tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post5011155315121087027..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Climate Change Poll: Britons Are UnconvincedIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger106125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-68648187789603760792009-11-18T18:31:13.940+00:002009-11-18T18:31:13.940+00:00Well spotted Hoatzin.
I note that this is your 7...Well spotted Hoatzin. <br /><br />I note that this is your 7th post & in none of them have you produced any facts showing catastrophic warming, though specificly asked to, & have stuck rigidly to personal attacks on all & sundry. May I say how pleasing it is to cross swords with somebody who represents your movement in such an accurate & unadorned manner.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53940000056378896182009-11-18T14:26:39.235+00:002009-11-18T14:26:39.235+00:00So,
you're still onside with the OISM then N...So, <br /><br />you're still onside with the OISM then Neil?thehoatzinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13080787665247014405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-82361759807676834172009-11-18T10:52:51.074+00:002009-11-18T10:52:51.074+00:00That's http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/16/g...That's http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/16/gore-has-no-clue-a-few-million-degrees-here-and-there-and-pretty-soon-were-talking-about-real-temperature/#more-12877neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-62279506651986193892009-11-18T10:50:47.095+00:002009-11-18T10:50:47.095+00:00Daz, Pogo is dead on - claiming ignorance & fo...Daz, Pogo is dead on - claiming ignorance & following it up by claiming knowledge of "overwhelming evidence" is clearly untrue. Lets make it easy on you - produce one single piece of evidence proving catastrophic global warming is actually happening - not a theory & not simply assertionn but evidence.<br /><br />As regards the LibDems it is a matter of record that I was expelled officialy for believing in free markets & low taxes to allow people to be productive (this was officially described as "illiberal" & "too right wing" to contemplate) & that I was later informed that the real reason was because I openly opposed racial genocide. Regulars here know this, as do most LD bloggers - see my blog.<br /><br />Tail you are simply engaging in another evidence free ad hominum attack. Even Hoatzin seems to have accepted that is unconvincing.<br /><br />Incidentally as an example of the ignorance of the alarmist charlatans see St Al Gore - remember David Cameron insisting the shadow cabinet sit through a personal lecture from him - saying that 2 km down the Earth is "millions of degrees" warm. The truthis 10s of degrees. Let us hope that most Tory advisors are 100s of thousands of times more educated than this eco-fascist buffoon.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-61391435777802651142009-11-17T21:15:58.228+00:002009-11-17T21:15:58.228+00:00@dazmando: "I of course like you am not a sci...@dazmando: <i>"I of course like you am not a scientist so can like you only make up my mind on global warming using the evidence. Which yes is on both sides of the fence but overwhelming on the Man made global warming side. "</i><br><br />Sorry old chap, but if you really were a scientist there's no way that you'd claim the evidence of MMGW to be "overwhelming" - because, quite simply, there is no empirical evidence pointing to that conclusion. Computer models might, but, and this is a very big but, computer models are NOT science.Pogohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10812765444160924585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-33406703113970398052009-11-17T20:46:43.306+00:002009-11-17T20:46:43.306+00:00Neil
Get some help. Seriously. You're a very ...Neil<br /><br />Get some help. Seriously. You're a very shouty man.<br /><br />You brought up the OISM. You're out of the game. You have zero credibility mate. You have been roundly educated on the farce that was the OISM paper and how the science in it has been totally junked, not be the climate change camp but by scientists IN GENERAL.<br /><br />Go and bother some people down the local with your 'theories'spatuletailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17371959265172170932noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-89092294979122011132009-11-17T19:18:30.059+00:002009-11-17T19:18:30.059+00:00Neil,
I dont know where you think the lib dems in...Neil,<br /><br />I dont know where you think the lib dems instructions are coming from. But I would not adhere to any instructions anyway. We are not paid we pay them. So I would never take instruction from the Lib Dem leadership. Also no where does the lib dem membership state that supporting this genocide is a condition of party.<br /><br />I infact am a liberal in that I believe in free markets and small government leaving people free to be productive.