Creator of Infamous Hockey Stick Graph Refuses to Turn Over Data to Court

[westwall]

And this is why there's over a dozen datasets made afterwards supporting it.

Seriously, get a grip.

Which all use the same flawed data set for their basis point. I agree, you need to get a grip.

 

[westwall]

Getfo you say the same thing about anyone that doesn't share in your bullshit like 87 year old Freeman Dyson

Dyson is remarkably stupid on the global warming topic.

That's almost certainly because he's old and grumpy, shaking his fist at how those young whippersnappers aren't doing things like they did it back in the day.

Happer would be another old cranky guy who makes the same dumb mistakes as Dyson.

Here's a simple test for you little kitty. Tell us what the "scientific method" is, and how does it operate?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Getfo you say the same thing about anyone that doesn't share in your bullshit like 87 year old Freeman Dyson

Dyson is remarkably stupid on the global warming topic.

That's almost certainly because he's old and grumpy, shaking his fist at how those young whippersnappers aren't doing things like they did it back in the day.

Happer would be another old cranky guy who makes the same dumb mistakes as Dyson.

That's your denial coming out and can't comprehend the difference between knowledge and wisdom..


Your Ilk is so stuck on being scared of the future and so stuck on propaganda..that you can't see the earth would of changed if humans were here or not...


It's like a circle jerk of morons with you.


.

 

[aoxomoxoa]

Getfo you say the same thing about anyone that doesn't share in your bullshit like 87 year old Freeman Dyson

Dyson is remarkably stupid on the global warming topic.

That's almost certainly because he's old and grumpy, shaking his fist at how those young whippersnappers aren't doing things like they did it back in the day.

Happer would be another old cranky guy who makes the same dumb mistakes as Dyson.

Man you are truly monumentally stupid, Dyson is in his 90s and still as sharp as a pin. You are not even fit to lick his boots ffs.

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

 

[Wyatt earp]

Older scientists are either retired or near to it, hence are not scared of ruining their careers by not conforming to the prevailing orthodoxy.

Can you name anyone who had their career ruined, or who was fired for "not conforming"? I'm pointing out that your premise is an unsupported conspiracy theory which is contradicted by the facts, being that no denier scientists have been fired anywhere.

Also, the vast majority of retired scientists don't develop such a case of the stupids, so that also debunks that conspiracy theory.

Judith Curry had to quit because of it...

And we all know the promient ones have tenor and the universities can't kick them out..it's the young ones if they don't go with the mantra ...

Well forget it.



.

 

[aoxomoxoa]

Older scientists are either retired or near to it, hence are not scared of ruining their careers by not conforming to the prevailing orthodoxy.

Can you name anyone who had their career ruined, or who was fired for "not conforming"? I'm pointing out that your premise is an unsupported conspiracy theory which is contradicted by the facts, being that no denier scientists have been fired anywhere.

Also, the vast majority of retired scientists don't develop such a case of the stupids, so that also debunks that conspiracy theory.

Yes indeed, and as a fellow woman you ought to have some sympathy. Judith Curry resigned from her professorship because of the bullshit she was subjected to, why don't you know this already? I would suggest that you became a tad more circumspect and not be so inclined to spout so much nonsense.

JC in transition

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

 

[mamooth]

Here's a simple test for you little kitty. Tell us what the "scientific method" is, and how does it operate?

That's trivial.

A. Look at what you do.

B. Do the opposite.

I'm serious. You stink so badly at all science on every level, doing the opposite of whatever you do almost guarantees good science.

For example, look at this thread.

There's zero evidence to back up the kook assertions in the OP. It's just a crazy greenhouse-effect-denier conspiracy website putting out a fake news piece. They even put out the exact same fake news piece in 2014. 3 years later, they just repeat it.

Knowing that, you and every denier still declare that it's absolutely true. You're all basing your "science" entirely on feelings instead of evidence. That's the opposite of the scientific method, and it's how every denier acts.

 

[westwall]

Here's a simple test for you little kitty. Tell us what the "scientific method" is, and how does it operate?

That's trivial.

A. Look at what you do.

B. Do the opposite.

I'm serious. You stink so badly at all science on every level, doing the opposite of whatever you do almost guarantees good science.

For example, look at this thread.

There's zero evidence to back up the kook assertions in the OP. It's just a crazy greenhouse-effect-denier conspiracy website putting out a fake news piece. They even put out the exact same fake news piece in 2014. 3 years later, they just repeat it.

Knowing that, you and every denier still declares that it's absolutely true. You're all basing your "science" entirely on feelings instead of evidence. That's the opposite of the scientific method, and it's how every denier acts.

Answer the question little kitty and then tell us how manns refusal to release his data, and methods, is a violation of the scientific method. Go ahead, little kitty, let's see you rationalize his behavior.

 

[mamooth]

Judith Curry had to quit because of it...

No she didn't. She was free to keep working at the university until she died. Where do you get this stuff?

She quit because she didn't want to work any more. Now she gets the fossil fuel money for doing nothing.

 

[mamooth]

Answer the question little kitty and then tell us how manns refusal to release his data,

Mann did release all data. It's all right there at the link I gave.

Now, lying is definitely a violation of the scientific method, as it's a form of data falsification. How do you rationalize lying?

 

[aoxomoxoa]

Here's a simple test for you little kitty. Tell us what the "scientific method" is, and how does it operate?

That's trivial.

A. Look at what you do.

B. Do the opposite.

I'm serious. You stink so badly at all science on every level, doing the opposite of whatever you do almost guarantees good science.

