My Photo
Mobilise this Blog

Google

InvestigateDaily

INVESTIGATEMAGAZINE.TV

Kiwiblog

New Zealand Conservative

InvestigatePodcast

AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] investigatemagazine.com and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« UN IPCC boss has fingers in carbon trading pie | Main | The funniest environmental political debate you'll witness »

Comments

Mack

You are in fact just one of Big AL's useful idiots CM.

CM

>>>Well doesn't that perfectly demonstrate what a closed-minded,brainwashed idiot you are then CM. (not kidding)<<<

Diddums. You need to chillax dude.

CM

79 actual reasons (not embarrassingly but hilariously made up ones) why global warming isn't natural:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Falafulu Fisi

CM said...
79 actual reasons (not embarrassingly but hilariously made up ones) why global warming isn't natural

CM, it amazes me, that you keep quoting web sites from guys who had graduated with undergrad degrees in Physics. The depth of physics covered in undergrad is no difference from high school physics and it is shocking that you've haven't got that thru your head. Tom Evereth used to argue here with his high school physics knowledge (oops - a degree in physics), but when been exposed to peer review crunch stuff, he simply went for early christmas holiday.

Skepticalscience!!! It would be better if you stick to quoting RealClimate, because those guys, discuss the level of science in PhD level and not highschool (undergrad) level physics that you keep quoting (as from sites like Skepticalscience). This is the reason, why I think your post for the sake of replying to every comment here is troll, rather than arguing the science or applying reason.

You're pathetic man (or woman).

AcidComments


Meanwhile:

You just got to love those once again failed AGW/CC Mild winter predictions for the NH from both sides of the Atlantic.

AS usual. On the whole the Mainstream Climate Baffoons who got it wrong. The UK Met office did put a small proviso in their mild winter predictions this year after getting it wrong too often. One in seven chance of a colder winter.

Those who weren't the Mainstream Climate Morons got the Winter predictions fairly correct for both sides of the Atlanticas usual. Those multi-million $$$ Climate computers used for their flawed climate modelling are duds as usual.

President Obummer. Just makes it back from Copenhagen. Only to be greeted by Blizzards in Washington DC. The worst since 1932.

Mack

And on top of that CM I've established that you are not only an idiot but stupid as well.And I just mock stupid idiots too you understand.
Aahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Mack

I've called you a stupid idiot CM and am wondering how much more insult your little hammer and sickle brain can cope with. Oh, that's right,it's impervious to everything.It's closed and brainwashed eh? A fact you failed to contradict in your posting Dec 23rd 3.03pm CM.
AAaahahahahahahahahahahaha

CM

>>>CM, it amazes me, that you keep quoting web sites from guys who had graduated with undergrad degrees in Physics. The depth of physics covered in undergrad is no difference from high school physics and it is shocking that you've haven't got that thru your head. Tom Evereth used to argue here with his high school physics knowledge (oops - a degree in physics), but when been exposed to peer review crunch stuff, he simply went for early christmas holiday.

Skepticalscience!!! It would be better if you stick to quoting RealClimate, because those guys, discuss the level of science in PhD level and not highschool (undergrad) level physics that you keep quoting (as from sites like Skepticalscience). This is the reason, why I think your post for the sake of replying to every comment here is troll, rather than arguing the science or applying reason.

You're pathetic man (or woman).<<<

1. And where do you think "100 reasons why global warming is natural" (that Ian promotes) comes from?

2. You've not actually shown anything that has been misrepresented or distorted.

CM

>>>I've called you a stupid idiot CM and am wondering how much more insult your little hammer and sickle brain can cope with. Oh, that's right,it's impervious to everything.It's closed and brainwashed eh? A fact you failed to contradict in your posting Dec 23rd 3.03pm CM.
AAaahahahahahahahahahahaha <<<

Ye gods, I'm a communist now. Well you're doing very well on the tick-box sheet. Are you the president of the Binary Club?

CM

>>>>Meanwhile:

You just got to love those once again failed AGW/CC Mild winter predictions for the NH from both sides of the Atlantic.

