«

»

Did this disciple just let the cat out of the bag?

Richard Lindzen, an MIT professor, and an AGW advocate, seems to have really let the cat out of the bag recently, according to this See-BS, news article, where he points out:

MIT Professor Richard Lindzen is a leading international expert on climate change. “The changes that have occurred due to global warning are too small to account for,” he told WBZ-TV. “It has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with where we live.”

Lindzen endorses sensible preparedness and environmental protection, but sees what he terms “catastrophism” in the climate change horror stories.

“Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. The opportunities for taxation, for policies, for control, for crony capitalism are just immense, you can see their eyes bulge,” he says.

I bolded the important sections. Nobody here should doubt that I disagree with the professor on AGW, or whatever they call it these days. There is no such thing as an optimum or steady state temperature, a base requirement for you to make the argument that these changes are bad. The immutable fact I agree with the Climate cult on is that in nature things change, and they have been changing since this giant ball we live on got formed out of dust in space over 4 billion years ago. Climate or temperature is no exception. The planet went from being molten rock to having a solid surface. Oceans formed, weather came about, and it has drifted between heat that had palm tree like plants growing at the poles to temperatures so cold that we had mile high ice caps on the very same poles.

All this happened long before man. Between the sun, other radiation from space, the complex relationship between the oceans, the atmosphere, earth’s various energy retention systems, and the many mechanisms that move these energies around the globe – systems and mechanisms we barely understand as all the faulty modeling (I am being generous here because we all know that there was more manipulation to reach a desire result than faulty anything) by the cultists and their failed predictions proves – temperatures and climate managed to fluctuate so drastically that we would barely be able to recognize the planet from one age to the other.

And yet, for the last 30 or so years, after a couple of decades before that of the same types talking about another ice age, we have been told that the planet was going to turn into a waterworld, not because of nature, but because of man. So, queue in the big government types, and suddenly mother nature doesn’t matter. Lindzen finally admits that the real problem is the incestuous relationship between the grant seekers doing this research and the big government (the nanny state collectivists) types that see this as a means to frighten uninformed or misinformed people into giving up more of their freedoms, rights, and wealth.

Maybe we are finally getting somewhere, and we can finally get some real research, not intended to help collectivists scare the sheep into letting them set up their tyrannical and all controlling governments, but stuff that can help us separate the facts from the fiction. Of course, I suspect that grant money will dry up quickly once the nanny staters stop seeing the stuff they want. At least we can now, without a shadow of a doubt, point out the ludicrous position taken by the cutists that only anti-AGW is bad because that was financed by fossil fuel types. Nobody can outfund the nannys state collectivist Leviathan….. Heh!

29 comments

No ping yet

  1. Retluocc1 says:

    Lindzen is FAR from an AGW advocate. Rather, he is regularly shouted down and accused of being in the pocket of “Big Oil” for the fact that he dismisses the hyperbole coming from the TrueBelievers(tm) as a bunch of crap. What he’s said in this article is what he’s been saying for YEARS.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen

    “We’re talking of a few tenths of a degree change in temperature. None of it in the last eight years, by the way. And if we had warming, it should be accomplished by less storminess. But because the temperature itself is so unspectacular, we have developed all sorts of fear of prospect scenarios – of flooding, of plague, of increased storminess when the physics says we should see less.

    I think it’s mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves.”

    AND

    “Based on the weak argument that the current models used by the IPCC couldn’t reproduce the warming from about 1978 to 1998 without some forcing, and that the only forcing that they could think of was man. Even this argument assumes that these models adequately deal with natural internal variability—that is, such naturally occurring cycles as El Niño, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, etc.

    Yet articles from major modeling centers acknowledged that the failure of these models to anticipate the absence of warming for the past dozen years was due to the failure of these models to account for this natural internal variability. Thus even the basis for the weak IPCC argument for anthropogenic climate change was shown to be false.”

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  2. AlexInCT says:

    Lindzen is FAR from an AGW advocate.

    Hmmmm…

    MIT Professor Richard Lindzen is a leading international expert on climate change.

    I guess that line from the article in a pro-AGW publication confused me then. When the left’s mouthpieces tell you someone is an expert on something they like, it usually means that he says the things they want to hear. Or is your point because this guy is actually reasonable and more concerned with the verifyable science, getting the facts, understanding the reality and getting to the truth, using logic to get that all lined up, and also points out that the political class is abusing the whole AGW doomsday predictions, that he couldn’t or shouldn’t be conflated with members of the church of AGW, Retloucci1?

