heating and eating as they struggle to live on less than £15,000 a year for a household of a couple and two children.”

    featured in both the TV adverts and online link. It’s the choosing between “heating and eating” that caught my eye.

    Age Uk has similar concerns about fuel poverty in the UK:
    http://www.ageuk.org.uk/latest-press/archive/fuel-poverty-statistics–age-uks-response/

    “Worryingly, these latest figures show that the number of households in fuel poverty has remained stubbornly high. It is unacceptable that 4.5 million homes in the UK and 3.2 million in England are still struggling to pay for their electricity and gas – many of them older people who are particularly vulnerable to the cold.”

    Other than retardedly suggesting renewable technologies are going to solve the problem because they’re cheaper, do any of you see moral issues with Carbon tax/Emissions trading “tokenism”? -Unlikely to achieve very much, while increasing the burden on those already struggling.

    To be fair to Save the Children, they didn’t specifically highlight environmental taxes, just rising prices.

    This is an appeal in the UK obviously, quite a wealthy western nation, but I’m sure there are similar (worse?) issues/concerns in less prosperous countries.

    Answer the question you have been asked time and time again.

  31. #31 BBD
    May 1, 2014

    The reason energy prices in the UK are so high is that the ‘big six’ energy companies have been ripping the public off. It has nothing to do with renewable energy and much to do with the extortionate price charged for gas.

    As usual, the problem is corporate greed and as usual, the shills are trying to misdirect the public over the truth.

  32. #32 chek
    May 1, 2014

    Families living in severe poverty often have to choose between heating and eating as they struggle to live on less than £15,000 a year for a household of a couple and two children.” <

    Oh, there’s a lot more ‘choosing’ going on than that referred to. Like ‘choosing’ not to buy new clothes/shoes until absolutely necessary, ‘choosing’ not to let your kids go on school trips or take part in any other extracurricular activities that cost money, ‘choosing’ no cultural or social life, and ‘choosing’ to worry about how the next unexpected bill to arrive will be coped with. Let alone regular expenses like birthdays, Christmas and Easter.

    It’s the choosing between “heating and eating” that caught my eye.

    Fuck off. Let’s try instead ‘the next talking point you’ve been given in a slow month’ for size. There, that fits so much better. And it’s both in character and more in line with your abilities.

    Other than retardedly suggesting renewable technologies are going to solve the problem because they’re cheaper, do any of you see moral issues with Carbon tax/Emissions trading “tokenism”? -Unlikely to achieve very much, while increasing the burden on those already struggling.

    Even the Daily Sturmergraph, champion of all things right wing, had to admit:
    “Profits at Britain’s ‘Big Six’ energy suppliers are five times higher than they were in 2009 as millions of households suffer record bills for their gas and electricity, regulators revealed today.”
    Ofgem said the ‘Big Six’ – British Gas, Npower, Scottish & Southern Energy (SSE), Scottish Power, E.ON and EDF – made a combined £1.2 billion in their household supply businesses last year, up 75 per cent on 2011 and five times higher than £221 million in 2009.

    Tax and renewable charges account for 16% of electricity prices, while wholesale cost/distribution/transmission/profit account for 78%.

    Your crocodile-teared concern for the ‘burden’ on the poor ignores everything we know about the harm, the expense and the finite nature of fossil fuels. Or how about the profits extracted from ‘the poor’ at every commercial level, such as card meters charging more per unit, and no discounts unlike those offered savings of GBP50 for direct monthly bank payment.

    “Other than retardedly suggesting …snip…
    Oh, there’s nothing “retarded” about your talk points, aimed at the stupidest fuckwits available to repeat, repeat, repeat..