AS usual. On the whole the Mainstream Climate Baffoons who got it wrong. The UK Met office did put a small proviso in their mild winter predictions this year after getting it wrong too often. One in seven chance of a colder winter.

Those who weren't the Mainstream Climate Morons got the Winter predictions fairly correct for both sides of the Atlanticas usual. Those multi-million $$$ Climate computers used for their flawed climate modelling are duds as usual.

President Obummer. Just makes it back from Copenhagen. Only to be greeted by Blizzards in Washington DC. The worst since 1932.<<<

Climate versus weather. Return to Go. Do not collect $200.

AcidComments

"Climate versus weather. Return to Go. Do not collect $200."

Wrong again CM,

Climate outlook was basically for a MILD NH Winter according to your beloved Climate AGW/CC Biased Idiots.

CM

Acid, have a look through this:

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap3-3/final-report/default.htm

"Heavy precipitation events averaged over North America have increased over the past 50 years, consistent with the observed increases in atmospheric water vapor, which have been associated with human-induced increases in greenhouse gases."

What climate models were used to predict 2009 winter weather? Which climate scientists made that claim?

AcidComments


"What climate models were used to predict 2009 winter weather? Which climate scientists made that claim?"

CM,

You wouldn't like some of the latest improved Climate models anyway. They only predict a 'sizzling hot' temp increase of 0.2C by 2100. NOT the BS over exagerrated / overhyped 6C increase Alarmist Garbage.

Whitebread

Ahh, finally CM you get it right. Yes, at concentrations of up to 4% depending on temperature, atmospheric water vapour is a far more potent and available greenhouse gas than CO2 ever will be. Essenigh's study of radioactive carbon in atmospheric CO2 actually said so. It's the sun and water that drive weather on planet earth, not minor variations of a trace gas necessary for organic life. But you can't tax water, set up an international exchange for it, or use it to dismantle western economies can you though CM?
You believers can't have it both ways. If warming is really happening then we shouldn't have the east Antarctic ice sheet and Greenland cooling. North America should not have experienced two huge early winter storms, Europe should not be in the grip of a huge and very cold winter storm that has paralysed much of the continent and NZ should not have just seen the coldest October for 46 years.

CM

>>>You wouldn't like some of the latest improved Climate models anyway.<<<

Yeah, thought so.

CM

"100 reasons to be appalled

Appalled that anything so transparently stupid as the Daily Express article “Climate change is natural: 100 reasons why” would appear anywhere other than as a failed junior high school paper. Michael Le Page at New Scientist has kindly dealt with the first 50 in “50 reasons why global warming isn’t natural“, undoubtedly having gotten ill reading so many.

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/12/50-reasons-why-global-warming.html

Liberal Conspiracy picks up some of the slack by debunking #s 88-100 in Con Home’s Climate Crock Rundown (88-100).

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/12/15/con-homes-climate-crock-rundown-88-100/

They also provide some background on the European Foundation “think tank” (think ‘Heartland Institute’ with tea) that put this drivel together in Revealed: Top Tories linked to climate change denialism report.

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/12/16/revealed-tory-front-benchers-linked-to-global-warming-denialism-report/

Seriously, this such an unbelievable collection of basic logical errors and pure idiocy it defies belief, for eg:

50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs.

97) India plans to reduce the ratio of emissions to production by 20-25 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2020, but all Government officials insist that since India has to grow for its development and poverty alleviation, it has to emit, because the economy is driven by carbon.

Apparently someone, presumably older than 12, actually thought that these were evidence that climate change is natural. That alone would be shocking, but that apparently many others agree? The whole list is like that, from your standard Climate Denier dumb to colossally stupid as per above. It clearly shows that the problem goes well beyond simple scientific illiteracy.

That New Scientist is clearly on the right track can be seen in that Joanne Nova singles them out for the usual Denier critique by distortion, innuendo, flawed logic, and lying, including and appeal to stupidity popularity fallacy:

'The comments below the article are 90% skeptics, 2% believers, and the rest are presumably so angry their’s were deleted.'

Obvious alert – what matters is the facts, not that the Deniers have mastered Twitter."

http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/12/16/climate-denial-the-stupid-it-burns/#more-7740

Superb.

The comments to this entry are closed.