    The thing is this guys is dead on in making the connection between government grant money for this research, the scare mongering that follows by those that want to keep the money flowing, and the fact that there is defenitely a political component to the movement’s agenda.

    I am glad to see that coming out.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  3. Retluocc1 says:

    “he couldn’t or shouldn’t be conflated with members of the church of AGW”

    ^ Pretty much this… ^

    There’s no denying that he’s an expert in the field of climatology. His “sin” in the eyes of people like Gore, Hansen, Suzuki, and others has been that he essentially takes the position that:

    1 – The Earth is warming up, but it’s so small as to be barely detectable;
    2 – CO2 is increasing due to human activity, but it’s not a driving force for change in the climate;
    3 – We’re better off being prepared and working on plans for mitigating any problems that arise.

    I say he’s not an AGW “advocate” because to me that describes some one who is behind the giant money/power grab attempts from the UN and various political/media/environmental groups.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  4. AlexInCT says:

    I say he’s not an AGW “advocate” because to me that describes some one who is behind the giant money/power grab attempts from the UN and various political/media/environmental groups.

    Thanks for the clarification then sir. This guy is one of the people I will now follow dilligently. Especially sicne I worry he might be killed by drone strike for his heresy.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  5. Seattle Outcast says:

    Remember, when you talk against the chosen religion of libtard progressives, you are obviously “in the pocket” of somebody. Never mind the billions they rake in, it’s all for the cause and is therefore above reproach.

    Oddly enough, they’ve never actually been able to prove the rhetoric of ANYONE ever being “in the pocket” of anyone…

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  6. Hal_10000 says:

    Good Lord, Alex. Everything you say below the quote is simply wrong. We’ve discussed this endlessly. That global warming wasn’t invented in “the last 30 years”; warnings about it emerged in the 1920′s. That global cooling was a sideshow that never disputed the theory of global warming and was mostly dismissed by climate scientists. That sure natural change happens but it happens for reasons and there is no natural driver of change right now. We’ve gone over that territory numerous times.

    You’ve learned nothing. 6000 comments on this subject, multi-hundred comments every time this comes and you are still repeating the same factually false talking points you heard on Neal Boortz 20 years ago. Could you come up with an original argument at some point?

    As for Lindzen, I think he has a point on this. Climate sensitivity is converging at 0.15 deg/decade (which is three times his estimate, half of everyone else’s). The tendency to blame every heat wave and hurricane on global warming is a problem. And there are a bunch of politicians and corporatists chomping at the bit to milk this for money and power. I’ve detailed what I think needs to be done before.

    Interestingly, I was talking to some solar scientists at the conference last week who think we might be entering a Dalton Minimum … maybe even a Maunder minimum (although it will be decades before we can tell). This wouldn’t stop global warming — we’ve had the hottest decade in 2000 years while the Sun was in deep minimum. But it would slow it down significantly: decades depending on how deep the minimum is.

    That doesn’t mean we should ignore AGW:: it is most likely that we are NOT entering a minimum. But it’s yet another way to buy time on the climate.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6

      
  7. Hal_10000 says:

    Remember, when you talk against the chosen religion of libtard progressives, you are obviously “in the pocket” of somebody. Never mind the billions they rake in, it’s all for the cause and is therefore above reproach.

    The problem is on the pro-AGW side, you have thousands of scientists in multiple fields funded mostly by agencies that don’t care what the results of their research are. On the anti-AGW side you have a handful of guys who are getting money from organizations that do have a vested interest in what the results are.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

      
  8. AlexInCT says:

    Good Lord, Alex. Everything you say below the quote is simply wrong. We’ve discussed this endlessly. That global warming wasn’t invented in “the last 30 years”; warnings about it emerged in the 1920′s.

    Oh please, that’s revisionist history at best. And there was no fucking way anyone in the 30s blamed man for any kind of climate shit. They didn’t have that sort of hubris even in the USSR, and dictators certainly didn’t need the fear of a world gone haywire to sell tyranny.

    That global cooling was a sideshow that never disputed the theory of global warming and was mostly dismissed by climate scientists.

    More revisionist shit.

    That sure natural change happens but it happens for reasons and there is no natural driver of change right now.

