Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Prev  1208  1209  1210  1211  1212  1213  1214  1215  1216  1217  1218  1219  1220  1221  1222  1223  Next

Comments 60751 to 60800:

  1. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Muoncounter @29. Yep, Monckton's not a 'Birther'; he just knows the birth certificate 'has been fabricated'. You know, like the, um, Birthers... He knows this because the egregious Sheriff Arpaio and his truth posse have devoted themselves to researching this 'for 6 months', and have discovered... a scanning artifact! (See my comment @9) Some of the more lunar theories (and, because of the starting base, we're talking lunar² here!) hold Obama to be a Kenyan foreign student taken in by his kindly 'grandparents' and passed-off as one of their own. The Mailman proved it, it seems. But nobody can handle The Truth, because, as Monckton says -
    nobody is saying anything because the entire electorate has been fooled.
    (Sound familiar?) This is the kind of crowd Monckton is working. Evidence don't really enter into it; their 'truths' arrive more by way of revelation. So counter-evidence is probably equally unlikely to be effectual...
  2. Bert from Eltham at 09:31 AM on 26 March 2012
    Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    The main logical reason for the hacking would be to uncover any conspiracy that only really exists in the fevered minds of deniers. Having found nothing the only thing they then can do is make the information public in the hope that extremists can use it to harass or worse. You only have to look at recent history to see the same M.O. used against other law abiding organisations or individuals. They are simply projecting their own standards onto others. Reason facts and logic are irrelevant to them. This is my only real fear. Bert
  3. 2012 SkS Weekly Digest #12
    The hacking attack has undoubtably cost sks money as well as time. Here's the donation link, which John hides pretty well: Skeptical Science donations: http://www.skepticalscience.com/donate.php
    Moderator Response: [JH] Thanks for providng the link. I've been wanting to make a contribution.
  4. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Thanks DB, all good now.
  5. New research from last week 11/2012
    But whatever will Steve Gddrd do with his triumphant proclamation of recovery?
  6. Catching up with the Younger Dryas: do mass-extinctions always need impacts?
    I don't think that an impact event is a requirement for a mass extinction, but I do think one is unlikely without some rapid change in climate. Impact events are not the only cause for such changes, but others, like massive volcanism, leave different signatures. I'm not sure how you would produce a black mat over a wide area, coincident in time, outside of an impact event. (OK, a widespread nuclear war might produce a char layer, but that hasn't happened yet, and I suspect the isotope irregularities would have a different signature.) If you hit an ecosystem already under stress, because one or more critical species in the food web are under stress, with an impact event, I could see that causing an ecosystem crash, or at least some sort of reset. If you put a lot of aerosols into the stratosphere when the atmosphere has about 250 ppm CO2, the effect might be larger, and last longer through inhibiting warming feedback mechanisms, than if you did the same with an atmosphere at 300 ppm, and above. I suspect that if there was an impact event, it came at a time when the earth was just to one side of a tipping point.
  7. New research from last week 11/2012
    Muoncounter @17, Hudson claims that: "In fact The Met Office issued a press release to that end, saying the loss of sea ice that year had been wrongly attributed to global warming." But Paul Husdon has misprepresented the Met office press release. He seems to have a habit of not getting his facts straight and providing fodder for those in denial-- I expect better from the BBC and likewise they should expect better of their staff. This is what the Met Office press release said [my bolding]: "Analysis of the 2007 summer sea-ice minimum has subsequently shown that this was due, in part, to unusual weather patterns. Arctic weather systems are highly variable year-on-year and the prevailing winds can enhance, or oppose, the southward flow of ice into the Atlantic. Consequently, the sea ice has not declined every year, but has shown considerable variability - both in extent and thickness. The high variability has made it difficult to attribute the observed trend to man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, although there is now enough data to detect a human signal in the 30-year trend. The trend and observed variability, including the minimum extent observed in 2007, is consistent with climate modelling from the Met Office." Hudson should issue a correction and apologise. I'm not holding my breath, because he has been propataing this meme since 2009, see here.
  8. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Sorry you were hacked. Hope you can catch them.
  9. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online

    Hi guys... can you please reset my account too? see my comments at #59 and #66.

