The Only People Denying Climate Change Are Those Calling Others Climate Change Deniers

[Old Rocks]

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

 

[Old Rocks]

I can't find anything about the IPCC requesting 76 trillion dollars from anywhere let alone just the U.S. I will give you that right now yes they are terribly inefficient but if we actually put effort in to researching them and making them better than they would become a worth while investment in our future, even if burning oil does no damage to the environment (which I very highly doubt considering all the evidence out there that states otherwise) regardless, would eliminating our oil dependence not be a great thing for our nation?

Now, the area where glaciers were “receding faster than in any other part of the world,” is, in fact, seeing statistically significant growth in the size of the glaciers over a substantial portion of the area under study. In essence, at the very time when the IPCC was relying on WWF literature to substantiate its claims for the end of the Himalayan glaciers, satellite photos were being taken which would disprove the central claim of Pachauri’s IPCC regarding the fate of those glaciers. That the researcher responsible for the study is clearly not a “climate change denier” makes the IPCC’s credibility gap all the more significant, and it raises new questions regarding the fundamental credibility of any claim coming from an organization which has relied on shaky science to back its demand for the power to take $76 trillion from the economies of the industrialized world and “redistribute” those funds for “green technologies” in the third world.

SOURCE

As for wind and solar, they have a long way to go and we must overcome the liberal "not in my back yard" approach of I will force you to use it but dont expect me too..

Storage is the major problem. until that is cheep, less environmentally intrusive and reliable nothing else matters.

They want 76 trillion dollars from the entire world over the course of 40 years, that is very different from asking the U.S. for 76 trillion dollars right here right now, as for the not in my back yard approach I have not met anyone with that view point myself but if I did I would be on your side, we not only need more efficient ways of storing the energy but also to increase the panels efficiency in gathering it.
Personally I think we are looking at the wrong piece of the photosynthesis equation, plants make energy using CO2 and light from the sun, the harm to our environment is done by the CO2 released during the process of burning fossil fuels. If plants can separate the carbon and the oxygen why not study them, figure out how to replicate it and then stick one on top of every smoke stack, using solar panels to power the process. Thus burning the coal to make energy for the grid, and using solar power to scrub the air and concentrate the carbon back in to coal in order to be burned again.

Wind turbines are inefficient and unreliable with high maintenance costs. They also kill birds and insects while changing the micro climates of the areas they are placed. The low vibration hum causes mental illness in both animals and humans. They are not user friendly and just one of the many reasons the Kennedy's refused to have them near their Puget Sound home.

I would be more in favor of an Ionic inducer placed vertical in the atmosphere.. No moving parts and as wind passes between the fins the static electric is converted into usable energy. For that matter lightening catching would be the best way period. If only we could find a way to capture, store and distribute this natural event, power generation would no longer be a problem. The continental US generates enough lightening strikes in just one month that it could power itself for 10 years.. Storage again is the main issue.

Carbon recapture and recarbonization? Your talking perpetual motion machines now...

Personally I think we have gone down the wrong path on renewables.. Period!

Care to link something that shows that wind is inefficient? I thought that was part of the new rules. Or are they only for people that actually know something about the subject?

At less than 20% efficiency.... I rest my case..

Silly little ass, what matters is the cost per watt delivered to the customer. And wind is beating even dirty coal on that cost, beating natural gas, also. And, with grid scale batteries, will be 24/7.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

You really are detached from reality... The suit in BC is going to bankrupt Mann and his legal fund. He is loosing.

 

[Billy_Bob]

SOURCE

As for wind and solar, they have a long way to go and we must overcome the liberal "not in my back yard" approach of I will force you to use it but dont expect me too..

Storage is the major problem. until that is cheep, less environmentally intrusive and reliable nothing else matters.

