Zombie Science

[Abraham3]

Actually, the horse cart ran you over about 17 years ago, when the global temp stopped rising even though the CO2 levels continued to rise at a prodigious rate.

So you couldn't keep up your side on the research grant discussion and decided to try to change the topic. Got it.

Sceptics began questioning the theory when that began....and of course when we realized the shoddy type of work that was being put out....that was a major turning point for me. And then, when they resorted to outright falsification of data that sealed their doom.

You had made your mind up long before you had any evidence indicating ANYTHING. And you have no evidence of any shoddy work or outright falsification. We, on the other hand, have loads of evidence supporting the mainstream AGW theories and loads of evidence supporting the contention that AGW denialism - the campaign to intentionally MISINFORM the public - is funded by the fossil fuel industry and a number of conservative foundations and wealthy individuals.

And it is you that has no evidence. We have LOADS of evidence that your theory is kaput. You have nothing to support it but the same tired old GCM's that have been proven to be worse than flipping a coin.

That you can tell such lies with such little apparent difficulty is troubling. Please go read WG-I of AR5 before you try to tell us again that there is no evidence.

But keep on keepin on by all means! You're nothing if not entertaining when you melt down.

I can certainly see someone that supports a disinformation campaign suggesting quite sincerely that we should not react harshly to liars. It's a self-protective approach if nothing else.

 

[Politico]

Explain this

You can see that last spike getting up near the mean. Does that REALLY look like some sort of turn to you? Do you REALLY think the ice is coming back?

Yeah, that ice is ROARIN' BACK!

ps: Note the colors. Note the near disappearance of older ice.

Your picture doesn't answer these questions.

Do you REALLY think your one year represents a turn around? Do you REALLY think all that ice is coming back?

Derp. Not in a year. It took hundreds to get where it is.

 

[freedombecki]

Virtually 100% of the world's climate scientists buy that ""man-made" line" so, when you say no one is buying it, we don't buy YOU or your blatant lies.

Now, where did you say climate scientists get their paychecks again?

Oh, yeah! Conservative foundations that were expropriated by lock-steppin' Gore liberals!

What was I thinkin'!!!

Climate scientists generally get their paychecks from the colleges and universities at which they work. Others are employees of the government. In neither case do they receive income from research funding - that is a meme that very accurately identifies deniers with no familiarity whatsoever with research funding. Research grants pay for the conduct of research. It is not some sort of reward paid to scientists for having come to some predetermined conclusion. THAT would be the way things work in pseudo-science organizations like the Heartland Institute, Climate Depot, Climate Audit, CO2 is Green, and other completely bogus "research" institutions set up by funders like the Searle Freedom Trust, the John William Pope Foundation, the Howard Charitable Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the Koch Brothers and ExxonMobil.

ps: how well do you think your butterflies are going to hold up to a 2-3C temperature rise, changes in rainfall, seasonal timing and a 1 meter rise in sea level?

Ever heard of conservative Republican Senator Henry John Heinz, III? Let me refresh your recall, from the pages of Wikipedia:

On April 4, 1991, Heinz and six other people were killed when a Bell 412 helicopter and a Piper Aerostar with Heinz aboard collided in mid-air above Merion Elementary School in Lower Merion Township, Pennsylvania. All aboard both aircraft, as well as two children at the school, were killed.[3] The helicopter had been dispatched to investigate a problem with the landing gear of Heinz's plane. While moving in for a closer look, the helicopter collided with the plane, causing both aircraft to lose control and crash.[4] The subsequent NTSB investigation attributed the cause of the crash to poor judgment by the pilots of the two aircraft involved.[5]
Following a funeral at Heinz Chapel[6] and a Washington, D.C. memorial that was attended by President George H. W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle,[7] Senator Heinz was interred in the Heinz family mausoleum in Homewood Cemetery, located in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.[1] His widow, Teresa Heinz, later married Senator John Kerry.[8]
Heinz's long time friend, Sen. Wirth of Colorado, remarked: "He really believed he could make the world a better place, such a contrast to the jaded resignation of our time. He could send the Senate leadership up a wall faster than anyone I've seen." Heinz's son Andre said at the services: "Dad, I am so grateful for the time we had, and I miss you and I love you."[9]

Ms. Teresa Heinz became a billion-heiress who endowed every miserable liberal hate-and-eliminate Republicans causes on the Democrat Party's black list. She is responsible for the expropriation of good and supporting very evil government agendas that will socialize/communize America and ensure that H. John Heinz's Republican principles are dust. She sealed the deal by marrying John Kerry, who dumped is millionaire wife for a new billionaire wife with the added bonus of expropriating conservative foundations and turning them into the DNC's cash cow.



This is only one of many conservative families whose ideals were spliffed and destroyed by monominded communists and union goons in the Democrat Party as a means to their dull end of destroying free enterprise, businesses large and small, and putting everything into the hands of a very few people to run the world on. The only trouble is, like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the in-crowd makes sure their family members get first dibs on all that free money that taxpayers had taken from them, they view as their little secret bonanza of picking everybody else's pocket. The net result is a huge whoosh of cash going into green projects with brothers=in=law, sons, etc., getting the go on free investment money to line their pockets with when the front organizations go belly up. The press does the STFU return and by omission, helps them destroy free enterprise.