  33. #33 GSW
    May 1, 2014

    @chek

    The lady in the Save the Children video seemed quite genuine to me, i.e not a paid actress or one of the “shills” BBD is obsessed with. Her per day challenges are quite real I can assure you.

    your;

    ” ‘choosing’ not to let your kids go on school trips or take part in any other extracurricular activities that cost money,”

    shows just how out of touch with “real” life in the UK you really are. The food/heating “choices” are not because she and her family “holiday in Monaco” or as a result of her children’s expensive “piano lessons”, as I think you are suggesting.

    From the Age UK link

    “‘Behind today’s statistics lie many stories of real human suffering as people face the misery of not being able to afford to keep adequately warm. Cold homes pose a serious risk to people’s health, increasing costs to health and care services to treat worsened cardiovascular and respiratory conditions, and contribute to the high numbers of older people we see dying over the cold winter months in the UK.”

    “‘Domestic energy prices have doubled since 2005, and the Government’s fuel poverty strategy has simply failed to keep up. ”

    “‘We now have a new tax on carbon emissions which is ultimately paid for by all energy consumers”

    I’ve no idea about your personal situations chek or BBD, but I don’t get the impression that sticking a few extra quid on your weekly energy bill is going to make that much of difference. The elderly on a state pension, a single mum with 4 kids, they have to make “choices” every day and its not “What do you fancy this year, Orlando or Biarritz?”

  34. #34 BBD
    May 1, 2014

    GSW

    You are dodging the question still.

    What about your apparent denial of matters of fact?

    When are you going to give us a simple, yes or no to whether you deny the matters of fact about the covert funding of the denial industry evidenced by the existence of Donors Trust, Donors Capital Fund and set out in eg. Brulle (2013)?

  35. #35 chek
    May 1, 2014

    “‘Domestic energy prices have doubled since 2005, and the Government’s fuel poverty strategy has simply failed to keep up. ”

    “Profits at Britain’s ‘Big Six’ energy suppliers are five times higher than they were in 2009 as millions of households suffer record bills for their gas and electricity, regulators revealed today.”

    What are you trying to say that wasn’t already addressed?
    That a Tory government (just like Lawson’s) shouldn’t jettison the poor at the earliest opportunity?
    Or that fossil fuels would get forever cheaper and cheaper if it wasn’t for those ‘burdensome’ renewables?
    What cloud-cuckoo land are you promoting exactly?

  36. #36 BBD
    May 1, 2014

    And GSW

    If, as I do, you believe that the current system of energy subsidy is effectively a regressive tax that penalises low income households, then you must do as I do, and work against it by lobbying your MP.

    But you don’t even live in this fucking country, do you, you worthless poseur?

  37. #37 GSW
    May 1, 2014

    @chek, BBD

    The Save the Children campaign and the Age UK links are as posted, nothing’s made up, they’re there and they are what they are. If you want to “think differently”/deny reality/ or ideate “shills” to make it easy to believe otherwise, that’s up to you.

    “you don’t even live in this fucking country, do you”

    If by that you mean “Neverland” with you and the rest of “lost boys”, then no I don’t.

  38. #38 Stu
    May 1, 2014

    GSW, you’ve already been shown it’s not environmental taxes that cause these problems. It’s price-fixing and greed. Why the fuck are you pretending otherwise?

  39. #39 chek
    May 1, 2014

    Griselda, you’re a fucking idiot who either can’t read, or can only recognise what your GWPF fed brain can translate.

    What Help the Aged actually say is this:

    ‘The solution to fuel poverty has to be in making our homes more energy efficient so we get real benefit from the fuel we use. Yet in the last few months, the only tax-funded fuel poverty programme in England has been wound up, and we are now into unknown territory with the Green Deal.

    ‘We now have a new tax on carbon emissions which is ultimately paid for by all energy consumers: it is high time the Government recycled the revenue that it raises into a vigorous home improvement programme to help households in fuel poverty save energy and keep warm.’

    To be fair to both Help the Aged and Save the Children however, this piece of shit is entirely your own:
    “Other than retardedly suggesting renewable technologies are going to solve the problem because they’re cheaper, do any of you see moral issues with Carbon tax/Emissions trading “tokenism”? -Unlikely to achieve very much, while increasing the burden on those already struggling”.