They want 76 trillion dollars from the entire world over the course of 40 years, that is very different from asking the U.S. for 76 trillion dollars right here right now, as for the not in my back yard approach I have not met anyone with that view point myself but if I did I would be on your side, we not only need more efficient ways of storing the energy but also to increase the panels efficiency in gathering it.
Personally I think we are looking at the wrong piece of the photosynthesis equation, plants make energy using CO2 and light from the sun, the harm to our environment is done by the CO2 released during the process of burning fossil fuels. If plants can separate the carbon and the oxygen why not study them, figure out how to replicate it and then stick one on top of every smoke stack, using solar panels to power the process. Thus burning the coal to make energy for the grid, and using solar power to scrub the air and concentrate the carbon back in to coal in order to be burned again.

Wind turbines are inefficient and unreliable with high maintenance costs. They also kill birds and insects while changing the micro climates of the areas they are placed. The low vibration hum causes mental illness in both animals and humans. They are not user friendly and just one of the many reasons the Kennedy's refused to have them near their Puget Sound home.

I would be more in favor of an Ionic inducer placed vertical in the atmosphere.. No moving parts and as wind passes between the fins the static electric is converted into usable energy. For that matter lightening catching would be the best way period. If only we could find a way to capture, store and distribute this natural event, power generation would no longer be a problem. The continental US generates enough lightening strikes in just one month that it could power itself for 10 years.. Storage again is the main issue.

Carbon recapture and recarbonization? Your talking perpetual motion machines now...

Personally I think we have gone down the wrong path on renewables.. Period!

Care to link something that shows that wind is inefficient? I thought that was part of the new rules. Or are they only for people that actually know something about the subject?

At less than 20% efficiency.... I rest my case..

Silly little ass, what matters is the cost per watt delivered to the customer. And wind is beating even dirty coal on that cost, beating natural gas, also. And, with grid scale batteries, will be 24/7.

You silly ass... Remove the subsidy and quit talking out your ass..

 

[westwall]

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

I like this comment that a more honest reader left and which you bloggers tried to deny....

"If you didn't misread, then the only conclusion I can make is that you intentionally misled readers in your article. How else to explain your statement that

The judges denied the defendants' motions to dismiss and ruled that Mann’s claims of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress are “likely to succeed on the merits.”
yet failing to note the context?

Hugely important context: Mann's claims are "likely to succeed" ONLY if the claims are found to be true."

 

[Old Rocks]

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

I like this comment that a more honest reader left and which you bloggers tried to deny....

"If you didn't misread, then the only conclusion I can make is that you intentionally misled readers in your article. How else to explain your statement that

The judges denied the defendants' motions to dismiss and ruled that Mann’s claims of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress are “likely to succeed on the merits.”
yet failing to note the context?

Hugely important context: Mann's claims are "likely to succeed" ONLY if the claims are found to be true."

This is what you said in the first post;

"Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass."

Now this is what you are saying now;

"Hugely important context: Mann's claims are "likely to succeed" ONLY if the claims are found to be true." "

Now which statement is true? Walleyes, how can he have had his ass handed to him if the case is ongoing, and there is a very good chance that Dr. Mann will win it? Seems like you are continuing to lie about this issue.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

I like this comment that a more honest reader left and which you bloggers tried to deny....

"If you didn't misread, then the only conclusion I can make is that you intentionally misled readers in your article. How else to explain your statement that

The judges denied the defendants' motions to dismiss and ruled that Mann’s claims of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress are “likely to succeed on the merits.”
yet failing to note the context?

Hugely important context: Mann's claims are "likely to succeed" ONLY if the claims are found to be true."

The last little stunt by Mann's attorneys is likley to cause him great pain. Failing to deliver all items demanded in discovery is about to land his sorry ass in jail. The judge was very pointed in his reminder that contempt will not be tolerated.. Mann's has been trying like hell for summery dismissal so that he does not have to allow discovery and the judge has said no.. Mann is going down hard and he has but two weeks to fully comply with the order..

I for one will be watching with great interest as all of little mikies e-mails and work must be given up. The judge will not allow Mikey to "back out" after costing the court and the defendant much money.. He will now have to prove he was slandered and the discovery he wanted to avoid is now smacking him up side the head..