<br /><br />I of course like you am not a scientist so can like you only make up my mind on global warming using the evidence. Which yes is on both sides of the fence but overwhelming on the Man made global warming side. However I would never say that anyway can’t express their believe that there is no global warming, that is for people to make their own minds up as indeed both you and me have.dazmandohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14859994295771083457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-56532640243483468792009-11-17T11:25:09.166+00:002009-11-17T11:25:09.166+00:00TheHoatzin you have, yet again, declined to disput...TheHoatzin you have, yet again, declined to dispute any of the facts I put up previously. You have made it abundantly obvious that, despite your lies, you simply can't - you are reduced to purely ad hominum attacks.<br /><br />Indeed your criticism of the 31,000 scientists on the petition revolves entirely round an ad hom attack on the Institute. It is certainly true that it is a small body refusing government funding on principle (unlike ALL alarmists). On the other hand it includes a Nobel prize winner & another member who fell out with a double Nobel winner over whether vitamin C stopped colds (he was right). Perhaps Hoatzin, if that is your name, you could let us know how many Nobels you have?<br /><br />That eco-fascists managed to put in a fraudulent signature in the name Geri Halliwell has been broadcast loudly by them. What it proves is that it is the alarmists who have absolutely no problem with fraud (as many of their papers also prove) & that the scientists aren't fans of the Spice Girls. You think that reflects badly on the scientists - I don't.<br /><br />Daz I have indeed posted on your site asking for any member of the LibDems who thinks they can argue the science rather than simply making ad hom attacks to do so - the response so far has been predictable.<br /><br />Since you bring it up I have indeed stated that those who commit war crimes & engage in genocide, ethnic cleansing, the sexual enslavement of children & the dissection of living people to steal their body organs in Kosovo are working in the Nazi cause. All big parties have been involved in this but the LibDems most enthusiastically & only they have made supporting this genocide a condition of party membership. I have said this previously here too. The difference being that though Iain has not answered it he is a good enough liberal not to censor it. <br /><br />Your own party has, of course, no such liberal principles & indeed now instructs its members to censor in the cause of genocide denial. I expect them to issue similar instructions over anybody mentioning the fact that the globe is cooling.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-49613524307958768382009-11-16T22:06:17.477+00:002009-11-16T22:06:17.477+00:00It's a true measure of your commentators, Iain...It's a true measure of your commentators, Iain, that they call people *who actually agree with Tory party policy* "eco-fascists."<br /><br />We have our own little Palinistas in the UK.Paul Halsallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602075031268155220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-57373666280281239642009-11-16T19:52:47.562+00:002009-11-16T19:52:47.562+00:00Wow its amazing some of these comments I blogged t...Wow its amazing some of these comments I blogged to your report Iain here http://bracknellblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/can-climate-change-debate-wait.html<br /><br />I dont want the left or right to highjack this issue for there own ends, I just want us to move forward on the issue and I dont know if we can wait for a debate.<br /><br />BTW Neil Craig also posted on my blog, he thinks us Lib Dems are Nazi's a step too far I think, infact its laughable.<br /><br />I also think as a comment on Bracknell Blog that it has become fashionable to be a climate change denier. Its the easy option.dazmandohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14859994295771083457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-33228494501653292372009-11-16T19:15:59.375+00:002009-11-16T19:15:59.375+00:00Neil, you might like to also consider the credenti...Neil, you might like to also consider the credentials of a few people who 'did' sign the petition.<br /><br />Such as, er, Geri Halliwell and various Star Wars characters. The monitoring was so lax that it was published with these obviously fictitious signatories. Try page 152 here: http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/resource-1892-2005.50.pdfthehoatzinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13080787665247014405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-60921282984844133482009-11-16T18:29:00.852+00:002009-11-16T18:29:00.852+00:00Neil, you're getting pretty tragicv now