    What would decrease ‘the burden’ would be a revenue neutral Carbon Tax a la James Hansen which would tax hi-carbon users (the rich) and pay a dividend to lo-carbon users (the poor) without any income accruing to Government.

  40. #40 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    GSW

    How vile of you to pretend that you give a shit about the struggles of low income households in the UK when all you are doing is distracting from the fact that you HAVE DODGED A QUESTION..

    This is perhaps the single most contemptible thing I have yet seen you do.

    Do you admit that you are denying matters of fact wrt the existence of a covertly funded denial industry?

    YES or NO?

  41. #41 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    I *will* have an answer GSW. You aren’t going to get away with this.

  42. #42 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    Glossary:

    Shills = GWPF

    Useful idiots = GSW

  43. #43 Lionel A
    May 2, 2014

    GSW and his crocodile tears about fuel poverty amongst the disadvantaged in the UK are sickening.

    This has nothing to do with any so called green taxes but a long term, decades long, systematic policy of increasing the wealth gap whilst at the same time increasing the number in poverty.

    Since the early 1980s I have been in positions where I have seen failed social, education and health policies in action.

    After the RN I gained a Maths and Science degree and then went teaching in primary schools. But in the gap between RN and the degree course whilst applying for jobs during a recession, I put a hobby to use doing portrait photography by door to door canvassing. This took me around many different standards of housing and the abject poverty in some was shocking, especially on a ‘sink estate’ in Southampton. Parking a fairly smart motor, second hand Cavalier 1500, and then the occasional carrying of a photo’ bag (I quickly reverted a nondescript back pack in such areas) ensured that I kept myself well aware of location and the behaviour of others around.

    In one area a large number of former shipyard workers from Tynside and Clydeside had uprooted families – severing many social support ties – and travelled south on the promise of work in the dockyards. In other words they had headed the lame advice of a certain Norman Tebbit to ‘get on their bikes and find work’ only to have the rug pulled out from under them when the promised jobs evaporated.

    But of course these were then amongst the ‘lazy, shiftless doll grabbers’ and thus not worth further consideration.

    Teaching too me to South Wales, there was much abject poverty in ‘The Valleys’ and in the shadow of the Llanwern steel works where the pupils knew only to well what poverty was – undernourished and developmentally backward as a result. The children with ‘many uncles’ was another feature encountered in other geographical areas.

    Whilst carrying out degree study I was expected to research and write assignments for a humanities course. The main lecturer here had first hand experience in the poorer areas of Central and South America and Asia. The impoverishing role, for most of the indigenous wherever they parked their operations, of multinationals was well brought to the surface as was their methods for maintaining increasing profitability at the expense of the indigenous and the environment in which they existed, one could scarcely describe it as living. No health care, no contracts, no education. Note how this which then, in the 1980s, was thought of as a ‘third world’ problem has been seeping back into our own supposedly affluent societies. That being a sick joke for some of course.

    And yes I am familiar with the plight of the workforce in Britain which underpinned the ‘Empire’, the dreadful working conditions in factories, mines and shipyards, not to mention match factories – look up ‘phossy jaw’ [1]

    From the Age UK you linked to:

    ‘We now have a new tax on carbon emissions which is ultimately paid for by all energy consumers: it is high time the Government recycled the revenue that it raises into a vigorous home improvement programme to help households in fuel poverty save energy and keep warm.’

    If there were any justice then the power utilities could be made to subsidise such home improvements but much housing stock will be difficult to improve without major structural changes. Solar panels are not worth installing on building not without a south facing side, until the efficiency improves to make this not so much of an issue. But many properties will require rectification work and electrical system upgrades – expensive and disruptive – to make it work satisfactorily.

