Denier contradictions – CSP contradictory beyond belief.

This could become a series. Previously in here, I have highlighted the way the Climate Sceptics Party and their official blogger Geoffrey Brown have shown hypocrisy in claiming peer review is corrupt yet when getting a sniff of a peer-reviewed paper that they think supports their idiotic position, they shout it from the rooftops and peer review is suddenly king. Well today, I thought I would highlight just how contradictory these idiots are. This time, it is with the generalisation that correlation does not equal causation.

Here is what Geoffrey and the CSP think about attributing causation to correlation.

So, apparently it is delusional to claim correlation equals causation, no matter how convincing. Ok. I get the point Geoffrey.  We better not do that then. So…….why is it important to you that Ole Humlum, geographer extraordinaire and science advisor to a dodgy outfit of misfits called the International Climate Science Coalition, found NO correlation in his graph (with the dodgy trend lines) comparing CO2 to temperature?

What is it you said? Let’s see…..

Although the atmospheric Carbon dioxide is ever rising, the temperature from data from Hadley CRU (HadCRUT4) shows a falling trend fron 1957 to 1977, a rising trend from 1977 to 2003 and falling from 2003 to March 2013. See any correlation?

Very interesting. Are you perhaps suggesting that because there is no apparent correlation in the dodgy graph between CO2 and temperature that CO2 is not the cause? Now I’m confused. Perhaps some more statements you’ve made about correlation and causation will help…

Ohhhhhh I get it now. Correlation DOES NOT equal causation but no correlation DOES equal no causation when the argument when the dodgy graph suits your nutty position….. Got it.

Idiotic denier graph of the day, May 24, 2013

Well, he’s at it again and again it’s about sea ice. Steve Goddard and his ridiculous graphs. I did discuss one of my favourites of his, the fuzzy blue caterpillar, previously. Today’s graph isn’t anywhere near as pretty but from what I can see, there is something dodgy about it. So, with no further ado…

Since Earth passed Hansen’s tipping point of 350 ppm CO2, there has been no trend in global sea ice area. There is more sea ice for the date than when CO2 was 350 ppm. Steve Goddard

sigh…where to start? How about the choice of May 13? Why pick a single day…and why that one? Very strange indeed. I’m not an Excel Expert like Steve so I haven’t bothered to check if any other cherrypicked days produce the same result. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t. I guess my question is, why not use all the data available? It doesn’t matter. Let’s get to the heart of this lunacy. Has there really been no trend in global sea ice area? Well, going to the same site that Steve has allegedly downloaded his data from, The Cryosphere Today, we get this graph.

Pay attention to the red line in comparison to the long-term average. Anyone who thinks there has been no downward trend in all the data for global sea ice area is blind. But in case you do have a problem seeing the trend, Tamino gives us the anomaly in global sea ice extent for the period in question….

But why does Steve cherrypick data and focus on global sea ice? The answer to the cherry picking is obvious, but the reason why he and his ilk like to incorporate southern hemisphere sea ice is to dilute what’s going on in the Arctic which as we all know is devastating…

That of course is only the area. What’s worse is when ice thickness is taken into account. The volume of sea ice in the Arctic has dropped so low, it is likely we will see a seasonally ice-free Arctic within a decade.

 

 

more confusion

Oh Eric…

Confusion

Oh Eric…..

Anthony Watts’ hypocrisy is off the chart.

Talk about a lack of self-awareness. Anthony crybaby Watts is all up in arms about a comment James Hansen has made about the Canadian government when it comes to climate change. In order to assert that the government was less evolved in its thinking on climate change he referred to them as neanderthals.  Shocking I know. What a terrible, terrible thing to say. This is what Crybaby Watts thinks…

So, Anthony doesn’t like ugly comments about people? Well, he goes on to reproduce a letter from someone called ‘Niall from Canada’ who is calling on Anthony and his sycophants for help in what is clearly a heinous act. Here is what ‘Niall from Canada’ says…

