EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Fri Nov 28, 2014 10:32 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 530 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 ... 36  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:01 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
Fence sitters we all know this has been going on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/enviro ... -data.html

Quote:
When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).


Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed “Data tampering at USHCN/GISS”, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on “fabricated” data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.


When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous “hockey stick” graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:49 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Take note fence sitters.

http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpres ... -findings/

Quote:
Receding Swiss Glaciers Reveal 4000 Year Old Forests – Warmists Try To Suppress Findings


Of course that's what the Cultist knuckle draggers know how to do when the science is not on their side. Impune, suppress, bully, and they'll get around to out right character assassination on this guy when they can.

Quote:
Dr. Christian Schlüchter’s discovery of 4,000-year-old chunks of wood at the leading edge of a Swiss glacier was clearly not cheered by many members of the global warming doom-and-gloom science orthodoxy.

This finding indicated that the Alps were pretty nearly glacier-free at that time, disproving accepted theories that they only began retreating after the end of the little ice age in the mid-19th century. As he concluded, the region had once been much warmer than today, with “a wild landscape and wide flowing river.”

Dr. Schlüchter’s report might have been more conveniently dismissed by the entrenched global warming establishment were it not for his distinguished reputation as a giant in the field of geology and paleoclimatology who has authored/coauthored more than 250 papers and is a professor emeritus at the University of Bern in Switzerland.


Now fence sitters this is important because the whole Cultist house of cards will fall with one fact. It has been warmer in the past before man could have possibly been responsible. Nature or natural variability is the best possible answer to explain how it could have been warmer than today in the past. The Cultist can't have that. That is one of two things Mann et al was all about. Erase the Midevil Warming Period. They can't admit that it was warmer in the past.

Quote:
Regarding IPCC integrity with strong suspicion, Schlüchter recounts a meeting in England that he was “accidentally” invited to which was led by “someone of the East Anglia Climate Center who had come under fire in the wake of the Climategate e-mails.”

As he describes it: “The leader of the meeting spoke like some kind of Father. He was seated at a table in front of those gathered and he took messages. He commented on them either benevolently or dismissively.”

Schlüchter’s view of the proceeding took a final nosedive towards the end of the discussion. As he noted: “Lastly it was about tips on research funding proposals and where to submit them best. For me it was impressive to see how the leader of the meeting collected and selected information.”

As a number of other prominent climate scientists I know will attest, there’s one broadly recognized universal tip for those seeking government funding. All proposals with any real prospects for success should somehow link climate change with human activities rather than to natural causes. Even better, those human influences should intone dangerous consequences.

Schlüchter warns that the reputation of science is becoming more and more damaged as politics and money gain influence. He concludes, “For me it also gets down to the credibility of science . . . Today many natural scientists are helping hands of politicians, and are no longer scientists who occupy themselves with new knowledge and data. And that worries me.”

Yes. That should worry everyone.


"Helping hands of politicians." I have to write that one down. That's good.

Keep a sharp eye out fence sitters. No doubt this guy is next on the Cultist's Climate McCarthyism hit parade.


A blog making assumptions about the reactions of others being quoted by other blogs? Where is the actual report of the finding or the paper which would have been published on the subject?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:56 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Fence sitters we all know this has been going on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/enviro ... -data.html

Quote:
When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).


Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed “Data tampering at USHCN/GISS”, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on “fabricated” data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.


When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous “hockey stick” graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology.


A "journalist" (using that title very loosely) quotes a random blogger as if there was some real information provided rather than assumptions pulled out of the air.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:15 am 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
18,000 hits. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

Fence sitters this is a good one in honor of 18,000

http://www.principia-scientific.org/bre ... sider.html

Quote:
‘Steven Goddard,’ the man behind ‘Real Science,’ a prominent anti-global warming blog, admits his real identity is Tony Heller, a former US government climate modeler. whistleblowerHeller broke the astonishing news on his website (June 27, 2014) declaring he is a life-long committed environmentalist sickened by the orchestrated campaign of misinformation pumped out by governments.

Among a list of gripes Heller writes, “The claims of 97% consensus are a massive lie. Only 52% of American Meteorological Society members believe that man is the primary contributor to global warming.”