    And I have only scratched the surface of the simplistic thinking on display by you on this topic. But then that is par for the course for those at the Limbaugh-Hannity-O’Reilly level of ignorant idelogy such as YOU GSW.

    [1] See e.g. ‘The Shocking History of Phosphorus: A Biography of the Devil’s Element’ by John Emsley.

  44. #44 GSW
    May 2, 2014

    @Lionel and others
    Save the Children and Age UK are simply stating that increasing energy costs affect low income families, which is undeniably true. Pricing carbon as an act of “tokenism” -feeling good because you’ve “done something”, without actually achieving anything and making life hard for the most vulnerable in our society, is just downright immoral. (See Save the Children video)
    http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/about-us/what-we-do/child-poverty/uk-child-poverty

    Your “government/energy companies just need to pay for everyone’s solar panels, windmills, etc”, so energy doesn’t cost anything, is just fantasy land stuff! The Genetically Modified “money tree” Organism is a way off yet, as is the “Energy Generating Light Bulb” and the famine busting “Edible Turd”.
    If these are the policy solutions that are intended to save us, we’re screwed. You really are a bunch of disgusting , foul mouthed, urea soaked cretins.

  45. #45 chek
    May 2, 2014

    “without actually achieving anything ”
    [citation needed]

    Griselda, I’m thinking of forming a ‘think tank’ to go up against your GWPF puppetmasters. Only mine will be constructed around the same principles as the Challenger Mk II. Be careful not to fall under its tracks.

  46. #46 GSW
    May 2, 2014

    @chek

    “I’m thinking of forming a ‘think tank’ ”

    Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …Ha, Ha. Ha, Ha …
    ‘)

  47. #47 GSW
    May 2, 2014

    @chek

    Seriously chek I haven’t laughed as much in ages, a real life changer that. thanks,
    ;)

  48. #48 Stu
    May 2, 2014

    Still?! Still?! You miserable, stupid, hypocritical, misanthropic lying toad.

    The denialists whine about income redistribution. They whine about how things will be awful for the economy. Almost to a one, these are the same libertarian asshats who trumpet a flat tax, removal of social safety nets, minimum wages, workplace safety regulations and unions. The same douches that extoll the free market.

    They read an article about how it is hard for people in some countries to pay their energy bills and POOF! All of a sudden they forget that it is their beloved “free” market that did this. Price fixing, price gouging, deregulation, bribing politicians, the lot. They forget that taxes are only a small part of the energy bills. They forget that the astronomical price hikes largely go directly to billionaire shareholders.

    All of a sudden these miserable sacks of shit are all of a sudden pretending to champion the cause of the poor.

    Fuck you and the horse you rode in on, and DIAFF, GSW. Seriously.

  49. #49 Stu
    May 2, 2014

    And on cue, GSW demonstrates that this is all a joke to him anyway. Ha ha ha, poor people. Why don’t you take your smileys and remove yourself from civil society, you scum-sucking sociopath.

  50. #50 GSW
    May 2, 2014

    @su

    DIAFF – Did I Anally Force Fruit? Whatever, after 6 six years of physics stu, what you do in your spare time is definitely up to you in my opinion.
    ;)

  51. #51 chek
    May 2, 2014

    And you still don’t get the joke was on you and your loopy trump Jonarse.Oh, how we laughed.

    Although it was such a long time ago, and you’ve consistently generated many grins sins then.
    Tell us the one about ‘caring for the poor’ again. That one never goes stale, nor will it ever.

  52. #52 GSW
    May 2, 2014

    @stu

    I know you think it’s all a bit of harmless fun stu, but you should consider beforehand where this harmless “mischief” could end up:

    http://ispub.com/IJS/28/5/14404

    “They may get pushed into the anal canal following assault or mischief or after accidental falls which can lead to serious complications and even death.”

    The “even death” should give you serious pause for thought.
    Anyway, Enjoy! (or whatever)
    ;)

  53. #53 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    GSW

    If you don’t answer the question, it is obvious that you are acting in bad faith.