    I call bullshit. The primary driver has and will always remain that giant ball of burning gas we see during the day time. And anyone that denies that is so full of shit its not worth having a serious discussion with them.

    We’ve gone over that territory numerous times.

    No, you cultists have been repeating that nonsense over and over and hoping that it sticks. I am not buying it, and am seeing with great joy how many people are finally wising up. This shit is a scam. One pushed and paid for by nanny state collectivist government agent hoping to use it as an excuse to justify tyrannical behavior we would otherwise never tolerate.

    There has been nothing but a giant circle jerk, based on a campaign of lies and obfuscation, financed by the biggest special interests on the planet – the nanny state governments – and I am glad it has been dying the deserving death it needs to die.

    The one fact that is certain is that these “climate scientists” have no clue what the fuck they are talking about, and the fact they are constantly horribly wrong proves it. That cult is dying. Go find another doomsday scenario to push and worship, please.

    Hot! Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

      
  9. AlexInCT says:

    Remember, when you talk against the chosen religion of libtard progressives, you are obviously “in the pocket” of somebody.

    The biggest special interest on this planet, bar none, are the collectivist nanny state governments that have paid for the people that compiled this campaign of lies, and the UN is their Vatican (or if you go by recent revelations, their Jonestown).

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3

      
  10. Hal_10000 says:

    Oh please, that’s revisionist history at best. And there was no fucking way anyone in the 30s blamed man for any kind of climate shit. They didn’t have that sort of hubris even in the USSR, and dictators certainly didn’t need the fear of a world gone haywire to sell tyranny.

    That’s because global warming isn’t a sinister communist tool to imprison humanity; it’s a scientific concept. I have linked Arrhenius’s paper that predicted global warming … in 1896. I have linked Callender’s papers before that provided the first proof of global warming … in 1938. This was such a mainstream concept that it was the basis of the movie Soylent Green in 1973. This is history. You and Sean Hannity come in and say, “No, fuck that. This was hatched in the 1970′s. Never mind the dozens of papers published on the subject! THIS IS MY REALITY!” That, my friend, is revisionism.

    Saying human beings can affect the environment isn’t hubris; it’s reality. There are seven billion of us. Saying we can do whatever the fuck we want and it will have no impact; ignoring the long history of creating oceanic dead zones, ozone holes, acid raid, deforestation, rivers that catch on fire, dust bowls, etc. … that’s fucking hubris.

    Keep sticking your fingers in your ears, Alex.

    The primary driver has and will always remain that giant ball of burning gas we see during the day time. And anyone that denies that is so full of shit its not worth having a serious discussion with them.

    Except there is zero connection between recent solar activity and temperature. If your bullshit solar theories were right, the temperature of the planet should have fallen significantly over the last decade as solar activity fell, not risen slightly. It should have been flat over the last forty years, not rising. News flash, Alex: WE STUDY THE SUN. We know what it’s doing. You act like thousands of climate scientists should slap themselves in the head and say, “OMG, we never thought about the Sun!” We account for the Sun. There is as much evidence that global temperature changes are being driven by the Sun as they are that it is being driven by broadcasts of I Love Lucy Episodes.

    The biggest special interest on this planet, bar none, are the collectivist nanny state governments that have paid for the people that compiled this campaign of lies, and the UN is their Vatican (or if you go by recent revelations, their Jonestown).

    Yes, all the thousands of people who work on this. They’re all part of the plot! They’re all UN worshippers, every single one! All of them are communists! And the conspiracy is so sounds that they’ve revised the laws of physics, math, electromagnetism, thermodynamics, molecular physics, orbital dynamics to conceal their tracks! Every day, all ten thousand of them get on a big telecon to decided how they are going to fool us today. Not a detail is missed, from the professor studying shellfish migrations in Maine to the marine biologist measuring ocean acid levels in Australia. Because all those tens of thousands of pieces of data that support global warming: glacier melt, sea ice levels, radiation signatures of the atmosphere, temperature levels, CO2 measurements, tree ring data, ocean content measures, deep ocean temperature measurements, upper atmospheric studies, upper and lower glacier measurements, weather station measurements, salinity measurements …. these don’t conspire themselves.

    Honestly, this is like debating with someone who believes in lizard people.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5

      
  11. Mook says:

    This wouldn’t stop global warming — we’ve had the hottest decade in 2000 years

    Hasn’t the earth’s temperature been dropping since 1998? Is that true or not? If true, then what’s with the “hottest decade in 2000 years” business?

    warnings about it emerged in the 1920′s.