Quote:
But without doubt the greatest of Heller's revelations from the climate modelling community is that it is well known by insiders that increases in levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide will not cause global warming.

He explains, “The radiative transfer models used by government climate scientists show that going up to 550 PPM or even 1000 PPM CO2 will make minimal difference to the radiative balance of the atmosphere. The knee of the CO2 curve is at about 30 PPM, and additional CO2 has little first order effect. This is because almost all radiation in the CO2 absorption spectra is already being absorbed by H2O or CO2 molecules. Adding more CO2 has minimal effect, because there is not much radiation left to be absorbed. (This is a bit of an oversimplification because of second order effects, but those are also small.) There is no indication from the radiative transfer models used by government scientists that additional CO2 will cause large amounts of heating.”


Quote:
Such a disclosure from a former government insider serves as a powerful endorsement of the findings of independent scientists at Principia Scientific International (PSI). In recent times PSI has been gaining recognition for representing independent experts from the “hard” sciences who say their own specialities show no evidence that atmospheric CO2 can “trap” heat or impact global temperatures.

Using real world evidence rather than junk climate models skeptics show that the climate 'science' community is wrong for blaming humans for changes in climate that are entirely normal. Heller's revelations affirm that alarmist scenarios cooked up in official US government climate models have all the ingredients of junk science, intentional fakery and group think.

But real science relies on the traditional scientific method where actual data trumps computer models every time. Among those who still hold to such methods is noted Chemistry expert, Dr Darko Butina.

On the very same day Heller blew the whistle Dr Butina's latest papers also prove what climate science insiders know: that H2O (water) in tandem with N2 (nitrogen) and O2 (oxygen) control the amount of heat energy received from the sun. They serve as Earth’s real thermostat - not carbon dioxide a trace gas which is an entirely innocent player in climate change. [1]

Global Temperature Records Fraudulently Altered to Create Warming Trend

Heller pulls no punches as to what he saw while working on the inside as government climate science worker. His revelations also confirm the long-held suspicion of skeptics that there has been a systematic conspiracy of criminal manipulation of the official temperature records.

Heller laments, “The temperature record of both the US and the world has been massively altered since older versions, almost invariably to create the appearance of more warming, and in some cases to create warming where there is none.”


Fence sitters I have used "Steven Goddard" a couple of times here on this board, and the Cultists always attack him as a no name blogger who doesn't have any credibility. Well, now we know who he is. I suggest you go back and read his stuff all over again. :lol:

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:29 am 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
Here is Goddard's (Heller) entire post. NO doubt some here will try to pick this apart and take it out of context. This man will have to be destroyed by the Cultists folks. Destroyed.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014 ... n-goddard/

Quote:
Posted on June 27, 2014 by stevengoddard


My name is Tony Heller. I am a whistle blower. I am an independent thinker who is considered a heretic by the orthodoxy on both sides of the climate debate.

I live in Columbia, Maryland – an amazing city where I can ride my bicycle everywhere through the forest, and never need to get in a car.

I am a lifelong environmentalist. I testified at my first Congressional subcommittee hearing at age 15 in Kanab, Utah, in support of a wilderness area – very close to the one which President Obama recently set aside. I worked to get the Clean Air Act passed. I worked as a volunteer wilderness ranger for two summers in the Cibola and Santa Fe National Forests in New Mexico. I worked on the Safety Analysis Report for DOE’s nuclear waste disposal site in New Mexico. I probably have the smallest electricity bill in Columbia, Maryland because I am very careful not to waste. I have never turned on my heat or air conditioning.

I have degrees in Geology and Electrical Engineering, and worked on the design team of many of the world’s most complex designs, including some which likely power your PC or Mac. I have worked as a contract software developer on climate and weather models for the US government.



I do not receive any funding other than small donations on my blog, which have worked out well below minimum wage. I have tried to obtain funding, but skeptics with money are terrified of political attacks directed by the White House and/or being targeted by the IRS. They openly state this to me.

My position on global warming:

The claims of 97% consensus are a massive lie. Only 52% of American Meteorological Society members believe that man is the primary contributor to global warming.