    Do you admit that you are denying matters of fact wrt the existence of a covertly funded denial industry?

    YES or NO?

  54. #54 chek
    May 2, 2014

    A very apt metaphor for your clique’s entire journey outside your native tongue, Griserlda. And following the prescription almost to the letter.
    But I’m sure Bjornieboy will be a font of information on minimising risk for you.

  55. #55 GSW
    May 2, 2014

    @chek

    “the joke was on you and your loopy trump Jonarse.”

    What’s this got to do with Jonas? Admittedly Jonas had an understanding of what science is, physics, mechanics, evidence etc, and your understanding was more “belly button fluff/uses of ear wax” centric, but we’re not snobs chek, you could have had your say. In any event the rest of us are left to ponder what might have been in the “great debate” had you not been timely saved from him by Tim.
    ;)

  56. #56 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    GSW

    Yes, but what do you have to say about the evidence that there is a covertly-funded denial industry?

    Eg. this:

    Brulle (2013):

    Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations

    This paper conducts an analysis of the financial resource mobilization of the organizations that make up the climate change counter-movement (CCCM) in the United States. Utilizing IRS data, total annual income is compiled for a sample of CCCM organizations (including advocacy organizations, think tanks, and trade associations). These data are coupled with IRS data on philanthropic foundation funding of these CCCM organizations contained in the Foundation Center’s data base. This results in a data sample that contains financial information for the time period 2003 to 2010 on the annual income of 91 CCCM organizations funded by 140 different foundations. An examination of these data shows that these 91 CCCM organizations have an annual income of just over $900 million, with an annual average of $64 million in identifiable foundation support. The overwhelming majority of the philanthropic support comes from conservative foundations. Additionally, there is evidence of a trend toward concealing the sources of CCCM funding through the use of donor directed philanthropies.

    Do you deny these matters of fact?

    Yes or no?

    If no, demonstrate why the evidence is invalid.

  57. #57 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    If yes

    demonstrate why the evidence is invalid.

    :-)

  58. #58 chek
    May 2, 2014

    Speak up Griselda.
    Jonarse being a monotonic boore has nothing to do with the predicament that you are in, and losing with every moment of evasive delay.

  59. #59 chek
    May 2, 2014

    C’mon Griselda.
    You know I’m talking to you.
    Who’re you hoping to impress with your chickenshit evasion and silence?

  60. #60 BBD
    May 2, 2014

    Do you deny these matters of fact?

    A yes or no will suffice.

  61. #61 chek
    May 2, 2014

    Maybe Griselda’s too busy helping out all those poor people it’s been told to feel so bad about?

  62. #62 chek
    May 2, 2014

    Or maybe its hand just got trapped in a box somewhere trying to figure out where it all went wrong with their outreach venture.
    Just sayin’.

  63. #63 Lotharsson
    May 3, 2014

    Pricing carbon as an act of “tokenism” -feeling good because you’ve “done something”, without actually achieving anything and making life hard for the most vulnerable in our society, is just downright immoral.

    Or would be, if that were actually the case.

    But it’s not.

    And to pretend that it is GSW must deny conventional and very mainstream economics that advocates capturing negative externalities to reduce market distortions, and insists that doing so will have an effect (as we observed in Australia, and as other places around the world have observed).

    That’s quite apart from the fact that any decent carbon pricing scheme – such as the one we had in Australia, or the one in Canada IIRC – makes sure that the poor are compensated (typically over-compensated) for the financial impacts of the scheme.

    It’s enough to make one wonder if GSW is a piece of algorithmic performance art designed to demonstrate the shoddiness of the denialists’ arguments.

  64. #64 Lotharsson
    May 3, 2014

    It’s almost like GSW has been reading The Australian.