 

[Old Rocks]

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

Dr. Tim Ball is considered to be a joke. He's funded by fossil fuel companies and lies about it, and lies about having a Ph.D in climate science (he was a professor of geography).

And Dr. Tim Ball needs to tell everyone what natural factor creates global warming, stratospheric cooling, an increase in backradiation and a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation. You can't just wave your hands around wildly and yell "natural cycles!". You have to demonstrate what's causing the natural cycle, especially since the natural cycles we know of are trying to slowly cool the earth.

Good to see Billy at least admitting the earth is warming, though he'll now flip right back to declaring the earth is cooling.

Really? He has handed Mann his ass in the court case in Canada. Leave it to a political hack like yourself to neglect to mention all the facts. The only one we're laughing at is Mann and his claims to be a Nobel laureate. What a fucking jackass.

Links? Or is this something you have pulled out of your ass?

Setting the record straight on misleading claims against Michael Mann Climate Science Watch

Another claim alleges that Dr. Mann lost a lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball in Canada. This case is still ongoing, and Mann's side says any claims of its conclusion, let alone outcome, are spurious. The following statement by Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie, was issued in response to what he refers to as "preposterous statements" and "nonsense" about the status of the case:

“The review of Tim Ball’s new book by Hans Schreuder and John O’Sullivan makes preposterous statements concerning Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit in the British Columbia Supreme Court against Tim Ball and other defendants. The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.

"Dr. Ball has not set the matter for trial and there is no motion by Ball currently before the Court. The allegation by Schreuder and O’Sullivan that Dr. Mann has refused to show his metadata and calculations in open court is not true.

"Their assertion that Dr. Mann faces possible bankruptcy is nonsense. Dr. Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Ball and other defendants is proceeding through the normal stages prescribed by the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules and Dr. Mann looks forward to judicial vindication at the conclusion of this process.”

Stay tuned

I like this comment that a more honest reader left and which you bloggers tried to deny....

"If you didn't misread, then the only conclusion I can make is that you intentionally misled readers in your article. How else to explain your statement that

The judges denied the defendants' motions to dismiss and ruled that Mann’s claims of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress are “likely to succeed on the merits.”
yet failing to note the context?

Hugely important context: Mann's claims are "likely to succeed" ONLY if the claims are found to be true."

The last little stunt by Mann's attorneys is likley to cause him great pain. Failing to deliver all items demanded in discovery is about to land his sorry ass in jail. The judge was very pointed in his reminder that contempt will not be tolerated.. Mann's has been trying like hell for summery dismissal so that he does not have to allow discovery and the judge has said no.. Mann is going down hard and he has but two weeks to fully comply with the order..

I for one will be watching with great interest as all of little mikies e-mails and work must be given up. The judge will not allow Mikey to "back out" after costing the court and the defendant much money.. He will now have to prove he was slandered and the discovery he wanted to avoid is now smacking him up side the head..

Link? Or just more silliness pulled out of your ass?

 

[bripat9643]

SOURCE

As for wind and solar, they have a long way to go and we must overcome the liberal "not in my back yard" approach of I will force you to use it but dont expect me too..

Storage is the major problem. until that is cheep, less environmentally intrusive and reliable nothing else matters.

They want 76 trillion dollars from the entire world over the course of 40 years, that is very different from asking the U.S. for 76 trillion dollars right here right now, as for the not in my back yard approach I have not met anyone with that view point myself but if I did I would be on your side, we not only need more efficient ways of storing the energy but also to increase the panels efficiency in gathering it.
Personally I think we are looking at the wrong piece of the photosynthesis equation, plants make energy using CO2 and light from the sun, the harm to our environment is done by the CO2 released during the process of burning fossil fuels. If plants can separate the carbon and the oxygen why not study them, figure out how to replicate it and then stick one on top of every smoke stack, using solar panels to power the process. Thus burning the coal to make energy for the grid, and using solar power to scrub the air and concentrate the carbon back in to coal in order to be burned again.