For example, look at this thread.

There's zero evidence to back up the kook assertions in the OP. It's just a crazy greenhouse-effect-denier conspiracy website putting out a fake news piece. They even put out the exact same fake news piece in 2014. 3 years later, they just repeat it.

Knowing that, you and every denier still declares that it's absolutely true. You're all basing your "science" entirely on feelings instead of evidence. That's the opposite of the scientific method, and it's how every denier acts.

Answer the question little kitty and then tell us how manns refusal to release his data, and methods, is a violation of the scientific method. Go ahead, little kitty, let's see you rationalize his behavior.

A few things are certainly true, the scientific method is not subject to either politics or political correctness. Also scepticism is at its very heart, it is the very essence of scientific inquiry.

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

 

[Wyatt earp]

Judith Curry had to quit because of it...

No she didn't. She was free to keep working at the university until she died. Where do you get this stuff?

She quit because she didn't want to work any more. Now she gets the fossil fuel money for doing nothing.

I get it from her interviews, you know damn well I watch 99% of her on you tube.

And still want to ignore fossil fuels pay so much of universities funding in the science ? I have already covered this subject with you before.


Denier.



.

 

[aoxomoxoa]

Judith Curry had to quit because of it...

No she didn't. She was free to keep working at the university until she died. Where do you get this stuff?

She quit because she didn't want to work any more. Now she gets the fossil fuel money for doing nothing.

Did you read the article in her blog? No, of course not!

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

 

[mamooth]

A few things are certainly true, the scientific method is not subject to either politics or political correctness. Also scepticism is at its very heart, it is the very essence of scientific inquiry.

And look at this thread, where the deniers are the polar opposites of skeptics. The all embraced a load of crap solely because an authority figure told them to. I was the only one to show intelligent skepticism of the OP.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Here's a simple test for you little kitty. Tell us what the "scientific method" is, and how does it operate?

That's trivial.

A. Look at what you do.

B. Do the opposite.

I'm serious. You stink so badly at all science on every level, doing the opposite of whatever you do almost guarantees good science.

For example, look at this thread.

There's zero evidence to back up the kook assertions in the OP. It's just a crazy greenhouse-effect-denier conspiracy website putting out a fake news piece. They even put out the exact same fake news piece in 2014. 3 years later, they just repeat it.

Knowing that, you and every denier still declares that it's absolutely true. You're all basing your "science" entirely on feelings instead of evidence. That's the opposite of the scientific method, and it's how every denier acts.

Answer the question little kitty and then tell us how manns refusal to release his data, and methods, is a violation of the scientific method. Go ahead, little kitty, let's see you rationalize his behavior.

A few things are certainly true, the scientific method is not subject to either politics or political correctness. Also scepticism is at its very heart, it is the very essence of scientific inquiry.

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

Thank you..I have no problem with science..I have a huge problem when assholes like , Michael Mann and Jim Hansen made it political and being out right whores

.

 

[mamooth]

Did you read the article in her blog? No, of course not!

Of course I did. I'll summarize it.

"All those other scientists are poopyheads for pointing out how my predictions were all totally wrong! Admitting I was totally wrong would be embarrassing, so I quit! See ya, suckers! I'm off to collect that sweet fossil fuel cash through my 'climate prediction' front company!".

 

[aoxomoxoa]

A few things are certainly true, the scientific method is not subject to either politics or political correctness. Also scepticism is at its very heart, it is the very essence of scientific inquiry.

And look at this thread, where the deniers are the polar opposites of skeptics. The all embraced a load of crap solely because an authority figure told them to.

Using loaded words like denier says much about you. Nobody who is seriously interested in advancing science would indulge in such puerile politicking.

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

 

[Wyatt earp]

A few things are certainly true, the scientific method is not subject to either politics or political correctness. Also scepticism is at its very heart, it is the very essence of scientific inquiry.

And look at this thread, where the deniers are the polar opposites of skeptics. The all embraced a load of crap solely because an authority figure told them to.

No one told me to do a damn thing..I told you a million times I am 52 years old and followed this story since I could almost read.i told you I had subscriptions to popular science , popular mechanics, old mechanic illustrated when I was 7 years old ..

They always covered this subject..

.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Did you read the article in her blog? No, of course not!

Of course I did. I'll summarize it.

"All those other scientists are poopyheads for pointing out how my predictions were all totally wrong! Admitting I was totally wrong would be embarrassing, so I quit! See ya, suckers! I'm off to collect that sweet fossil fuel cash through my 'climate prediction' front company!".

No to me you are trying to tell us ignore the Naomi Kliens of the world who out right admitted this was about social economic change..(remember the pope invited her to speak at the Vatican)

Is to ignore Obama's words about we our flat earthers

Ignore Al gore ( who is advised by Jim Hansen) that the science is settled..


You make me want to puke...when you despise any one questioning your motives.



.

 

[mamooth]

Using loaded words like denier says much about you. Nobody who is seriously interested in advancing science would indulge in such puerile politicking.

Going into "I've got the vapors!" mode because your junk science was debunked says much about you. It's says you know you can't defend your claims, and so you need to deflect.

Now, back to that topic you tried to deflect from. The OP in this thread was load of crap. There's zero evidence anywhere that Mann refused to provide any data. Yet every denier still swore that's the case. None of them displayed even the tiniest amount of skepticism. All of them simply parroted what they were told to parrot.

How does that square with your "My side has the skeptics" theory?