  65. #65 bill
    May 3, 2014

    I wouldn’t pay the slightest attention to sham concerns about the poor from the likes of Goosey (or The Australian, for that matter.)

    It’s the far-Right we’re talking about here; the very next thing these selfish jerks do is complain that any action on AGW is an attempt at a socialist redistribution of wealth. The poor are only interesting insofar as they may occasionally afford an opportunity for a cheap shot, other than that they’re not getting their undeserving hands on my wad…

  66. #66 bill
    May 3, 2014

    The Australian’s War on Science goes Quantum!

  67. #67 GSW
    May 3, 2014

    Thanks Bill and Loth, I’d missed that Lomborg piece in the Australian fro a few days ago and as you pointed out, it’s very much on topic.

    “Renewables pave path to poverty”
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/renewables-pave-path-to-poverty/story-fni1hfs5-1226898730123

    “A Salvation Army report from last year found 58 per cent of low-income households were unable to pay their electricity bills on time. Lynne Chester of the University of Sydney estimated last year that 20 per cent of households are now energy poor: “Parents are going without food, families are sitting around the kitchen table using one light, putting extra clothes on and sleeping in one room to keep warm, and this is Australia 2013.””

    As we know its UK 2013/2014 as well. And the “revenue neutral taxes” dodge is the refuge of the economically iliterate; “revenue neutral taxes” don’t build windmills or pay the salaries of those in the “Green Jobs Boom” we keep hearing so much about.

    It is interesting to see the charities getting involved and campaigning with “fuel poverty” as an issue. If well off western countries are struggling, how’s the rest of the world going to cope.

  68. #68 bill
    May 3, 2014

    Blah blah baheddy blah blah blah blah blah… paste paste pastey paste paste paste…

    Re-read my comment above. You don’t give a shit about the poor. No-one here believes you do, including you.

  69. #69 Lotharsson
    May 3, 2014

    “Very much on topic” if your topic is obscuring the truth. Note that the piece I linked to calls out Lomborg for writing misleading bullshit and GSW pretends like he didn’t.

    “And the “revenue neutral taxes” dodge is the refuge of the economically iliterate;

    Er, no. A goodly number of rather economically literate professional economists advocate them. That means that falsely claiming that they are the “last refuge of the economic illiterate” appears to be, ironically, economically illiterate and somewhat of a refuge from an inability to substantiate your position.

    Or as I say “it’s always projection“.

    …“revenue neutral taxes” don’t build windmills or pay the salaries of those in the “Green Jobs Boom” we keep hearing so much about”.

    This strawman is also evidence of economically illiteracy. It doesn’t take much economics understanding to see how applying a revenue neutral tax that captures a negative externality can simultaneously enhance demand for technologies that reduce those externalities, thereby creating “green jobs”.

    Unless, of course, your position depends on not seeing it.

    (I guess we can add economics to the list of topics that GSW is a DuKE of.)

  70. #70 Lionel A
    May 3, 2014

    Lest you be under any illusion on our awareness of how hard the FFL are trying to protect their exorbitant profits into the future it appears that protesters against dirty and dangerous fuel extraction and transportation methods are labelled as counter-terrorism. Water boarding for trying to protect your children’s future, who’d have thunk it possible a few decades ago. But the corporatisation of governments marches on.

    Are you opposed to fracking? Then you might just be a terrorist”>

    I have flagged other aspects of this dirty business here: at this “Geoscientists get all ethical about climate change” thread.

    There is also this new twist on fossil corporate propaganda Wealthy Corporate CEOs Behind Fake Anti-Fracking Ads. Not unexpected to be sure, but watch out for similar over here – similar methodology is behind the blathering’s of a certain Matt Ridley.

    GSW, are you so far up your own seventh rock from the sun that you cannot see what is going on or are you a part of this process of undermining what vestiges of democracy we have left.

  71. #71 Lionel A
    May 3, 2014

    Groan, link issues, having workspace issues with FireFox in Linux sticking to sides to easy and swithing between panes on small screen exacerbating things.