So Hansen referring to the Canadian government as neanderthals is not ok but referring to Hansen as a ‘grotesque charlatan’ is? Am I missing something here? Anyway, a scroll through the comments on this silly piece from Anthony reveals a number of what most sane people would consider ‘ugly comments’. These include Hansen being referred to as a dimwitted lout, certifiable, racist, prehominid, fiend, jerk, useful idiot, corrupt, ugly, insane, crazy, shyster, grumpy old incompetent, unhinged, enemy of humanity, deranged, advocate of mass slaughter, village idiot, and the list goes on. No shortage of ‘ugly comments’ directed at Hansen. This one however, takes the cake. It is just part of a long, deluded rant from some idiot called “Bill from Nevada”…

So where is Crybaby Watts’ concern about ‘ugly comments’? Does it not apply to his sycophants and flying monkeys? Where is his and their self-awareness? Personally, I think it’s all quite sad yet at the same time amusing. Again I am reminded of the terrible singers who turn up at Idol auditions thinking they are the best singers of all time only to be told how awful they truly are and then walk away asking “What would Simon Cowell know anyway?”

 

Denier Comment of the Day April 11, 2013

Steve McIntyre wins the coveted DCOD award today for the following ripper where he considers the uneducated, ill-informed ignorant understanding of idiotic denier den frequenters as scientifically more valid than the reviewers in the prestigious scientific journal, Nature.

“Although the defects of this series as a proxy are well known to readers of “skeptical” blogs, peer reviewers at Nature were obviously untroubled by the inclusion of this proxy in a temperature reconstruction.”

Well done Steve. It’s no wonder you and your ilk are the laughing stock of the scientific community. Because of this comment, I am now considering starting a new series and calling it the “Lunchtime Legend Award” for those who grossly overestimate their own scientific abilities.

Denier Comment of the Day April 4, 2013

Anthony Cox,  secretary of the Climate Sceptics Party is the recipient of today’s DCOD award for this ripper…

Anthony Cox in a misguided and silly rant over at Geoffrey Brown’s official blog for the CSP accuses the Climate Commission of lying. Nothing new there I suppose….but speaking of lying, who remembers this?

That’s right, Anthony Cox once claimed to have a degree in climatology, which of course was him ‘just plain lying’. Credibility problem Anthony? I think so.

 

CSP – climate sceptics party or communist and socialist party?

The Climate Sceptics Party are worse than communists. So there is no confusion, that is the “No Carbon Tax Climate Sceptics Party” How did I arrive at such a conclusion? It’s pretty straight forward really. Let’s talk very briefly about freedom of speech and assembly.

In 1842, Karl Marx argued in favour of a free press, decrying censorship as “a tool of the powerful to oppress the powerless.”

Just prior to WW2, Mao stated “[the people] should subject … the party in power, to severe criticism, and press and impel it to give up its one-party, one-class dictatorship and act according to the opinions of the people….The second matter concerns freedom of speech, assembly and association for the people. Without such freedom, it will be impossible to carry out the democratic reconstruction of the political system.”

And what do the CSP think about individual freedoms? Well according to Geoffrey Brown, the official blogger for the CSP, James Hansen, renowned NASA scientist and occasional climate activist should be stripped of individual US constitutional freedoms.

“As a Government employee he shouldn’t have taken part in protests.”

So, according to Geoffrey Brown and the CSP, individual government employees should not share the same rights as other people in their spare time. In light of how Marx and Mao felt about freedom of speech and assembly, one can only wonder what sort of restrictive political system the CSP envision for Australia? Remember…these morons want your vote.

Attack of the scitards

What’s a scitard? It should be fairly obvious to anyone who isn’t a scitard. Essentially not understanding exactly what peer review is or how important it is in ensuring science is sound is a sure sign that you might be a scitard.

My favourite blogger, Geoffrey Brown, the official blogger for the Climate Sceptics Party, has demonstrated yet again, his severe lack of understanding of the importance of peer review is on display yet again in his latest post where he discusses more bullshit from  “Emeritus Professor Don Easterbrook PhD” (notice the excessive use of titles and qualifications rarely seen amongst serious scientists). Essentially he says  “Emeritus Professor Don Easterbrook PhD  has published extensively on issues pertaining to global climate change.”

