The Real Climate Wiki
On Greenfyre
Great sites Debunking Denier Myths*
- A Thorough Debunking
- Climate change controversies: a simple guide
- Climate change debate summary
- Climate Change Myths
- Climate Change: A guide for the perplexed
- Common Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics
- Debunking the Urban Legends of Climate Change
- How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic
- Real Climate Wiki
- Response to common contrarian arguments
- Skeptical Science
- Slamming the Climate Skeptic Scam
- TEN POPULAR MYTHS About Global Climate Change
- Climate Denial Crock of the Week
On Greenfyre
By Denier
- Bellamy, David: David Bellamy: victim! but of who?
- Gunter, Lorne: Lorne Gunter and the “National Pest” Debunked … Again
- Johnson, Paul: The Nonsense of Paul Johnson: The Dunning-Kruger Effect on Display
- Keen, Richard: Climate Change and Picking Cherries with Richard Keen
- Monckton, Christopher: Night of the Climate Change Denier Undead
- Spencer, Roy: Skeptic’ scientist is CENSORED! … or not.
By Myth
“Myth: Global Warming stopped in 1998” (video below)
- 1970s global cooling: More Climate Denier Undead Zombie “Science”
Myth “Scientific consensus in 1970s of global cooling” (video below)
- CO2 Lag: Mind prisons and prisms: CO2 lag and Global Warming
- Conspiracy Theories: Denier Conspiracy Theories: More Paranoid Than Thou
- Climate realists as Alarmists: Paul Revere – Alarmist!
- The Oregon Petition 30,000 Scientists signed a petition
- NOT Sparta – Inhofe and the 400
Myth: “It’s the Sun” (video below)
*Did I miss any good sites that debunk Denier Myths? Please add them as a comment and I will incorporate them. Thanks.
This page has the following sub pages.
Greenfyre's 
My web site http://www.Lomborg-errors.dk might be relevant. Please notice that it contains also a section on Al Gore´s “An inconvenient truth”, and compares the number of errors made by Gore and Lomborg.
Kåre Fog
—-
This is a wonderful gathering of important sites.
But it is not the whack-jobs that I fear the most – it is the institutions and trade organizations that feed and nurture this ideology.
Note the API propaganda site of http://energytomorrow.org
It flirts with global warming acceptance, but wrongly inserts energy (carbon energy) as the solution to our future.
thanks for all that you do
—-
DELETED
Posting the same comment in two entirely different threads is spamming.
Besides which, comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change belong in the “Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread.
S2
Everything posted by John O’Sulllivan is completely wrong and dishonest. It is this type of behaviour which should be controlled.
When we make a mistake in life, we learn, we forgive ourselves or we are forgiven by others — then we move forward and sin no more. If we continue in our ignorant misbehavior, then society must step in to correct, protect, educate or punish.
This fosters civilization – because we know that we gain knowledge and correct behavior we will assure the common good.
This all depends on knowing and discovering our errors. We must know the consequences and worth of our actions – and this includes discovering all the science behind anything that affects others.
If someone hurts me by accident, and he corrects and discovers his error, then I am more open to forgiveness. I may excuse the error – since a new lesson has been learned – and by learning – we each will have an improved future.
However, if a third party injects itself into the perverse role of preventing knowledge, inducing skepticism or otherwise hindering earning from our mistakes – then that is beyond bad, beyond sin – into deep evil.
Encouraging commercial misbehavior by encouraging such ignorance harms us all.
The escalation of uncivilized anti-science — by individuals, organizations or shills are easy to recognize and will not be forgotten.
DELETED for Violation of Comment Policy
Comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change belong in the Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread.
If you can’t be honest then you should either keep quiet or live by the consequences.
You are a nasty denier troll who is cutting and pasting dishonest garbage.
I am a scientist and when I see science and scientists treated in the manner you and you lying band of deniers are using I will call you on it every time.
If the moderator thinks I have gone too far, so be it, but my comments will still stand in the minds of honest people who are trying to untangle the web of deceit you are weaving.
We should not delude ourselves in thinking that any political or economic policy will do very much to influence the laws of thermodynamics.