The radiative transfer models used by government climate scientists show that going up to 550 PPM or even 1000 PPM CO2 will make minimal difference to the radiative balance of the atmosphere. The knee of the CO2 curve is at about 30 PPM, and additional CO2 has little first order effect. This is because almost all radiation in the CO2 absorption spectra is already being absorbed by H2O or CO2 molecules. Adding more CO2 has minimal effect, because there is not much radiation left to be absorbed. (This is a bit of an oversimplification because of second order effects, but those are also small.) There is no indication from the radiative transfer models used by government scientists that additional CO2 will cause large amounts of heating.

The temperature record of both the US and the world has been massively altered since older versions, almost invariably to create the appearance of more warming, and in some cases to create warming where there is none.

Sea level has been rising for 20,000 years, and is now 400 feet higher than it was when the first humans walked to North America from Asia across the Bering Strait. Most of the apparent sea level rise on the US East Coast is due to the land sinking, not sea level rising. There has been little or no sea level rise on the West Coast.

The weather is not getting more severe. Since President Obama took office, there have been three US hurricane strikes – the fewest of any presidency. While Grover Cleveland was president in the 1880′s, the US was hit by twenty-six hurricanes. The US is currently experiencing its longest period since the 1860′s without a major (category 3-5) hurricane strike. The last one was Wilma in 2005.

Florida is currently experiencing the longest period on record without a hurricane strike. The US tornado count over the past two years has been the lowest in the modern record.

America’s worst forest fires occurred in 1871, when thousands of people burned to death in horrific firestorms around the Great Lakes – on the same day that Chicago burned to the ground.

Is climate change real?

Climate is cyclical and is always changing.


One of their own emerging from the belly of beast. He pulled himself off the government gravy train where he worked, and said this is not right, accurate, or morally correct. The climate scientists and government are lying to the people. Oh yes, this man will be picked apart and they will do their level headed best to destroy this man. Dr. Heller good luck to you because you are in for a bumpy ride from here on out. The climate McCarthyites are sharpening their knives and you are next.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:47 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
18,000 hits. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

Fence sitters this is a good one in honor of 18,000

http://www.principia-scientific.org/bre ... sider.html

Quote:
‘Steven Goddard,’ the man behind ‘Real Science,’ a prominent anti-global warming blog, admits his real identity is Tony Heller, a former US government climate modeler. whistleblowerHeller broke the astonishing news on his website (June 27, 2014) declaring he is a life-long committed environmentalist sickened by the orchestrated campaign of misinformation pumped out by governments.

Among a list of gripes Heller writes, “The claims of 97% consensus are a massive lie. Only 52% of American Meteorological Society members believe that man is the primary contributor to global warming.”


Meteorologists are now climate scientists? Talk about lies, that is a good one. If he lies about something so easily determined what else is not truthful?


Quote:
Fence sitters I have used "Steven Goddard" a couple of times here on this board, and the Cultists always attack him as a no name blogger who doesn't have any credibility. Well, now we know who he is. I suggest you go back and read his stuff all over again. :lol:


A contract software developer has a little more credibility than a random blogger, but only in the realm of software development not climate science. Now we know is has no experience in climate science.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:57 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
I believe that he has already been ripped apart, but by the people supposedly on his side ..... Also, to be Dr. Heller he would have to hold a PhD, which it does not appear he does.

http://rankexploits.com/musings/2014/ho ... ent-130003

Quote:
Anthony Watts (Comment #130003)
June 6th, 2014 at 8:00 am

I took Goddard to task over this as well in a private email, saying he was very wrong and needed to do better. I also pointed out to him that his initial claim was wronger than wrong, as he was claiming that 40% of USCHN STATIONS were missing.

Predictably, he swept that under the rug, and then proceeded to tell me in email that I don’t know what I’m talking about. Fortunately I saved screen caps from his original post and the edit he made afterwards.

See:

Before: http://wattsupwiththat.files.w.....before.png

After: http://wattsupwiththat.files.w....._after.png

Note the change in wording in the highlighted last sentence.

