The Climate Change Debate Thread

[Wakeupcall]

DENIERS, DENIERS, DENIERS

Jaysus lot of emotive rage coming out there Owed.

Being exposed as a climate change tourist hurt you yesterday? I mean not knowing the history of the climatology of the dark ages is not very good, especially when you think you have the prerogative to use a derogatory term as "denier" for people who are sceptical about the degree of human influence in climate change.

Haha so true. Im surprised a lot of these agw proponents are not too embarrassed to continue posting on the subject

[owedtojoy]

DENIERS, DENIERS, DENIERS

Jaysus lot of emotive rage coming out there Owed.

Being exposed as a climate change tourist hurt you yesterday? I mean not knowing the history of the climatology of the dark ages is not very good, especially when you think you have the prerogative to use a derogatory term as "denier" for people who are sceptical about the degree of human influence in climate change.

I don't remember ever presenting myself as an "expert in the climatology of the dark ages". I am amused at your expectations of me, though.

Presumably, Mike Baillie is such a person - I do know that you definitely are not an expert, either!

A denier is someone who irrationally clings to belief in the face of the evidence, so if the cap fits .............

I do deny that "denier" is a derogatory term, and I think you should embrace it. There have been eminent deniers in scientific history, such as Einstein and quantum mechanics.

[Wakeupcall]

I don't remember ever presenting myself as an "expert in the climatology of the dark ages". I am amused at your expectations of me, though.

Presumably, Mike Baillie is such a person - I do know that you definitely are not an expert, either!

A denier is someone who irrationally clings to belief in the face of the evidence, so if the cap fits .............

I do deny that "denier" is a derogatory term, and I think you should embrace it. There have been eminent deniers in scientific history, such as Einstein and quantum mechanics.

I remember you not knowing about some of Einsteins world, yes world, even with all that education swimming about in your illogical mind!

[Tombo]

I didn't say I was impressed or comment one way or the other on the graph. JCR pointed out your comment was extremely uninformative was part of a pattern of uninformative posts made by you. He's entirely correct since all you've posted is "Obviously wrong!!" followed by "You're too stupid to know the answer" when challenged.

Oh come on.

The point was trivial and obvious in the extreme, namely:

A very short time series plot of points with a straight line drawn through them and extrapolated out over time to "prove" that the Arctic was "going to melt as soon as 2013".

Why should anyone bother to waste precious time having to debunk such obvious drivel. And this "research" supposedly came from a PhD candidate in climate science. I can believe it.

Don't get all whingy and whiny because you are so stupid you can't tie your own laces.

[Tombo]

And more news from the Consensus

Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous. That particular consensus judgement, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields.

http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uplo...ahony-PiPG.pdf

[owedtojoy]

And more news from the Consensus



http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uplo...ahony-PiPG.pdf

Professor Hulme has taken issue with the way his words have been twisted by deniers.

Mike Hulme sets Solomon and Morano straight Deep Climate

http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uplo...my-Remarks.pdf

"I did not say the ‘IPCC misleads’ anyone – it is claims that are made by other commentators, such as the caricatured claim I offer in the paper, that have the potential to mislead"

[Tombo]

Professor Hulme has taken issue with the way his words have been twisted by deniers.

Mike Hulme sets Solomon and Morano straight Deep Climate

http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uplo...my-Remarks.pdf

"I did not say the ‘IPCC misleads’ anyone – it is claims that are made by other commentators, such as the caricatured claim I offer in the paper, that have the potential to mislead"

Quick on the draw with that straw man there.

[myksav]

DENIERS, DENIERS, DENIERS

Jaysus lot of emotive rage coming out there Owed.

Being exposed as a climate change tourist hurt you yesterday? I mean not knowing the history of the climatology of the dark ages is not very good, especially when you think you have the prerogative to use a derogatory term as "denier" for people who are sceptical about the degree of human influence in climate change.

And here I thought that you did not believe in climate change.

As for "denier" being a derogatory word, hogwash. You have blatantly denied any and all evidence that climate change on a rising trend is happening. Anyway, "denier" is shorter to write than "one who disbelieves the evidence in front of them".

[ibis]

And here I thought that you did not believe in climate change.

As for "denier" being a derogatory word, hogwash. You have blatantly denied any and all evidence that climate change on a rising trend is happening. Anyway, "denier" is shorter to write than "one who disbelieves the evidence in front of them".

Or "one whose understanding of data is so shallow that they can't tell the difference between a global data set and a weather report from a ski resort". Mind you, that's not really denialism if it's genuine.

[myksav]

Or "one whose understanding of data is so shallow that they can't tell the difference between a global data set and a weather report from a ski resort". Mind you, that's not really denialism if it's genuine.

Hmm, strictly speaking wouldn't that be ignorance rather than denial?