    I’ve asked you for cites on this before and you produced nonsensical cites that did nothing to establish this “fact”, yet you repeat it over and over like a drone.. please repost your cite so that others can see the “proof” that you keep referring to regarding the 1920′s predictions. It’s as if facts don’t matter to you.. exactly the accusation you project onto others Hal.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

      
  12. Hal_10000 says:

    Hasn’t the earth’s temperature been dropping since 1998? Is that true or not?

    No. http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/12/16/global_warming_new_study_shows_pause_doesn_t_exist.html

    Here is Arrhenius’s 1896 paper: http://www.math.umn.edu/~mcgehee/Seminars/ClimateChange/references/Arrhenius1896-ocr.pdf

    Where he lays out the basics of carbon’s effects on the atmosphere.

    Here is Callendar’s 1938 paper:

    http://www.rmets.org/sites/default/files/qjcallender38.pdf

    By fuel combustion man has added about 150,000 million tons of carbon dioxide to the air during the past half century. The author estimates from the best available data that approximately three quarters of this has remained in the atmosphere.

    The radiation absorption coefficients of carbon dioxide and water vapour are used to show the effect of carbon dioxide on “sky radiation.” From this the increase in mean temperature, due to the artificial production of carbon dioxide, is estimated to be at the rate of 0.003°C. per year at the present time.

    The temperature observations a t zoo meteorological stations are used to show that world temperatures have actually increased at an average rate of 0.005°C. per year during the past half century.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  13. AlexInCT says:

    That’s because global warming isn’t a sinister communist tool to imprison humanity; it’s a scientific concept.

    All right man, thanks for that laugh. As I have repeatedly said: nothing I know of has done more to cause harm to the credibility of the scientific community than this AGW cult. These people fabricated data and models, lied about what was happening, predicted doom and gloom, and got everything you possibly could wrong, and yet, we are supposed to take them seriously? PUH-LEASE!

    I have linked Arrhenius’s paper that predicted global warming … in 1896. I have linked Callender’s papers before that provided the first proof of global warming … in 1938. This was such a mainstream concept that it was the basis of the movie Soylent Green in 1973. This is history. You and Sean Hannity come in and say, “No, fuck that. This was hatched in the 1970′s.

    I can link the bible, the koran, and numerous other religious text that also predict the end of the world and have a huge following with the same fervor as the church of AGW has, but for some reason I suspect you will both miss the irony and the parallel I am trying to make. Shit, I remember reading a ton of global cooling shit in the 70s and 80s, in the Scientific American of al publications (back when it actually wasn’t hijacked by the cultists), and people have been predicting global cooling for far longer than they have predicted warming, but you dismiss that as if those predictions are just quackery.

    Saying human beings can affect the environment isn’t hubris; it’s reality. There are seven billion of us.

    Only in the small minds of people that traded one religion and its doomsday prediction for another. I have seen absolutely zero proof that what the church of AGW claims is true. Yes there has been warming, but that warming was done by the sun. Some idiots have glommed to CO2, because they can then pretend the issue is manmade, and ignore everything else, including all the historical determinants for warming and cooling, and suddenly that’s proof? Fuck, for someone with some kind of scientific background your bar is awfully low dude. Me, having done some work as an engineer and now as a developer, I have zero tolerance for fabricated bullshit. The first time I see you made up shit and your predictions are wrong, I am off that bandwagon. How many times must these people be exposed for frauds before you call it quit?

    And what does 7 billion mean in the scheme of things? If you need proof of how arrogant people that believe man has a bigger impact than nature on climate are, just research the after effects of the Mt. Pinatubo volcano’s eruption back in 1991. Even NASA admitted that that single eruption did more to climate than supposed decades of anything man made did. Nature is the most efficient and unforgiving self-correcting mechanism. One day it might just wipe all 7 billion of us out, and not even blink. There is neither an optimum temperature nor an equilibrium point, which both have to be accepted to take the AGW cultists seriously.

    Except there is zero connection between recent solar activity and temperature.

    No Hal, what we have is people claiming that there is zero connection, using a biased peer review system that only allows the kind of research outcomes they like to be published, and accusing anyone else that points out otherwise to be in league with evil fossil fuel money grubbers to discredit them. That’s what we have had for going on 30 years now. Big difference.

