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?

 

Tony Abbott's environment

Reblogged from The Australian Independent Media Network:

If Tony Abbott or his political party claim they are 100% committed to the environment then I would suggest that is a big fat lie. Here is an example of Tony Abbott's commitment:

The Opposition leader, Tony Abbott’s pitch to major polluters reached new heights today. Addressing a conference in Brisbane, Mr Abbott said he would out-source the protection of the environment and impacted communities to the States and Territories eager to fast track massive new industrial developments.

Read more… 705 more words

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.

 

 

 

The gifts that keep on giving – deniers’ conspiracy ideation

It was comedy gold when Stephen Lewandowsky released his paper in 2012 NASA faked the moon landing – Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science (LOG12) (available here). The response by the denier den community to LOG12 was predictable. When confronted with the findings that conspiracy theorists who endorse a cluster of non-climate-related conspiracy theories are more likely to reject climate science, they fought back the best way they knew how, by engaging in conspiracy ideation about the paper, the authors, the lead author’s institution, the Australian government…. What a classic! I am sure a few of the more sensible amongst them would have been wishing their fellow deniers would shut up, but alas, it became a veritable orgy of paranoia and conspiracy ideation.

So much of this was going on, it prompted Lewandowsky to delve deeper into the issue and collect data from the LOG12 response. With John Cook (SkepticalScience),  Klaus Oberauer (University of Zurich) and Mike Marriott (Watching the Deniers), he produced the paper Recursive fury: conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation. This paper classifies different types of conspiratorial thinking into easy to understand bites that I hope those of us who regularly comment in blogs will use when engaging climate science deniers who engage in that kind of thinking.

Abstract: Conspiracist ideation has been repeatedly implicated in the rejection of scientific propositions, although empirical evidence to date has been sparse. A recent study involving visitors to climate blogs found that conspiracist ideation was associated with the rejection of climate science and the rejection of other scientific propositions such as the link between lung cancer and smoking, and between HIV and AIDS (Lewandowsky et al., in press; LOG12 from here on). This article analyses the response of the climate blogosphere to the publication of LOG12. We identify and trace the hypotheses that emerged in response to LOG12 and that questioned the validity of the paper’s conclusions. Using established criteria to identify conspiracist ideation, we show that many of the hypotheses exhibited conspiratorial content and counterfactual thinking. For example, whereas hypotheses were initially narrowly focused on LOG12, some ultimately grew in scope to include actors beyond the authors of LOG12, such as university executives, a media organization, and the Australian government. The overall pattern of the blogosphere’s response to LOG12 illustrates the possible role of conspiracist ideation in the rejection of science, although alternative scholarly interpretations may be advanced in the future.

The full article is an excellent read. The deniers of course won’t like it.