So what has the brilliant Easterbrook “published” on global climate change? Well……..nothing actually, at least not in the peer reviewed literature. A full list of the brilliant Emiritus Professor with a PhD can be found here.

When will these idiots, like Geoffrey Brown, realise that when it comes to science, realise they are retarded?

 

Can’t help themselves.

You don’t need to watch this video just put it on and enjoy the song while reading this post.

I was over at a WTFIWWAW and saw a post mentioning John Cook and Stephen Lewandowsky in the title. Having just read the latest paper from Lewandowsky (LCOM13) and posted a small piece about it here I was curious to see what it was about. I was quite taken with the first line…

Now to be quite honest, while Watts, is obviously trying to be funny, I’m actually not sure if he genuinely doesn’t want to be labelled a conspiracy theorist or if he wears the tag with pride under the delusion that he thinks he’s right? Whatever, it’s irrelevant because a number of his sycophants (many of whom become very indignant at the label as was demonstrated in LCOM13) in responding to the post couldn’t help themselves.The post was about the “Angry Summer” report.

At the time I checked it out there were 50 comments from 45 people. Using the criteria as outlined in LCOM13 I classified the commenters as either a conspiracy theorist or not and guess what? 23 of them are conspiracy theorists. It’s no surprise really. A fair number of the comments were completely irrelevant, a couple deliberately deceptive and one batshit crazy. I think I’ll start with the batshit crazy one first.

jc says…

“Others have noted the title “Angry Summer” in relation to Gaia and as a demonstration of the primitive.

Whilst the first (or continuing) response may be to be amused or bemused, it is overtime to actually look at these sorts of things seriously.

Tim Flannery recently, I think in some manner in reference to this publication or at around the same time, referred to the atmosphere as a “sensitive organ”.

Forget the attempt to fit such beings into categories such as poor/incompetent scientist, or noble cause victims.

These are actually beings that do not qualify as fully human. I mean that in all seriousness. To be homo sapien is not equivalent to being human. Humanity has characteristics distinct from the functioning of an organism.

These do not include the compulsion to reduce by generally unspecified means the world population by a dramatic amount as is actually the desire of a significant part of these beings.

They do not include the abasement of human capacity to a degree required to live in a manner subservient to unknowable physical forces directed by an inconceivable power completely unrelated to human experience.

These being have separated themselves by whatever means from humanity. They intend to impose their will on humanity and effectively destroy it.

They do so for their benefit as they see it.

In the past they would have been described as evil.

Whether that is preferred to primaeval does not matter, it is the same thing.

It is time to stop seeing these beings as misguided or opportunistic in an ordinary way. They are something altogether different. And they are a threat to humanity.”

Right then. It’s a whole good versus evil thing apparently with half-humans being the bad guys. Interesting that he calls himself jc. Coincidence or does he think he might be Jesus? The whole good/evil thing had me wondering.

Next we have the deceptive where one of my favourite morons, Eric Worrall tries to somehow link the refusal of the government to allow the Traveston dam to the Brisbane floods. For anyone unfamiliar with the geography around Brisbane, the dam would have been on the Mary River, not the Brisbane River or any of its tributaries, more than 100km north of Brisbane. Here’s what Eric had to say…

Oh dear. tsk tsk. Of course nobody takes Eric seriously. Anyone seeing his nonsense over at Watching the Deniers where he demonstrates his silly trolling and clown act knows what he is like. I’ll have to dig out the comments he made where he suggested all the polar bears could be placed in Antarctica and all the crocodiles in Australia should be shot. But finally I would like to show my favourite comment from the post. It is my favourite, because not only is it irrelevant, juvenile, and worthless, but it also shows that Anthony Watts has very very low standards for what he finds acceptable on his blog.

Good one Terry. It must have taken you at least 10 minutes to come up with that one…. and you managed to type it with one hand. Well done. You managed to violate at least half a dozen of Anthony’s rules and still get published. Well done again.