    Are you opposed to fracking? Then you might just be a terrorist”.

    I have flagged other aspects of this dirty business here: at this “Geoscientists get all ethical about climate change” thread.

    There is also this new twist on fossil corporate propaganda:

    Wealthy Corporate CEOs Behind Fake Anti-Fracking Ads. Not unexpected to be sure, but watch out for similar over here – similar methodology is behind the blathering’s of a certain Matt Ridley.

  72. #72 Lionel A
    May 3, 2014

    Blast this is really irritating. Is Firefox working differently now, there was a big update recently?

    Try again:

    Are you opposed to fracking? Then you might just be a terrorist at the Guardian, Nafeez Ahmed, Tuesday 21 January 2014 18.13 GMT

    Look for ‘Wealthy Corporate CEOs Behind Fake Anti-Fracking Ads’ at DesMogBlog why the directly imported link fails I do not know.

    Will it work without the added html:

    http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/04/28/wealthy-corporate-ceos-behind-fake-anti-fracking-ads

    ?

  73. #73 Lionel A
    May 3, 2014

    You really are a bunch of disgusting , foul mouthed, urea soaked cretins.

    Look in the mirror whilst repeating that, the mirror in the corner and whilst wearing your conical hat, the one with a big D on it, as you do.

    Talk about twisting reality. You are beneath contempt GSW.

  74. #74 Olaus Petri
    May 3, 2014

    Latest news from the lake that warms faster than any other lake on the planet:

    http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/content/will-lake-superior-still-have-ice-june

    The heat is on! ;-)

  75. #75 chek
    May 3, 2014

    ..and?

  76. #76 BBD
    May 3, 2014

    GSW

    Your refusal to answer the yes/no question about evidence denial is duly noted. You have confirmed that yes, you are denying reality.

    Thanks.

    Moving on, since you are so implacably opposed to renewables, what steps do you advocate for decarbonising the electricity supply?

    Or do you argue that no such policies are necessary, and if so, why? Please be specific wrt climate sensitivity to CO2.

  77. #77 GSW
    May 3, 2014

    Don’t think it’s been flagged here yet, but Brad has a new post up a ClimateNuremberg.

    “Dinner With the Salman Rushdie of Climate Change”
    http://climatenuremberg.com/2014/05/03/dinner-with-the-salman-rushdie-of-climate-change/

    As usual it’s funny and well written. The “Salman Rushdie of Climate Change” in question being activist Tim Flannery.

    Original article here:
    http://www.smh.com.au/national/tim-flannery-a-man-for-all-climates-20140207-3271c.html#ixzz2zUv6qtHq

    “Most of the time, Flannery sounds exactly like a human being but, on the odd occasion, his inner lab rat creeps out.”

    Oh dear.

  78. #78 Lionel A
    May 3, 2014

    Ayup GSW, what’s it like being BK’s toe-rag?

  79. #79 chek
    May 3, 2014

    As usual it’s funny and well written

    Except, that says much more about what a clog you are, rather than Keyster’s alleged “cleverness”.

    As Willard’s unravelling of him (which like most things is going completely over your pointy little head-in-denial) at the Rabett’s, Keyster is merely slippery and wordy, not clever.
    But no doubt those are valuable commodities in your world of lies, evasion and spin.

  80. #80 BBD
    May 3, 2014

    You just don’t do dialogue do you, GSW?

    You do monologues instead.

    You don’t learn by delivering monologues. You might learn by engaging in dialogue, which involves answering questions.

    * * *

    There’s no point linking to BK’s blog here. Nobody will click the link. Perhaps if you linked to RC, SkS, the published scientific literature etc you might have more luck.

    It would be worth asking yourself why you don’t answer questions and why you don’t link to useful, science-based material, but prefer instead to reference the irrelevant.