Wind turbines are inefficient and unreliable with high maintenance costs. They also kill birds and insects while changing the micro climates of the areas they are placed. The low vibration hum causes mental illness in both animals and humans. They are not user friendly and just one of the many reasons the Kennedy's refused to have them near their Puget Sound home.

I would be more in favor of an Ionic inducer placed vertical in the atmosphere.. No moving parts and as wind passes between the fins the static electric is converted into usable energy. For that matter lightening catching would be the best way period. If only we could find a way to capture, store and distribute this natural event, power generation would no longer be a problem. The continental US generates enough lightening strikes in just one month that it could power itself for 10 years.. Storage again is the main issue.

Carbon recapture and recarbonization? Your talking perpetual motion machines now...

Personally I think we have gone down the wrong path on renewables.. Period!

Care to link something that shows that wind is inefficient? I thought that was part of the new rules. Or are they only for people that actually know something about the subject?

At less than 20% efficiency.... I rest my case..

Silly little ass, what matters is the cost per watt delivered to the customer. And wind is beating even dirty coal on that cost, beating natural gas, also. And, with grid scale batteries, will be 24/7.

Not even close, moron. It only beats coal if you assume 100% utilization. Since wind typical only operates at about 20% of it's rated capacity, it's far more expensive. Furthermore, every watt of wind power needs 100% backup.

 

[Crick]

I think the message by Dr Tim Ball hits the climate alarmist squarely where they live.. In denial of science and facts.. The true deniers of climate change are alarmists.

That, of course, explains why such a large percentage of climate scientists and scientists in general categorize themselves as climate change deniers.

"If you are in the group who call challengers, climate change deniers, it implies that you deny that climate changes.

Don't make yourself look any worse than you already do. People get termed "climate change deniers" because they either deny that the climate is changing or (more commonly) that any part of its change is due to human activities. This is common knowledge on all sides. Attempting to redefine it indicates ignorance or desperation or both.

The distinction between human-caused change and natural change is irrelevant at this point

Only to climate change deniers.

because the public knows virtually nothing about natural change. If they did, they would not be so easily misled.

So... you conclude those who disagree with you, do so out of ignorance. Is that the explanation behind the 99% of climate scientists who do?

I wonder how many understood what Dr. Philip Lloyd said in his assessment of temperature records?

Holocene century-on-century changes have a standard deviation close to 1 deg C, so if there is a signal due to carbon dioxide, it still has not emerged from the background noise.

I couldn't tell you about the public and Dr Lloyd, but I can tell you that your petticoats are showing. AGW has only been taking place for 150 years and the bulk of it in the last 50. A "century-on-century" dataset, particularly one dominated by pre-instrumental records is meaningless in this regard. The sigma of the data since the invention of the thermometer is considerably less and the warming signal is as clear as day.

You are also in the group that believes “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”, which allows you to ignore the evidence and pursue personal attacks.

It IS the evidence which tells us that the science is settled and the debate is over. Unjustifiable personal attacks (like those on Michael Mann, James Hansen, Phil Jones, Al Gore and President Obama take place when the ignorant are compelled to lash out in their frustration as reality continues to fail to cooperate with their fantasies. Legitimate criticisms of notable figures (like those on Tim Ball, Christopher Monckton, Roy Spencer or James Inhofe) take place when individuals attempt to use their name recognition or respect earned in unrelated fields to push false hypotheses without resort to the scientific method.

People in this group, including the mainstream media, have a political agenda,."

Yes, yes Billy Boy... of course they do. And, somewhat surprisingly, the governments and their press, from 195 different countries around the world, ALL SEEM TO HAVE THE SAME AGENDA.