    Yes, all the thousands of people who work on this. They’re all part of the plot!

    It’s called a steady paycheck and left leaning big government loving twits. Colleges produce these types by default these days, and I have seen research types sell their souls for far less. This is one massive gravy train that is on tour as long as they put out what the governments throwing billions at this want to see as results. The point of my post was precisely this: the biggest special interest on the planet is the one funding the AGW cult’s hysteria, but that – despite the fact that it is but one of the plethora of issues, albeit one of the biggest ones, that tar this unscientific quasi-religious movement’s dubious and politically motivated agenda and is the source of practically all research funding – is not reason to suspect anything is wrong. Yeah, sure. I am the one being unscientific and kooky about this.

    If funding from fossil fuel interests tainted the work form anti-AGW researchers, please explain to me why government funding for pro-AGW research should not be subjected to the same level of taint (if not more since government can always outspend the fossil fuel types by orders of magnitude)? Especially considering how much the ever expanding nanny state has gained and stands to gain because of this bullshit. What? Because it is government it is pure as the driven snow? Hmmmm…

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

      
  14. Mook says:

    Thanks for the cite on Arrhenius 1896 paper, which is a different source than I’ve seen you produce in the past. Arrhenius’ wiki description says that he was also a eugenicist, which must have been “settled science” back then.. he was not a climate scientist, it was considered a hobby. His models were wrong then, just as most climate models are wrong now. He suggested that carbon gases have an effect, he even advocated more carbon gases in the atmosphere.

    Love the “scientific” Slate paper. Earth temperature are warming, because unaccounted temperatures went into “unforeseen” heat sinks in the oceans (which were not previously considered in the models) and now unforeseen “polar vortexes”.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

      
  15. Hal_10000 says:

    So Mook, you respond with an ad hominem on Arrhenius (whose models were based on calculations done with pencil and paper) and laugh at Slate which linked several scientific papers disputing the so-called pause in global warming. Alex, I link several paper on global warming that prove you were completely full of shit in claiming AGW was invented in the 1970′s, you respond with some wild-eye raving about the bible. You also make claims about Pinatubo that are unsupported by the link and claim a connection between solar activity and the sun with no evidence at all. Just a vague claim that “they” are concealing the evidence (by making it publicly available?)

    This is why I’m not debating the subject anymore with you guys. I’m debating facts, data, a history of climate science and thousands of pieces of information. You’re debating 1990′s radio talking head talking points. I know those point; I believed them. And then I found out that they were a bunch of crap.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

      
  16. Hal_10000 says:

    eugenicist, which must have been “settled science” back then

    Eugenics: undermined by a century of data.

    Global warming: supported by a century of data.

    See the difference?

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6

      
  17. Mook says:

    Eugenics: undermined by a century of data.

    Global warming: supported by a century of data

    If global warming, that is man-made global warming, is “supported” by a century of data, then why have the scientists in support of that theory been unable to create a model that can accurately predict climate with any degree of certainty? That, by definition, is testing their hypotheses.. their failures are self evident to anyone with eyes willing to see.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

      
  18. CM says:

    Mook, not being able to create a prediction that matches up 100% with what happens doesn’t mean the model is wrong or that any hypothesis has failed (unless the hypothesis is that they must be 100% correct, but that is the ‘proof’ of mathematics, not science).

    If you go are told you have terminal cancer is the diagnoses a ‘failure’ unless they can tell you the time and date you’re going to die, and precisely what will cause your heart to stop?

    The processes and outcomes are supported by a century worth of data, much of which is overlapping.

    Climate is about long term trends, and we certainly do have a degree of certainty over that. We also have a very good idea of why it’s happening, and no other plausible alternative explanation that comes even remotely close to matching up. Those who don’t accept the science need to come up with a reasonable alternative that fits if they want to be taken seriously. Saying “it’s the sun” (as Alex does) is the opposite of a reasonable alternative. It’s transparent and clumsy nonsense.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

      
  19. AlexInCT says:

    Mook, not being able to create a prediction that matches up 100% with what happens doesn’t mean the model is wrong or that any hypothesis has failed (unless the hypothesis is that they must be 100% correct, but that is the ‘proof’ of mathematics, not science).