In case you didn’t know, “Steve Goddard” is a made up name. Supposedly at Heartland ICCC9 he’s going to “out” himself and start using his real name. That should be interesting to watch, I won’t be anywhere near that moment of his.

This, combined with his inability to openly admit to and correct mistakes, is why I booted him from WUWT some years ago, after he refused to admit that his claim about CO2 freezing on the surface of Antarctica couldn’t be possible due to partial pressure of CO2.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/200.....a-at-113f/

And then when we had an experiment done, he still wouldn’t admit to it.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/200.....-possible/

And when I pointed out his recent stubbornness over the USHCN issues was just like that…he posts this:

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.....reeze-co2/

He’s hopelessly stubborn, worse than Mann at being able to admit mistakes IMHO.

So, I’m off on vacation for a couple of weeks starting today, posting at WUWT will be light. Maybe I’ll pick up this story again when I return.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 4:29 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
Careful Wayne. Cruising WWWT some of it might rub off. :mrgreen:

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:01 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Careful Wayne. Cruising WWWT some of it might rub off. :mrgreen:


Not unless I hit my head and loose several points of IQ .....

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:51 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
Don't know if there is a problem, but I can't access any of Wayne's WWWT links in a recent post. And, you missed this one. Completely expected.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/28/t ... -data-set/

Quote:
Goddard initially claimed 40% of the STATIONS were missing, which I said right away was not possible. It raised my hackles, and prompted my “you need to do better” statement. Then he switched the text in his post from stations to data while I was away for a couple of hours at my daughter’s music recital. When I returned, I noted the change, with no note of the change on his post, and that is what really put up the wall for me. He probably looked at it like he was just fixing a typo, I looked at it like it was sweeping an important distinction under the rug.

Then there was my personal bias over previous episodes where Goddard had made what I considered grievous errors, and refused to admit to them. There was the claim of CO2 freezing out of the air in Antarctica episode, later shown to be impossible by an experiment and the GISStimating 1998 episode, and the comment where when the old data is checked and it is clear Goddard/Heller’s claim doesn’t hold up.

And then just over a month ago there was Goddard’s first hockey stick shape in the USHCN data set, which turned out to be nothing but an artifact.

All of that added up to a big heap of confirmation bias, I was so used to Goddard being wrong, I expected it again, but this time Steve Goddard was right and my confirmation bias prevented me from seeing that there was in fact a real issue in the data and that NCDC has dead stations that are reporting data that isn’t real: mea culpa.


Quote:
But, that’s the same problem many climate scientists have, they are used to some skeptics being wrong on some issues, so they put up a wall. That is why the careful and exacting analyses we see from Steve McIntyre should be a model for us all. We have to “do better” to make sure that claims we make are credible, documented, phrased in non-inflammatory language, understandable, and most importantly, right.

Otherwise, walls go up, confirmation bias sets in.

Now that the wall is down, NCDC won’t be able to ignore this, even John Nielsen-Gammon, who was critical of Goddard along with me in the Polifact story now says there is a real problem. So does Zeke, and we have all sent or forwarded email to NCDC advising them of it.

I’ve also been on the phone Friday with the assistant director of NCDC and chief scientist (Tom Peterson), and also with the person in charge of USHCN (Matt Menne). Both were quality, professional conversations, and both thanked me for bringing it to their attention. There is lots of email flying back and forth too.


Quote:
They are taking this seriously, they have to the as final data as currently presented for USHCN is clearly wrong. John Neilsen-Gammon sent me a cursory analysis for Texas USHCN stations, noting he found a number of stations that had “estimated” data in place of actual good data that NCDC has in hand, and appears in the RAW USHCN data file on their FTP site


You see fence sitters bias and walls are very prominent. Especially here on this board. Wayne please see your health care professional. You obviously have been concussed. :crazy:

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 5:42 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Don't know if there is a problem, but I can't access any of Wayne's WWWT links in a recent post. And, you missed this one. Completely expected.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/28/t ... -data-set/

Quote:
Goddard initially claimed 40% of the STATIONS were missing, which I said right away was not possible. It raised my hackles, and prompted my “you need to do better” statement. Then he switched the text in his post from stations to data while I was away for a couple of hours at my daughter’s music recital. When I returned, I noted the change, with no note of the change on his post, and that is what really put up the wall for me. He probably looked at it like he was just fixing a typo, I looked at it like it was sweeping an important distinction under the rug.