The O...Neil, you're getting pretty tragicv now<br /><br />The OISM and their pathetic 'paper' entitled Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide are a source of open amusement among scientists.<br /><br />As SourceWatch state: The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself as "a small research institute" headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war. <br /><br />The OISM is located on a farm (I shit you not) about 7 miles from the town of Cave Junction, Oregon (population 1,126). The OISM would be equally obscure itself, except for the role it played in 1998 in circulating a deceptive "scientists' petition" on global warming in collaboration with Frederick Seitz, a retired former president of the National Academy of Sciences. <br /><br />The 'paper' has never been accepted for publication anywhere, let alone in the NAS Proceedings. It was self-published by Robinson, who did the typesetting himself on his own computer. None of the coauthors of "Environmental Effects of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" had any more standing than Robinson himself as a climate change researcher.<br /><br />"The mailing is clearly designed to be deceptive by giving people the impression that the article, which is full of half-truths, is a reprint and has passed peer review," complained Raymond Pierrehumbert, a meteorlogist at the University of Chicago. <br /><br />Numerous other scientists, and even the NAS themselves, ridiculed the paper publicly. Almost none of the signatures are of climate specialists, and only a few dozen were from people in the climate field. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/10/oregon-institute-of-science-and-malarkey/<br /><br />If you''re interested in Pierrehumbert, check this demolition of the poorly-written Freakanomics/Superfreakonomics climate claptrap. <br /><br />http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/an-open-letter-to-steve-levitt/comment-page-15/#comment-141499thehoatzinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13080787665247014405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-61441935231084463642009-11-16T15:41:17.174+00:002009-11-16T15:41:17.174+00:00Hoatzin the closest you have come to mentioning wh...Hoatzin the closest you have come to mentioning what I said was on th14-8.00pm post in which you made no answer.<br /><br />Therefore while I once again accept your claim to "shown the error" of what I have written as being the very highest standard of honesty to which you eco-fascists aspire. It is nonetheless wholly untrue as anybody here cab see.<br /><br />I note your claim to be a scientist & raise you all the various other eco-fascists online who have claimed to be scientists, nuclear physicists etc while displaying a total ignorance of their alleged subjects.<br /><br />Now if you actually feel you have a factual answer to my points 2 posts ago feel free to put them up for taget practice.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-7466061261127640212009-11-16T13:27:01.519+00:002009-11-16T13:27:01.519+00:00Neil Craig
I'm not a lefty, certainly not an ...Neil Craig<br /><br />I'm not a lefty, certainly not an eco-fascist. Can't stand them. But I am a scientist. I have already shown the error of your thinking re a current cooling. It's an oft-repeated meme. Repeated by people who aren't cogniscent of the facts or comfortable with anything other than basic science. Continually shouting about it all being a con by the world's leaders and scientists might go down well in your circle or with the people you browbeat on a daily basis who are too pleasant to tell you you're thick but it doesn't wash with people who are a tad better informed than you.<br /><br />Still, keep shouting it. If it makes you feel betterthehoatzinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13080787665247014405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-13284799217303221652009-11-16T10:39:12.348+00:002009-11-16T10:39:12.348+00:00Since TheHoatzin refuses to answer the points I ra...Since TheHoatzin refuses to answer the points I raised disproving his eco-fascist claims lets move on.<br /><br />Rob's Uncle says "the scientists have gone from being 'worried' about climate change to despair"<br /><br />Again an example of the very highest standard of honesty to be expected from the eco-fascist side of the debate. The largest single expression of scientist's opinion is the Oregon Petition in which 31,000 of them have expressed the view that not only do we not face catastrophic warming but that the rise in CO2 is beneficial.<br />http://www.oism.org/pproject/<br /><br />For obvious reasons this has never been mentioned by alarmist politicians & their propagandists running the BBC.<br /><br />There are a number of scientific bodies which say they believe there is some warming thlough they say it has been a fraction of a degre which is beneficial & certainly not catastrophic. Such bodies are uniformly funded by governments which have already announced that catastrophic warming, like Lysenkoism in Stalin's day, is official truth. It is good to see that the Russian Academy of Science has proven itself independent. Though, under its previous chair the British government funded Royal Scoiety was a hysterical alarmist propagandist their latest pronouncements a carefully worded to appear alarmist but claim nothing.<br /><br />I am quite certain that every alarmist who is remotely interested in the truth will either dissoaciate themselves from Hoatzin & Uncle or point out any factual inaccuracy in my answer. I am almost equally sure that there is not a single honest person promoting catastrophic global warming alarmism.