 

[Old Rocks]

They want 76 trillion dollars from the entire world over the course of 40 years, that is very different from asking the U.S. for 76 trillion dollars right here right now, as for the not in my back yard approach I have not met anyone with that view point myself but if I did I would be on your side, we not only need more efficient ways of storing the energy but also to increase the panels efficiency in gathering it.
Personally I think we are looking at the wrong piece of the photosynthesis equation, plants make energy using CO2 and light from the sun, the harm to our environment is done by the CO2 released during the process of burning fossil fuels. If plants can separate the carbon and the oxygen why not study them, figure out how to replicate it and then stick one on top of every smoke stack, using solar panels to power the process. Thus burning the coal to make energy for the grid, and using solar power to scrub the air and concentrate the carbon back in to coal in order to be burned again.

Wind turbines are inefficient and unreliable with high maintenance costs. They also kill birds and insects while changing the micro climates of the areas they are placed. The low vibration hum causes mental illness in both animals and humans. They are not user friendly and just one of the many reasons the Kennedy's refused to have them near their Puget Sound home.

I would be more in favor of an Ionic inducer placed vertical in the atmosphere.. No moving parts and as wind passes between the fins the static electric is converted into usable energy. For that matter lightening catching would be the best way period. If only we could find a way to capture, store and distribute this natural event, power generation would no longer be a problem. The continental US generates enough lightening strikes in just one month that it could power itself for 10 years.. Storage again is the main issue.

Carbon recapture and recarbonization? Your talking perpetual motion machines now...

Personally I think we have gone down the wrong path on renewables.. Period!

Care to link something that shows that wind is inefficient? I thought that was part of the new rules. Or are they only for people that actually know something about the subject?

At less than 20% efficiency.... I rest my case..

Silly little ass, what matters is the cost per watt delivered to the customer. And wind is beating even dirty coal on that cost, beating natural gas, also. And, with grid scale batteries, will be 24/7.

Not even close, moron. It only beats coal if you assume 100% utilization. Since wind typical only operates at about 20% of it's rated capacity, it's far more expensive. Furthermore, every watt of wind power needs 100% backup.

Ah, dear little twink, you are so wrong. Even those ultra-liberal Texans disagree with you.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...rt-to-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energyis as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

Now you can make all the claims you want, but when the unsubsidized cost of wind is 3.7 cents, and the cost of coal, with the depletion allowances, which are subsidies, is 6.6 cents, I would say that wind has won the economic war. Add in grid scale batteries, and coal is on it's last legs.

 

[Crick]

You really are detached from reality... The suit in BC is going to bankrupt Mann and his legal fund. He is loosing.

That would have been spelled L O S I N G, but he's not.

 

[mamooth]

Mann's has been trying like hell for summery dismissal so that he does not have to allow discovery and the judge has said no.

Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo ....

Mann filed the lawsuit. He doesn't have to ask for dismissal. If he wants out, he can simply withdraw the lawsuit, just as Wegman recently did after trying to sue DeSmogBlog and failing. That is, after seeing his target was going to fight back and rip him a new one, Wegman bolted.

Needless to say, Mann isn't withdrawing. In contrast, after publicly bragging about how they wanted discovery, Ball and Steyn have been going into contortions trying to get a dismissal, so that they don't have to go through discovery. Mann has nothing to hide, while Ball and Steyn plainly do.

 

[jc456]

Address the science he presented you ignorant fool.. It is why I included it int he OP... Show us where the CO2 signal is.. Or is all you got Ad Hom's?

First, Given ad homs is all you do, kindly stuff your hypocrisy.

Second, you don't understand science. Science is not "Prove me wrong". Science is "Demonstrate you're right".

Climate scientists have done that, by creating a theory that explains all of the observed evidence, and which has been making correct predictions for decades.

Your side hasn't even tried to create a theory, and that's why you're considered to be cultists instead of scientists.

and dude, dudette, we have been waiting for you to prove you're right. When is that going to happen?

 

[jc456]

Address the science he presented you ignorant fool.. It is why I included it int he OP... Show us where the CO2 signal is.. Or is all you got Ad Hom's?

