OK, not really citation indexes so much as weekly round ups of the internet with respect to climate change. I thought it would be interesting to compare and contrast the Climate Rationalist news roundup with the Climate Change /Global Warming Denier1 equivalent, just to see what we’ve got.
Curiously, both are from Canada as am I. Not sure what that means, but I thought I’d note it.
H.E. Taylor’s excellent “Another Week of Climate Disruption News” pretty much speaks for itself; organized, sometimes annotated, and comprehensive. How this worthy gentleman finds the time I have no idea, but it is an invaluable tool, if somewhat intimidating.
I read it so that you don’t have to, so let’s look at what we’ve got:
Part One: Al Gore and Friends
This section is a full quarter of the Roundup and is devoted to irrelevant ad hominem’s on Al Gore, which is twice as much attention as is given to the alleged “real science” (Part 5, a priority only just ahead of some pop porn). The Denier obsession with Gore is definitely creepy. Some sort of Oedipal thing? repressed anger with a father figure? who knows?
Part Two: AGW Scaremongers and Propagandists
The lengthiest section, in which we get:
Links to news articles with snide and sarcastic comments (and some unbelievably juvenile attempts at humour “a man that wants to blow be Al Gore.”), but nothing of any substance to refute the content of the pieces linked.
Some of the links, such as “Greens really are scared of everything. Including 78 year-old retirees using walking sticks.” have nothing to do with either climate change or environmentalists.
Links to Denier Blogs, mostly Tom Nelson’s, which if you follow the links are also nothing more than links to news articles with a snide or sarcastic comment added but absolutely nothing of substance. We also get Nigel Calder’s ridiculous piece “Global warming is just propaganda“.
Part Three: Inconvenient Truths
I wish this got better, but it doesn’t. How this section differs from Part Two is a mystery as it is just more links to news articles and blogs.
The blogs are just as ridiculous and devoid of fact or even minimal comprehension of basic science (eg “The green sahara is proof that global warming is a hoax. Says a Sopranos wannabe.”). The news links are again annotated with misleading claims such as “British people agree, global warming scare is media hype.” linking an article that reports 40% skepticism among the British public.
As with the preceding section there are some filler articles that really have nothing to do with climate change, and nowhere do you find anything other than parroting the thoroughly debunked Denier Myths (see “Debunking Denier Nonsense links in the sidebar) such as Global Cooling
Part Four: AGW in the News
Unlike the previous two sections, this one consists of annotated links to … news articles and blogs. More of the same.
Part Five: Real Science
Finally … except there is hardly any. Half of the alleged science pointing to Antony Watt’s blog, and most of it concerning the thoroughly debunked solar nonsense. A link to an appalling “documentary” devoid of science (a blog on this one later).
A link to science showing that the Greenland melt is being caued by wind. Apparently Deniers can’t think through to the point of realizing that something has to make the wind warmer …
There is one link to a response to Tamino by Roy Spencer; this one would count as science.
Part Six: Global Hottie
Some cheesecake/soft porn. Mind you, no more irrelevant or devoid of fact or science than much of the content presented, so I guess it fits in.
Compare this drivel to H.E. Taylor’s weekly round up. I think both speak for themselves … each in their own way.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 8 … still no evidence.
1As I discuss here I do not use the term “Denier” to refer to all climate change doubters. Those who thoughtfully and intelligently address the facts I call ’skeptics’.
Those who irrationally deny the existence of the science and instead propagate the lies and distortions such as those discussed above and linked to the right under “Debunking Denier Nonsense” are “Deniers”.
The choice of the correct term is based on their actions, not their conclusions.