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-26758973101232301562009-11-16T09:09:56.596+00:002009-11-16T09:09:56.596+00:00FYI. Follow this link to find out how shocking the...FYI. Follow this link to find out how shocking the fraud has been by the Eco Marxists. I also have to add how STUPID this make President Obama look. Why didn't he ask independent statisticians to look at the RAW DATA rather than the daisy ring of peer reviewing eco marxists. <br /><br />http://dizzythinks.net/2009/09/climate-change-peer-review-fail.html<br /><br />the lesson from this is ... When ever presented with this sort of argument force the raw data (the FIELD data) out of the scientists and get independent statistician to stake their reputations on a public review of the data.javelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04685858339910528013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-5838478032596533812009-11-16T08:18:03.075+00:002009-11-16T08:18:03.075+00:00Dizzy and Bishop Cramer recently linked to some bl...Dizzy and Bishop Cramer recently linked to some bloggs abot the guy who predicted the hockey stick rise in temperature had cherry picked his trees from the siberian woods. The guys samples had been used as the basis for the key papers - yet he refused to publish his full data set until he made the mistake of publishing in Philosophical Transactions whose policy was to publish raw data. It's taken over a decade for the environmental academic sleazeballs to publish their data and they have been found to be frauds. <br /><br />Sure climate change happens but as politicians we need to focus on real issues like - flood protection, energy supplies, land fill sites, too much packaging In food materials and so on. The real crime here is that New Labour has used the global warming as a Marxist proxy to bash business and not focused on fixing the real issues. Floods, predictions of power cuts, no land fill sites and bins full of plastic wrapping show New Labour's subliminal Marxist agenda renders them unfit to govern because the don't focus on real world issues.javelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04685858339910528013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-78787696326939417272009-11-16T06:55:34.821+00:002009-11-16T06:55:34.821+00:00Hoatzin said.
"Johnny Norfolk
you ignorant ...Hoatzin said.<br /><br />"Johnny Norfolk<br /><br />you ignorant idiot"<br /><br />Wow do you always talk dirty to your friends.Johnny Norfolkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900659617233793880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-79154173786834041012009-11-16T00:29:37.237+00:002009-11-16T00:29:37.237+00:00I might be more convinced that your 'fact'...I might be more convinced that your 'fact' is a 'fact' if The Times still had reliable pollsters as when they used MORI (now IpsosMORI).Max Atkinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06163447049027217653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-72972921428251855612009-11-15T23:48:54.251+00:002009-11-15T23:48:54.251+00:00Paddy Briggs - "it does seem to be right wing...Paddy Briggs - "it does seem to be right wing to challenge the science and even to dismiss the obvious fact that mankind is largely responsible for global warming".<br />Er... because it isn't obvious and it certainly isn't a "fact".<br />It's a theory - and the part of the global warming theory that says that any warming that might be happening is man-made is not backed by any conclusive data.<br />I guess right wingers are more sceptical of the global warming theories because we are still used to thinking for ourselves, rather than relying on an all-consuming state to tell us what to think and how to behave.Jonforesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01924098051450314709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-23434040235356922532009-11-15T23:41:19.527+00:002009-11-15T23:41:19.527+00:00Iain, you are absolutely right about the link betw...Iain, you are absolutely right about the link between the climate change taliban now and the Commies, Neutralists and Defeatists of the 70s and 80s.<br />They are the children of the same, I have no doubt.<br />At university, I ended up sharing a house with one of the leading lights of CND in the place. He really did spend nearly every minute of every day shitting himself. <br />Forget moral concerns about nuclear weapons, he was consumed with irrational fear and thought the Russkies had a nuke personally targetted at him.<br />You cannot have rational debate with someone who things that a nuclear bomb is going to land on their head at any second. <br />These climate change nutters are same kind of folk who in former times used to go into a panic every time there was an eclipse or a comet.Jonforesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01924098051450314709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-47249089493975849582009-11-15T23:10:23.579+00:002009-11-15T23:10:23.579+00:00There is a very good essay on 'Global Warming ...There is a very good essay on 'Global Warming as a Religion' by Prof John Brignell at http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/religion.htmTubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00499122556473339166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-72493095260533412372009-11-15T22:10:36.181+00:002009-11-15T22:10:36.181+00:00Johnny Norfolk
you ignorant idiot