First, Given ad homs is all you do, kindly stuff your hypocrisy.

Second, you don't understand science. Science is not "Prove me wrong". Science is "Demonstrate you're right".

Climate scientists have done that, by creating a theory that explains all of the observed evidence, and which has been making correct predictions for decades.

Your side hasn't even tried to create a theory, and that's why you're considered to be cultists instead of scientists.

Pointing to the Weather Channel and shrieking MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING CLIMATE CHANGE, DENIER!!! is not a prediction

president stated that in his address to the graduate class at the Coast Guard. Embarrassing that his writers took him there.

 

[jc456]

Still not seeing your theory of climate, Billy.

Until you present a theory that explains all the observed data and makes testable predictions, you're just a cultist.

You made assertions.. Prove them..

what a goofball he/she is. not once on here has this thing, he/she, ever provided one iota of evidence to support its theory.we're only here because doom and gloom mumbo jumbo comes from it.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I think the message by Dr Tim Ball hits the climate alarmist squarely where they live.. In denial of science and facts.. The true deniers of climate change are alarmists.

That, of course, explains why such a large percentage of climate scientists and scientists in general categorize themselves as climate change deniers.

"If you are in the group who call challengers, climate change deniers, it implies that you deny that climate changes.

Don't make yourself look any worse than you already do. People get termed "climate change deniers" because they either deny that the climate is changing or (more commonly) that any part of its change is due to human activities. This is common knowledge on all sides. Attempting to redefine it indicates ignorance or desperation or both.

The distinction between human-caused change and natural change is irrelevant at this point

Only to climate change deniers.

because the public knows virtually nothing about natural change. If they did, they would not be so easily misled.

So... you conclude those who disagree with you, do so out of ignorance. Is that the explanation behind the 99% of climate scientists who do?

I wonder how many understood what Dr. Philip Lloyd said in his assessment of temperature records?

Holocene century-on-century changes have a standard deviation close to 1 deg C, so if there is a signal due to carbon dioxide, it still has not emerged from the background noise.

I couldn't tell you about the public and Dr Lloyd, but I can tell you that your petticoats are showing. AGW has only been taking place for 150 years and the bulk of it in the last 50. A "century-on-century" dataset, particularly one dominated by pre-instrumental records is meaningless in this regard. The sigma of the data since the invention of the thermometer is considerably less and the warming signal is as clear as day.

You are also in the group that believes “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”, which allows you to ignore the evidence and pursue personal attacks.

It IS the evidence which tells us that the science is settled and the debate is over. Unjustifiable personal attacks (like those on Michael Mann, James Hansen, Phil Jones, Al Gore and President Obama take place when the ignorant are compelled to lash out in their frustration as reality continues to fail to cooperate with their fantasies. Legitimate criticisms of notable figures (like those on Tim Ball, Christopher Monckton, Roy Spencer or James Inhofe) take place when individuals attempt to use their name recognition or respect earned in unrelated fields to push false hypotheses without resort to the scientific method.

People in this group, including the mainstream media, have a political agenda,."

Yes, yes Billy Boy... of course they do. And, somewhat surprisingly, the governments and their press, from 195 different countries around the world, ALL SEEM TO HAVE THE SAME AGENDA.

SO your ok with giving up your rights to your body, your land (if you even own any) and all of your money to be a slave... Good to know.. You are far worse than the IPCC fools because you follow without question..

And you, like old fraud or DOT.FAIL want everyone else to follow you in your stupidity... 95% of your appeals to authority are bull shit and lies.. Some of us can see through the huge pile of shit you folks have been spreading..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Wind turbines are inefficient and unreliable with high maintenance costs. They also kill birds and insects while changing the micro climates of the areas they are placed. The low vibration hum causes mental illness in both animals and humans. They are not user friendly and just one of the many reasons the Kennedy's refused to have them near their Puget Sound home.