But just to be fair to the future generations, who may actually want to survive, we should be honest about the causes.
We have been popping off industrial CO2 like a billion terrorists firing rifles into the air. Now the bullets are starting to fall back to earth, and we are scrambling to ignore it or blame someone else.
The Suicide Bummers. And the very worst are those delusional coaches who deny the consequences and exhort continued carbon consumption.
Interesting times for our species as we desperately struggle to learn how to look at the future.
DELETED for Violation of Comment Policy
Comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change belong in the Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread.
DELETED for Violation of Comment Policy
Comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change belong in the Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread.
[Edit]
What I seek to draw attention to is the undermining of the credibility of computer models because they treat the Earth as if the Second Law doesn’t apply. But we DO NOT live in a model with a closed environment. Earth exists in an open environment so that all the rules of entropy apply here.
[Edit]
—-
Thanks for not deleting Mr. O’Sullivan’s hilarious demonstration why he is (or claims to be) the world’s most popular science writer on the “global warming hoax.” His work indeed is followed by hordes of global warming deniers, who would rather live in a world governed by the laws of comic book science.
For the last 6 months, I’ve been unraveling the huge web of lies this humbug has been weaving across the Internet. Now that a formal inquiry by the Law Society of British Columbia has been completed, I will be placing on my web site the evidence I’ve gathered that shows Mr. O’Sullivan is an utter humbug who’s been promoting himself and his gang of “Sky Dragon Slayer “scientists” through fraudulent academic and professional credentials. For example, Mr. O’Sullivan is:
NOT an attorney employed by Pearlman Lindholm as a legal consultant;
NOT an attorney representing fellow humbug Tim Ball in the Supreme Court of British Columbia;
NOT an attorney with more than a decade of successful litigation in New York State and Federal 2nd District Courts;
NOT a member of the American Bar Association;
NOT a member of the New York County Lawyers Association;
NOT the author of the two climate articles he claims to have written in the National Review;
NOT the author of articles in Forbes magazine;
NOT now or was ever licensed to practice law in New York courts;
NOT licensed to practice law in British Columbia;
NOR apparently in any other courts.
In addition, Mr. O’Sullivan first reported he earned his law degree from University College, Cork, Ireland. He now contradicts that by claiming he earned his law degree from the University of Surrey in the UK — while he actually was earning a degree in art from another — West Surrey College of Art and Design!
After earning his degree from West Surrey, he went for teacher training to become a gym, sports, or athletics teacher and worked for some 20 years as a school teacher teaching presumably gym or athletics (and/or possibly art).
Around 2009-2010, Mr. O’Sullivan launched his “new career” as a “science writer” and “legal analyst.” He found his niche as a high-profile hit man seeking to destroy the reputations and careers of climate scientists and soon began awarding himself academic and professional credentials to help sell himself and his shamelessly false, often defamatory attacks.
The quote you saved above shows why he really should be calling himself a “science re-writer” — since for the past 2 years he has been quite busy rewriting the laws of science.
The “rewrite” above is nearly as funny as the discourse he gave to LinkedIn’s Science and Technology Writers Group, in which he lectured how a scientific theory becomes a law of science after it’s repeatedly tested and proven true.
That guffaw-inspiring puffery is almost matched by his pontification below about how a scientific “theory must provide the proof.” It’s a good thing no one told Einstein that, since he never, ever provided any of the proof that firmly established his revolutionary theories of Relativity.
And then he ignoramusly twists the relationship between hypothesis and theory: “If the theory makes a prediction, which it must to not simply be a hypothesis, and the prediction is wrong then the theory is discarded.”
As disreputable and harmful as Mr. O’Sullivan is, I have to admit he is great entertainment.
Ooooh’Sullivan, calling a spade a spade and calling a liar, troll, shill a liar, troll, shill is not name calling. It is merely telling everyone th etruth abot how you behave.
If yopu do not like to be exposed for what you are the nstart acting honestly.
Ooooh’Sullivan said:
That is ironic since it is you who is doing the lying by distorting the work of honest scientists. Somehow I don’t believe a word you say so stop all the lies and distortions.
The rest of your post is just a regurgitation of denier talking points all of which are either lies or gross distortions of actual scientific findings.