/lectio Divinia

Our unborn grandchildren will owe half a million dollars apiece at their moment of birth for all that borrowing that is being done by the government. In fact, you can just call them slaves, because they will be worse off than someone who is openly pushed around for services that make somebody else rich.

The Democrats are making servants of unborn children who won't have a fighting chance of having a level playing field without fear of reprisal from those whose Congress loaned their grandparents' generation of victims the money that will bury them in Communism.

And I thought Kruschev's cold words, "We will bury you," didn't apply to me when I saw him hitting his shoe on a podium and telling the world his communist plan for America.

I guess the Democrats shoved Obama in the Oval office to make sure a black man, not lily-white Hillary gets blamed for the deleterious State of the Union in an election, when white people are turned into mules for the state's welfare.

And that's what I think is true. I wish I weren't so on the money.

 

[freedombecki]

There was something odd going on a few posts back. A post by someone else included a hypertext link (in a graphic) that took you to Sallow's profile. I don't see it now, but at the time I know I thought it made no sense at all. Perhaps someone is doing some impersonation.

And you're the harpy who's caterwauling other people providing links.

 

[freedombecki]

Virtually 100% of the world's climate scientists buy that ""man-made" line" so, when you say no one is buying it, we don't buy YOU or your blatant lies.

No they don't

That would be another blantant lie.

There you go again, projecting your credibility away through the most pathetic means possible.

 

[Abraham3]

How about some sort of explanation as to why you say the majority of climate scientists don't accept AGW? I would have thought you'd seen my evidence enough times, but if you'd like, I could pull it all up again.

But where is YOURS?

 

[westwall]

Actually, the horse cart ran you over about 17 years ago, when the global temp stopped rising even though the CO2 levels continued to rise at a prodigious rate.

So you couldn't keep up your side on the research grant discussion and decided to try to change the topic. Got it.

Sceptics began questioning the theory when that began....and of course when we realized the shoddy type of work that was being put out....that was a major turning point for me. And then, when they resorted to outright falsification of data that sealed their doom.

You had made your mind up long before you had any evidence indicating ANYTHING. And you have no evidence of any shoddy work or outright falsification. We, on the other hand, have loads of evidence supporting the mainstream AGW theories and loads of evidence supporting the contention that AGW denialism - the campaign to intentionally MISINFORM the public - is funded by the fossil fuel industry and a number of conservative foundations and wealthy individuals.

And it is you that has no evidence. We have LOADS of evidence that your theory is kaput. You have nothing to support it but the same tired old GCM's that have been proven to be worse than flipping a coin.

That you can tell such lies with such little apparent difficulty is troubling. Please go read WG-I of AR5 before you try to tell us again that there is no evidence.

But keep on keepin on by all means! You're nothing if not entertaining when you melt down.

I can certainly see someone that supports a disinformation campaign suggesting quite sincerely that we should not react harshly to liars. It's a self-protective approach if nothing else.

I already challenged you to present a SINGLE research project that was accomplished without a research grant. So far you have failed to present a single one, so that means it is you who has failed that test.

I was a firm supporter of AGW theory till around 1988, when a student of mine started asking questions I couldn't answer. That led to he and I delving into the actual science, and that led to my change of opinion.

I love how you claim I lie when it has been shown repeatedly that without lies you guys would have nothing. Good job proving our point yet again!

I could go on, but everyone here gets the idea. You have nothing but shrill accusations and petulant whining about "big oil". Your religion has collapsed and you're pissed off. Your gravy train is coming to an end and now you're finally going to have to work for a living...

Sucks to be you!

 

[freedombecki]

How about some sort of explanation as to why you say the majority of climate scientists don't accept AGW? I would have thought you'd seen my evidence enough times, but if you'd like, I could pull it all up again.

But where is YOURS?

Evidence by omission is not evidence at all. It's a lie.

 

[Abraham3]

How about some sort of explanation as to why you say the majority of climate scientists don't accept AGW? I would have thought you'd seen my evidence enough times, but if you'd like, I could pull it all up again.

But where is YOURS?

Evidence by omission is not evidence at all. It's a lie.

Omission? If you haven't seen these links or their contents before, I will eat my hat.

Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a matter of fact, YOURS would be the evidence by omission. You have no evidence that the majority of climate scientists reject AGW.

 

[mamooth]

I was a firm supporter of AGW theory till around 1988, when a student of mine started asking questions I couldn't answer.

That's nothing special. You can't answer questions from anyone on any topic. You being clueless is hardly an indictment of science.

But do go on. If you're not making up a tall tale, let us know what these questions you couldn't answer in 1988 were. I'm sure it will be fascinating.

Here's another thought. Tell the truth. Like almost all denialists, you flipflopped when your political cult ordered you to flipflop, early in the Bush administration.

 

[Abraham3]

I'm curious. What were these questions in 1988 that you couldn't answer?

That was the same year the WMS and UNEP formed the IPCC and two years before the release of the First Assessment Report. Did the FAR not answer these questions?