Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2008

The latest climate change / global warming Denier1 fraud is sucking them in like hayseeds in Vegas.

Hook, Line, Sinker

Hook, Line, Sinker

On Oct 27th Rick C. Hodgin posted “MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data” a distortion of the MIT news item “Levels of the greenhouse gas methane begin to increase again.”

Within a couple of days the fraud had gone viral and spread to dozens and dozens of Denier sites and forums.

It is an obvious and ridiculous fraud and all anyone had to do was check the MIT news item to confirm that it was nonsense, but apparently none of the self-styled “skeptics” bothered to do so. It has already been debunked at “‘ain’t no global warming’ spin – from MIT??” so for the most part I won’t repeat that.

What I do want to point out is what it shows us about Deniers and the supposed “unsettled science”, specifically that Deniers:

1) misrepresent, distort, and lie;

2) do not understand even simple climate science;

3) do not remember their own scripts, contradicting one another and themselves;

4) far from being skeptics, they are are so ridiculously gullible it is pathetic.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Jennifer Marohasy‘s Denier1 Blog has published the climate change / global warming Deniers [Fanfare] “Ten of the Best Climate Research Papers (Nine Peer-Reviewed): A Note from Cohenite

OK, I count only seven peer reviewed, so we see that the Deniers are up to their usual standard of accuracy (and I haven’t actually checked them all yet). Actually there are several fun things about the list, but let’s start with:

Eli Rabett blogged about the list in “Believing ten impossible things before breakfast.”

Best of the Best

Best of the Best

Eli explains it in more detail and it is definitely worth checking out, but the nutshell version is that a number of the papers are mutually exclusive.

Put simply, if paper A is true, then B cannot be. So by accepting some of the papers as valid the Deniers are necessarily saying that others on the list are false. If they are false, why are they on the “ten best” list?

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Is the American Spectator trying to appeal to stupid people? to foster more stupidity? or to merely alienate the more intelligent segment of the conservative wing? I have to ask based on the recent article Climate Alarmism’s Flimsy Foundation by climate change / global warming Denier1 Paul Chesser published Oct 24th.

It’s not simply that the article is factually inaccurate, but rather that it is pathetically so. The quality of the alleged ‘research’ would be considered lame at a junior high school level, and frankly it insults the intelligence of an adult reader. It is so bad that one has to wonder what on Earth Chesser and the editors were thinking when they published this.

In the current US election there has been much talk of the attempt to appeal to the lowest common denominator, ie rather than reach out to ‘the base’, the politics appeals to and nurtures all that is base.  The worst kind of populism that does not seek to empower the common man, but rather to gain power through the mob.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

On October 14, 2008 Pielke posted ‘Dr. Richard Keen’s “Global Warming Quiz”

Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (ATOC) at the University of Colorado has a very interesting set of questions that he has posted with respect to global warming. It can be viewed at

http://atoc.colorado.edu/wxlab/atoc1050/1050%20ppt/Global%20warming%20quiz.ppt

His class website, which illustrates his expertise in atmospheric science, is at http://atoc.colorado.edu/wxlab/atoc1050/Syl1050F08.htm.

His global warming quiz is quite informative.”

Which raises some interesting, amazing, and (in)convenient questions.  Specifically, why would two scientists Picking Some Cherriesout themselves as corrupt or incompetent?

You would think it is the sort of thing that they would want to keep quiet. Certainly nothing to be proud of.

Why do I say that? Let’s have a look at Keen’s Quiz

We start with some blatant cherry picking of historical data with a collection of historical examples of warm periods and extreme weather events.  This is followed by quoting

Thomas Jefferson “A change in our climate however is taking place very sensibly. Both heats and colds are become much more moderate within the memory even of the middle-aged. Snows are less frequent and less deep.” — Notes on the State of Virginia, 1778“1 and similar quotes from American and British figures.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

So one of the great bastions of climate change / global warming ignorance is at it again. The National Post and Lorne Gunter in

Denier Cluster Fest

Denier Cluster Fest

particular  have been exposed repeatedly before (and here), but like Undead Zombies they simply rise again, this time with “Lorne Gunter: Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof“.

I apologise in advance for the rather lengthy nature of this post, but the Gunter piece is such a turgid example of the Gish Gallop that, as discussed before, it requires effort to untangle the nonsense.

“a string of news stories about scientists rejecting the orthodoxy on global warming” Really? Where? what scientists? No sources, no names, just his claim.

“it is hard for skeptical scientists to get published in the cabal of climate journals now controlled by the Great Sanhedrin of the environmental movement.” There are 6,400 peer reviewed science journals in the world spread across almost every nation and involving tens of thousands of scientists, and we are asked to believe that they are all controlled by the environmental movement? Does anyone with more than 2 neurons to rub together actually believe this? The unbelievable stupidity of this claim is discussed here (and earns him 40 points on the Crackpot Index).

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Does the right of freedom of speech extend to shouting “Hoax” on a burning planet? The climate change / global warming Deniers1 made much hysterical arm waving out of James Hansen’s “call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature” and David Suzuki’s call for Denier politicians to be “hold politicians legally accountable“, do the Deniers have a point?

If you check the Denialosphere’s version of both the Hansen interview and Suzuki’s comments the narrative is that both were calling for the criminalization of legitimate dissent, the suppression of freedom of speech, and the punishment of thought crimes. As Richard Littlemore notes, according to the Denialosphere  it is “environmental fascism,” “enviro-totalitarianism” and/or the beginning of an “enviro-inquisition.” Is that what really happened?

(more…)

Read Full Post »

In his latest update on Lord VoldeMonckton (“Monckton on the commie plot against him“) Tim Lambert over at Deltoid idly ponders what Monckton’s Crackpot score would be, thereby drawing my attention to John Baez’s The Crackpot Index.

It struck me that Lambert is right in that the index is very apropos, not just of Monckton but climate change / global warming Deniers1 generally. So much so that with only very minor edits it applies almost perfectly. I guess crackpots and wingnuts are pretty much the same everywhere.

To appreciate just how untouched this is I have put my edits from Baez’s original in bold. I have also removed some points entirely as they were not that applicable (not unsurprising since Physics is an older and more storied science than climate research, so there is much broader scope for crackpots).

Without further ado: “A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to climate science:”

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 65 other followers