I would be more in favor of an Ionic inducer placed vertical in the atmosphere.. No moving parts and as wind passes between the fins the static electric is converted into usable energy. For that matter lightening catching would be the best way period. If only we could find a way to capture, store and distribute this natural event, power generation would no longer be a problem. The continental US generates enough lightening strikes in just one month that it could power itself for 10 years.. Storage again is the main issue.

Carbon recapture and recarbonization? Your talking perpetual motion machines now...

Personally I think we have gone down the wrong path on renewables.. Period!

Care to link something that shows that wind is inefficient? I thought that was part of the new rules. Or are they only for people that actually know something about the subject?

At less than 20% efficiency.... I rest my case..

Silly little ass, what matters is the cost per watt delivered to the customer. And wind is beating even dirty coal on that cost, beating natural gas, also. And, with grid scale batteries, will be 24/7.

Not even close, moron. It only beats coal if you assume 100% utilization. Since wind typical only operates at about 20% of it's rated capacity, it's far more expensive. Furthermore, every watt of wind power needs 100% backup.

Ah, dear little twink, you are so wrong. Even those ultra-liberal Texans disagree with you.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...rt-to-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energyis as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

Now you can make all the claims you want, but when the unsubsidized cost of wind is 3.7 cents, and the cost of coal, with the depletion allowances, which are subsidies, is 6.6 cents, I would say that wind has won the economic war. Add in grid scale batteries, and coal is on it's last legs.

You really are detached from reality... The suit in BC is going to bankrupt Mann and his legal fund. He is loosing.

That would have been spelled L O S I N G, but he's not.

Mann's has been trying like hell for summery dismissal so that he does not have to allow discovery and the judge has said no.

Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo ....

Mann filed the lawsuit. He doesn't have to ask for dismissal. If he wants out, he can simply withdraw the lawsuit, just as Wegman recently did after trying to sue DeSmogBlog and failing. That is, after seeing his target was going to fight back and rip him a new one, Wegman bolted.

Needless to say, Mann isn't withdrawing. In contrast, after publicly bragging about how they wanted discovery, Ball and Steyn have been going into contortions trying to get a dismissal, so that they don't have to go through discovery. Mann has nothing to hide, while Ball and Steyn plainly do.

Oh Look... Three ass clowns who haven't a clue..

They cant find a single fact amongst themselves.. Mann is in deep shit, Wind is only 20% effective and a failure, and coal beats them all hands down...

 

[Billy_Bob]

"The head of Xcel Energy in the U.S., Wayne Brunetti, has said, "We're a big supporter of wind, but at the time when customers have the greatest needs, it's typically not available." Throughout Europe, wind turbines produced on average less than 20% of their theoretical (or rated) capacity. Yet both the British and the American Wind Energy Associations (BWEA and AWEA) plan for 30%. The figure in Denmark was 16.8% in 2002 and 19% in 2003 (in February 2003, the output of the more than 6,000 turbines in Denmark was 0!). On-shore turbines in the U.K. produced at 24.1% of their capacity in 2003. The average in Germany for 1998-2003 was 14.7%. In the U.S., usable output (representing wind power's contribution to consumption, according to the Energy Information Agency) in 2002 was 12.7% of capacity (using the average between the AWEA's figures for installed capacity at the end of 2001 and 2002). In California, the average is 20%. The Searsburg plant in Vermont averages 21%, declining every year. This percentage is called the load factor or capacity factor. The rated generating capacity only occurs during 100% ideal conditions, typically a sustained wind speed over 30 mph. As the wind slows, electricity output falls off exponentially. [Click here for more about the technicalities of wind as a power source, as well as energy consumption data. Click here for conversions between and explanations of energy units.]"

Source

looks like Old Fraud has some serious egg to clean off his face..

 

[Crick]

Those were hardly surprises to ANYONE and they have no bearing on the cost per kwh - ie, they are fully factored into the numbers you've been provided.

Profit-making businesses keep spending money on wind and solar. That's the one point that makes it hard to take your claims seriously.