    Opinions about Tim Flannery’s character are no more relevant to the science than an argument about whether Gilmour or Page is the better musician.

  81. #81 BBD
    May 3, 2014

    Chek

    Per FrankD and Willard, let’s leave BK on RR. Bunnies can watch the fun over there if they are interested.

  82. #82 chek
    May 3, 2014

    Yes I agree, but I did think it worth rubbing Griselda’s nose in how oput of its depth it was when it attempted its Keyster support mode.

    And regarding character assassination, deniers will never understand the difference between the work and the man.
    It’s embedded in their corporately encouragedHello! -culture shallowness.
    Did Beethoven mistreat his wife? Was John Lennon mean to his kids? Is Mike Mann vain? The Hello-culturalists (cultureless?) will speculate their pointy heads off all the live-long day because that’s their intellectual level – viz. Griselda re: Flannery above..

    The rest will appreciate the work that they offered to the world.

  83. #83 BBD
    May 3, 2014

    Chek

    And regarding character assassination, deniers will never understand the difference between the work and the man.

    As we all know, some understand it and use it tactically; the rest just bleat along. But they are *all* obligate character assassins because they have no scientific argument. Or indeed any other kind.

    GSW’s persistent refusal to enter into a dialogue and answer questions about the denial industry and its funding, and decarbonisation policy informed by the scientific understanding of climate sensitivity to radiative perturbation demonstrates where he sits in the spectrum of intellectual (dis)honesty.

  84. #84 Stu
    May 3, 2014

    GSW, apologize for trying to use the plight of the poor or admit you are a sociopath.

  85. #86 chek
    May 4, 2014

    Why are sociopaths always such prissy little mummy’s boys, like Griselda and Anders?

  86. #87 Lionel A
    May 4, 2014

    Bill @ #85, but the worm is still wriggling.

  87. #88 BBD
    May 4, 2014

    Result for Bob Ward. As I believe I’ve said before, if I ever meet the man, he will not pay for a drink that evening.

  88. #89 bill
    May 4, 2014

    That revised graph is going to be a useful stick to hit the ‘AGW is good’ brigade with. Particularly given its ‘origin story’!

    Not that they’ll learn anything from it themselves, of course, one does it solely for the benefit of onlookers…

  89. #90 chek
    May 5, 2014

    I wonder if some are finally daring to look at what may well happen as the shit contacts the leading edges of the fan blades.

    People like Tol may well be self-seeking, but they’re not stupid, and a whole lot of far from stupid people are beginning to realise.

  90. #91 chek
    May 5, 2014

    Griselda et al meanwhile will fan their nuts over how ‘clever’ the fucking Keyster is.

  91. #92 Bernard J.
    May 5, 2014

    Tol deserve due credit for his admission – and I too am happy to offer such.

    Now, if he can learn some thermodynamics and ecology and properly internalise them into his economic ideas he could really redeem himself…

  92. #93 el gordo
    May 5, 2014

    ‘Why don’t you take your smileys and remove yourself from civil society, you scum-sucking sociopath.’

    Colourful choice of words, the irony burns.

  93. #94 Lionel A
    May 8, 2014

    Lest there is any doubt as to how the filthy rich undermine the welfare of others two strands emerging throw spotlights on this issue:

    Barack Obama’s emissions plan comes under new line of attack

    and

    Show Me the Money: Meet the Multimillionaire Squeezing Missouri’s Schools.

    Do these selfish idiots, if they have offspring, not realise that no amount of ‘fortress’ mentality will be able to prepare those offspring for the upheaval that will result from the continuation of BAU aided by impoverished education?

    Voldemort, if he had been reality, was this evil and existed in much the same way – sucking the life force of others. Was JK more than a little prescient and perceptive?

  94. #95 Eli Rabett
    http://rabett.blogspot.com
    May 29, 2014

    Deltoid’s original focus was gun violence, with a Mary Rosh specialty. The old dear has reappeared