    I would settle for them getting even 5% of things right, which they have not. We are not talking about them getting some things wrong, within some reasonable margins of error, unless we allow 95% or higher margins. Please stop pretending that there are just a few things they have gotten wrong. They have gotten it so fucking wrong, by orders of magnitude, that the only real thing we can take away from how wrong they are is that they have no fucking clue what they are doing or talking about.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      
  20. CM says:

    I would settle for them getting even 5% of things right, which they have not.

    See that’s just nonsense. And yet you’ll just keep saying it as though it’s true. Which is why Hal just gives up. You don’t actually want to discuss this. This whole topic is just a vehicle for you to bang on about your overall narrative.

    We are not talking about them getting some things wrong, within some reasonable margins of error, unless we allow 95% or higher margins.

    No of course we’re not, in fact we can’t possibly talk about anything that makes any sense. Apparently.

    Please stop pretending that there are just a few things they have gotten wrong. They have gotten it so fucking wrong, by orders of magnitude, that the only real thing we can take away from how wrong they are is that they have no fucking clue what they are doing or talking about.

    And yet you cannot demonstrate this AT ALL. Not even remotely. Because, as you keep clearly demonstrating with your sun nonsense, you have no fucking clue what you are doing or talking about. You demonstrate this EVERY time it comes up. And EVERY time someone calls you on your cluelessness, you just revert to these same old tired empty vague claims. YAWN. Get a new record Alex, you broke this one years ago.

    BTW Happy New Year to you and everyone else here. I’ve been absent for the best part of the last month as it’s summer and there are obviously better things to do than this ;-) Anyway, all the best to everyone for a successful 2014, whatever that might mean to you.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7

      
  21. AlexInCT says:

    See that’s just nonsense.

    Yeah, it is because you say so. The fact however that nothing they have predicted has come to pass, in fact things have actually moved the other way, and that they have gotten it all wrong is just me saying so.

    Your faith is so strong CM.

    BTW Happy New Year to you and everyone else here.

    Same to you dude. Hope all is well with you.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  22. CM says:

    “Yeah, it is because you say so.”

    That’s PRECISELY the argument you’re trying to use. As if it were an argument. If you disagree then please show me where you’ve done ANYTHING else.

    “The fact however that nothing they have predicted has come to pass, in fact things have actually moved the other way, and that they have gotten it all wrong is just me saying so.”

    It is EXACTLY that unless you can adequately support it with evidence.

    “Your faith is so strong CM.”

    My faith in what you will do when it comes to this subject is indeed unwavering. And I’ve never been let down. Including your claim that I rely on ‘faith’ – which always makes zero sense. As for the actual topic – I do place a reasonable degree of trust in the scientific method to ultimately tell us about our world. But yours is NOTHING but faith (in fraud and conspiracy, never to actually be established, always to be an ‘accepted truth’), which is why you can never successfully back up anything you claim. It’s ALWAYS ALL just claims. Which is why Hal gives up. There is no discussion to be had with anyone who deals only in conspiracy nonsense and when they do dip their toes in the science display such stunning ignorance like you did again with “the sun did it”.

    Thanks. All is excellent here thanks, even though we have the tail of a cyclone going through.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

      
  23. AlexInCT says:

    That’s PRECISELY the argument you’re trying to use. As if it were an argument. If you disagree then please show me where you’ve done ANYTHING else.

    You are priceless dude. You must be brain damaged to miss the facts. Your cult got caught cheating and making up shit. In any serious scientific circle that’s the end of anything trying to claim to be driven by the scientific process and principle. You and the cultists pretend that the cheating and manipulation doesn’t matter, or worse, that even though there is blatant cheating and manipulation, you want to keep acting as if you have ground to stand on. Non of the models pan out. In fact, we find out they are rigged to produce the same result regardless of input. You and the cult tell us this is not important because the predictions will bear out the fact the models are right. The predictions all fall flat. You and the cultists tell us that you are still right and have ground to stand on.

    But yeah, I am the one saying stuff without any reason. As I already mentioned: your faith is strong man.

    t is EXACTLY that unless you can adequately support it with evidence.

    You have no shame right? Next you will tell me that despite the fact that other doomsday cultists that predicted the end of the earth coming incorrectly, they are still right, because I have failed to prove they have gotten this wrong. Because that’s what you are doing here. You are beyond a caricature.

    My faith in what you will do when it comes to this subject is indeed unwavering.