I have already...Johnny Norfolk<br /><br />you ignorant idiot<br /><br />I have already posted a simple explanation of the oft-repeated fallacy of a cooling planet<br /><br />Try again: <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/comment-page-10/" rel="nofollow">here</a>thehoatzinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13080787665247014405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53758300264365740692009-11-15T22:04:04.808+00:002009-11-15T22:04:04.808+00:00Mmmm so let me see:-
There is no empirical evide...Mmmm so let me see:- <br /><br />There is no empirical evidence for MMCC; from Polar Bears to African mountains, all has been debunked. <br /><br />The model the whole idea is based on has been refuted, and cannot even predict the British Summer. <br /><br />The so call consensus amongst scientists, doesn't exist and never did. (You don't have to look very hard on the internet to find the evidence.) <br /><br />The supporters of MMCC talk about science, but obviously have no idea what scientific method actually is. <br /><br />The main arguements of the supporters are around myths and name-calling, whereas time and time again those who recognize the scam for what it is give reasoned arguement. <br /><br />C02 is a plantfood not a toxic substance, and a 35% rise in next to nothing is, still next to nothing. It can be proved that C02 levels have been higher in the past anyway. <br /><br />The climate has always changed - long before man evolved. And quite dramatically. It will contine to do so, it cannot be held in aspic - as the 'alarmists' seem to want to do. <br /><br />If the earth was warming then why is everything doom and gloom, surely there would be some benefits, where are those? Look at all that new land that would come available at the Poles for example!! Everyone at the Equator could move there!!! <br /><br />Why is it that the behaviour of the 'alarmists' has not modified in line with their dictates. Why is everyone flying to Copenhagen? <br /><br />Am I convinced by the MMCC hypothesis. Nope. And name calling really means nothing to me. The poor opinion of greedy, people who want to undermine freedom, democracy and scientific thought - is not something to worry about.Summerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269033958151012528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-56751587179947254252009-11-15T18:10:38.528+00:002009-11-15T18:10:38.528+00:00Paddy,
It is far from an obvious fact that mankin...Paddy,<br /><br />It is far from an obvious fact that mankind is responsible for global warming. The majority of the alarm was created by the infamous Hockey Stick graph, which has since been largely discredited. <br /><br />In addition to the points I made earlier, neither CO2 levels nor temperature are at historically high levels. Ask a geologist.<br /><br />We are looking at a snapshot of recent temperatures and CO2 levels which is akin to attempting to discover the subject of a book by selecting a single word at random.<br /><br />The unfortunate thing about obvious facts is that sometimes they are wrong.<br /><br />Of course, this may or may not be the case about anthropogenic global warming. The good thing about science is that it does not work by obvious fact or article of faith, it works by evidence.<br /><br />When a scientific paper is released that proves conclusively that mankind is responsible for the warming we see, and these findings are replicated by other scientists, I will no longer be skeptical. This is generally called the scientific method.<br /><br />Indeed, when such a thing happens, everyone will forget about the word consensus. They will simply show the paper.<br /><br />Your point about the right wing people being inclined to be skeptical is an interesting one. It may be that some on the right (libertarians, generally), though by no means all, value rationality and individual thought rather susceptibility to groupthink.<br /><br />I believe it is far more rational to be skeptical about something for which we have little evidence than it is to take other people's word that it is happening and make huge sacrifices that will make the poor poorer and the hungry hungrier.<br /><br />I find it quite sad that Science, which I consider to be the best hope for mankind, is just being turned into another religion by people who do not understand the scientific method but have assumed the trappings and terminology of scientists.<br /><br />There must be something deep in the human subconscious that requires this kind of unswerving belief in the unseen, especially if there is an element of guilt involved.<br /><br />In 30 years I imagine the case will be largely proven, one way or the other. I just hope we haven't caused too much hardship or death with our actions by that time.<br /><br />Now if you wanted something really scary that we could do something about, try asteroids.<br /><br />Thousands whizzing through our part of space all the time. Indeed we watch them hit our celestial neighbours through our telescopes and do nothing to prevent the same happening to us! And of course, it's not a question of if, but when.<br /><br />Unfortunately this would involve technological advance and job creation, which does not seem to fit into the environmentalist agenda.ScienceIsSkepticismhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03094375352136386870noreply@blogger.com