Then there was my personal bias over previous episodes where Goddard had made what I considered grievous errors, and refused to admit to them. There was the claim of CO2 freezing out of the air in Antarctica episode, later shown to be impossible by an experiment and the GISStimating 1998 episode, and the comment where when the old data is checked and it is clear Goddard/Heller’s claim doesn’t hold up.


And then just over a month ago there was Goddard’s first hockey stick shape in the USHCN data set, which turned out to be nothing but an artifact.

All of that added up to a big heap of confirmation bias, I was so used to Goddard being wrong, I expected it again, but this time Steve Goddard was right and my confirmation bias prevented me from seeing that there was in fact a real issue in the data and that NCDC has dead stations that are reporting data that isn’t real: mea culpa.


What makes this guy more or less important knowing that he is a software developer making claims of the government being wrong when even the people on his side of the discussion point out how often he is wrong? The odds are not good in favor of his being right in the future based on past experience, which is unaffected by knowing his name and background.

Quote:
But, that’s the same problem many climate scientists have, they are used to some skeptics being wrong on some issues, so they put up a wall. That is why the careful and exacting analyses we see from Steve McIntyre should be a model for us all. We have to “do better” to make sure that claims we make are credible, documented, phrased in non-inflammatory language, understandable, and most importantly, right.


The problem is that even when the skeptics are correct, it is more often an insignificant aspect they have stumbled upon.

Quote:
You see fence sitters bias and walls are very prominent. Especially here on this board.


So that is why you never respond to the evidence showing how poor your "evidence" is?


Quote:
Wayne please see your health care professional. You obviously have been concussed. :crazy:


Not hardly, I do not buy WUWT as a source, just a passing reference to show the quality, or lack thereof, of your new "expert" whose track record is unchanged by the revelation of his name and lack of qualifications.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:25 am 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
Fence sitters I've never said skeptics are never wrong. I've never stated that skeptics never argue with one another. On this particular issue the skeptic was right. You see fence sitters when the USHCN is caught using dead station data and is clearly wrong the Cultists here say that's "insignificant." =D> =D> =D>

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:43 am 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:29 pm
Posts: 377
Here's something interesting fence sitters.

http://www.thegwpf.org/bbc-bosses-rule- ... y-radio-4/

Quote:
And it has been widely condemned by MPs, with Peter Lilley, a Tory member of the Commons Energy and Climate Change Select Committee, saying it shows the BBC is ‘afraid of letting a single critic point out that the climate change emperor has no clothes’.


His Labour colleague Graham Stringer said: ‘This is a form of censorship.’


Citing the bogus claim that the MMR jab causes autism, which was exploded by investigative journalists, he added: ‘After all, it is often non-specialists who prove the specialists wrong.’


You see fence sitters their house of cards is falling when these so called experts call for censorship.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.


Last edited by Milton Banana on Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:44 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Fence sitters I've never said skeptics are never wrong.


You also never admit when they are wrong, misrepresent the facts, or when the point they are trying to make is really moot.

I
Quote:
've never stated that skeptics never argue with one another.


You never comment on that aspect at all.

Quote:
On this particular issue the skeptic was right. You see fence sitters when the USHCN is caught using dead station data and is clearly wrong the Cultists here say that's "insignificant." =D> =D> =D>


It is insignificant and if you had a basic understanding of math you would know that. It is not good to have that data included as it was, but it is not really bad in the over all data averages.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:48 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20584
Location: Southeastern US
Milton Banana wrote:
Here's something interesting fence sitters.

http://www.thegwpf.org/bbc-bosses-rule- ... y-radio-4/


Yes, it is interesting that the BBC was called out for creating the appearance of a scientific balance between the two sides of the debate when that is not the case. It is akin to giving flat earther views equal time when discussing geostationaty satellites and the such. There is an opposing view but the science behind it is weak and not on a par.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 530 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 ... 36  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group