    You mean point out that your cult is neither scientific, interested in the scientific process or method, is a bunch of crooks and liars, can’t get shit right, or really interested in anything but a political agenda? Cause that’s what I am doing, and the tide has turned my way. With the exception of the usual members of the priesthood and the hard core fanatics of the political agenda like you, most others are catching on and abandoning the sinking ship.

    As I pointed out numerous times: find a new doomsday/end of world scenario that your kind can blame on man, and use that to scare people into letting your kind expand the powers of an already bloated and corrupt government system, because this AGW cult is cooked.

    Enjoy!

    Thanks. All is excellent here thanks, even though we have the tail of a cyclone going through.

    We practically had zero hurricanes this year on my side. Been an interesting and frighteningly cold winter here and things are even worse. Snow again the next 2 days with scary temperatures. The people who I work with all are complaining about how much they have to pay to keep their houses warm. I am happy with 62 degrees F (I walk around in shorts) and still have used more oil for heating than the last 2 years combined, and my house is super efficient. Most have seen a doubling in what they have paid in the coldest of the last 5 years or more. I bet this will not be the last really fucked up cold winter either, and that next year will be worse.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      
  24. Hal_10000 says:

    You must be brain damaged to miss the facts. Your cult got caught cheating and making up sh

    False. See? Climategate was debunked years ago. A dozen investigations looked into it, including ones by global warming deniers. Here I write about BEST, which looked at all the temperature records and reached the same conclusion: http://right-thinking.com/2011/10/21/berkeley-results/

    (And no one ever alleged that they were faking data, incidentally.)

    You guys admitted this was right. You accepted that temperatures were rising. But because of your pathological need to oppose AGW, you reflexively go back to square one and say, “DUDE, CLIMATEGATE! FAAAAKE!” Nothing ever gets resolved. It’s a game of whack-a-mole because you guys don’t give a shit about evidence, science, data. What you care about is that a bunch of hairy hippies and Algore have to be wrong! They just have to be! And so you will grasp at any straw, embrace any crackpot, flaunt any theory as long as AGW is a big hoax.

    I would settle for them getting even 5% of things right, which they have not

    The global warming models do a far better job than your theory of “it’s the Sun!” which has negative percent correct predictions (i.e, everything it has predicted was wrong). (This being when you’re no longer pretending temperatures aren’t rising and are pretending the theory is wrong).

    “Climategate! Faking data!”
    “Here’s all the investigations plus BEST showing the temperature data is correct.”
    “OK, but it’s the Sun!”
    “Here is the comparison of AGW to solar models and AGW does a far better job of predicting temps.”
    “Climategate! Faking data! Algore turned me into a newt!”

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5

      
  25. CM says:

    ^ Exactly.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4

      
  26. Mook says:

    Here I write about BEST, which looked at all the temperature records and reached the same conclusion: http://right-thinking.com/2011/10/21/berkeley-results/

    (And no one ever alleged that they were faking data, incidentally.)

    You guys admitted this was right.

    Who can say with certainty that BEST was “right”? You certainly can’t.. neither can I. Is it, or is it not true that BEST’s ocean temps were measured by only something like a total of 3,000 buoys worldwide? You think that’s even close to adequate given how much ocean covers the earth?

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

      
  27. CM says:

    You’re referring to the Argo (FuckYourself) network, and the number is now up to 3611. Here is a map of where they are:
    http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/index.html

    This is a discussion about the original design details, including a discussion of the location and required number (they determine that average spacing of 3o by 3o would work to satisfy “both the requirement for sampling global anomalies in temperature and heat storage (Section IIIa above) and also provides reasonable signal-to-error characteristics for sampling large-scale oceanic variability corresponding to the global altimetric data”).
    http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/argo-design.pdf

    So what would be ‘adequate’ or ‘close to adequate’ if 3000 isn’t? Has someone actually demonstrated that 3611 isn’t enough, or does it just ‘feel’ insufficient?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

      
  28. Mook says:

    So what would be ‘adequate’ or ‘close to adequate’ if 3000 isn’t? Has someone actually demonstrated that 3611 isn’t enough, or does it just ‘feel’ insufficient?

    Yes, you ignorant turd, any thinking person would think that 3,600 or 36,000 would be insufficient given the incredible size of our planets’ ocean. Glad to see you reveal yourself as an unthinking, unquestioning idiot once again. Congratulations!

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

      
  29. CM says:

    Right, it’s a “feeling”. Thanks for confirming. And re-confirming your position with yet more ad hominem.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

      

Comments have been disabled.