What ever you did at University (assuming you are actually telling the truth for once) it obviously was as far removed from science as one can get. Your post is so full of scientific garbage that I am sure that other deniers are wishing you would go away since you are so utterly devoid of even a modicum of scientific literacy (note: just using large words and scientific terms in a post does not translate into science; I doubt very much that you even know what 5% of the terms you so glibly throw out actually mean).
Since you are able to use a computer why don’t you use a few (usually unused in your case) neurons and find out for yourself about climate, temperature, carbon dioxide and glaciation in the Ordovician? I am not involved in that field but I was able to find your answer in less than five minutes. Are you really that stupid or is that just an act to try and attract sympathy from other deniers?
The rest of your posts are just complete lies and distortions (e.g. “that temps decreased by 0.65 to 0.75 degrees C. over the past year”).
Your last post shows that you know nothing about either the Laws of Thermodynamics or what entropy is. [1]
You are a pathetic troll. I suggest you go away and learn some science before showing how ignorant of the subject you are. Have you heard of the Dunning Kuger effect? You are one of the finest candidates to show what DK syndrome is all about.
—-
[…] Denier Myths […]
Alarmists who plug the dodgy theory of man made global warming are not applying the scientific method. Scientists all know that the science must stand on its own.
In science the burden of proof is on the theory.
The theory must provide the proof.
If the theory makes a prediction, which it must to not simply be a hypothesis, and the prediction is wrong then the theory is discarded.
That is part of the scientific method. [1]
The AGW theory predicts that CO2 causes global warming.
CO2 is higher now then it was in 1998.
Average global temperature has been declining since 1998 [2]
The prediction made by the theory is wrong therefore the AGW theory must be discarded. [3]
QED. [4]
It is called the scientific method. It only takes one wrong result to discard a theory.
‘No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.’ Albert Einstein [5]
—-
John O’Sullivan has no credibility:
http://globalwarmingsuperheroes.com/bad-guy-of-the-week/bad-guy-of-the-week-john-osullivan/
He’s one of the bad guys.
GG
John O’Sullivan is a humbug with fabricated credentials on his many online resumes and profiles.
O’Sullivan is leader of a group of global warming deniers who call themselves Sky Dragon Slayers (and have authored a book titled “Slaying the Sky Dragon”).
He claims to be a science writer with major articles published worldwide including in National Review and Forbes magazine — he’s lying. He hasn’t published any article in either publication.
When repeatedly challenged to cite ANY article he published in those magazines, he finally provided links to two articles published in National Review. An investigation showed that the articles were actually published by the magazine’s editor-at-large John O’Sullivan — not this global warming-denying humbug.
He claims to be a lawyer with more than a decade of successful litigation in New York and Federal 2nd District courts. He is not license to practice law in NY or the 2nd District Federal courts and I have not been able to find any evidence that he is a lawyer licensed to practice anywhere. Nor have I been able to find any record of law suits he filed or defended in which he prevailed.
He claims to be a member of the American Bar Association (which would mean that he is an attorney licensed to practice in the U.S.) He is lying. He recently joined the ABA as an associate — a non-member affiliation that is open to everyone with or without any legal training.
He claims to be an attorney defending fellow denier Tim Ball in two libel suits filed against him in the Supreme Court of British Columbia by two climate scientists. He is not. He is not licensed to practice law in British Columbia (or anywhere else that I’ve been able to find).
For more information, see my book review of Slaying the Sky Dragon on Amazon.com and the more recent posts to Judith Curry’s web site, “Slaying a Greenhouse Dragon:
http://www.amazon.com/Slaying-Sky-Dragon-Greenhouse-Theory/product-reviews/0982773412/ref=cm_cr_dp_synop?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#R2EG81R2VBZA75
http://judithcurry.com/2011/01/31/slaying-a-greenhouse-dragon
The 3 videos under “Global Cooling” aka Climate change stopped in 1998″ have bad links or just don’t exist
Wow if warming stopped in 1998, how is it we just had the warmest decade in 134 years and 2013 was tied for the fourth warmest year globally in 134 years. get a grip
[…] Denier Myths Debunked. […]