    Moderator Response: [DB] I have reset your account & sent an email with the details to the email account on file.
  10. Daniel Bailey at 08:35 AM on 26 March 2012
    New research from last week 11/2012
    Paul should learn the meaning of both nilas ice and First-year-ice. Essentially, the entirety of the non-red/brown areas will be gone by the end of the melt season in September. And much of the red/brown will be: - dashed on the shores of Greenland/the Canadian Archipelago - piled in windrows before them both - advected out the Fram Strait The Death Spiral...Lives...
  11. New research from last week 11/2012
    But the BBC's weather blog has assured us of a strong recovery ... who you gonna believe?
  12. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    As if his Lor'ship's nonsense didn't go deep enough, he's publicly thrown his hat in with the birthers: I’m no birther [sic], don’t get me wrong… I haven’t a clue where Obama was born ... on the White House website is he has put up a document which he is plainly a forgery and I would regard that as a very serious matter. A 'birther' is someone who believes that President Obama was not born in the US and that his Hawaii certificate of birth is a forgery. This group is the lowest form of right-wing nutters. But it is even a step lower on the evolutionary ladder to admit being one and simultaneously deny being one.
  13. Daniel Bailey at 07:51 AM on 26 March 2012
    New research from last week 11/2012
    Speaking of Arctic sea ice, the multi-year ice has almost completely receded back to the North Pole from 2011: To 2012: [Source]
  14. Roy Spencer's Bad Economics
    Dunc461 - coal does not cost the same everywhere. Labour, technical extraction and transport costs vary enormously. Renewables cost is also very location dependent. Where I live, we have no subsidies on any form of generation. Wind is competitive with coal because of high availability. Ditto for Concentrated Solar Power in other locations. (You can expect reduction in PV, but SCP is technology of choice for large scale solar). Can I strongly recommend you look at Sustainable Energy without the hot air I also wouldnt rush to blame economists for perceived ills. Plenty of cassandra's out there because it is hard to convince politicians to hear unwelcome news (just like AGW "skeptics"). I also have considerable faith in markets to deliver. Kill the subsidies (all of them), ban new coal-fired generation, then leave it to the market to sort out best replacement generation.
  15. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Caerbannog, your name is highly appropriate for the flack you could have taken, Raising your head above the parapet (or Bannog) is a brave thing to do when in the middle of such a hostile and illogical crowd. Hwyl Fawr !
  16. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Oh dear, we must have upset someone. Churchill's quote comes to mind. "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." The regrettable thing is that we have been exposed as agents for the New World Order, part of a socialist conspiracy, with massive funding from the shadowy Illuminati. Do you think that might affect our reputation?
  17. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    I read on a denial site that if you put the hacked files onto an old phonograph and play it backwards you can hear John (Cook, not Lenin) saying "Paul flies black helicopters."
  18. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Oh dear. If this was indeed a sophisticated attack to unearth evidence about some vile conspiracy, the doers must feel rather disappointed now. But do not fall to desperation, my friends, maybe the secret orders for black helicopters are to be found from some other place. After all, internet is vast :)
  19. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Mod test??????
    Moderator Response: [Sph] Yes, sorry. We have to test a lot of things. I just randomly picked your comment to do so.
  20. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Are you going to send an email to those whose information was stolen alerting them of this? In the profile change I noticed that: a) There is no captcha (easy to implement) b) The password is not confirmed (leading to involuntary user self invalidation)
    Moderator Response: [Sph] We are working on a number of things, but there is a lot to do and only so much manpower. This is a 100% volunteer run site, one that generates a lot of posts, works on other efforts, and so on. The programming needed to fix this is not trivial, especially while simultaneously trying to track down the hacker, secure the site and evaluate the dangers of all of the data that was stolen (and please do not for one minute doubt this, we have substantial, irrefutable proof that the entire site was hacked in a way that was not trivial, Any claims that somehow we just left a door open, and someone happened to find stuff, are utterly and completely ludicrous.)
  21. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    caerbannog - my experience at Monckton's talk in Sacramento was similar, though probably not as extreme. Lots of Tea Party folks, conspiracy theorists, the same "Agenda 21" nonsense, applause when Monckton accused climate scientists of fraud, etc. I'll have a post on the event next week.
  22. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    thanks DB, that seems OK. The Update Profile still won't let me change my password but I'll worry about that later when the fuss has died down...
  23. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Just posted interview of Peter Hadfield by Peter Sinclair - Potholer54 and Greenman3610 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZKzJwMOWAI
  24. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    I am continually amazed that some US politicians look to Monckton for advice on anything at all. He self-evidently does not believe in democracy. Here is the proof. In 1999 the British government passed a law taking away the right of hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords. The 1999 Act is quite short and is very clear in its meaning. The House of Lords Act 1999, section 1, provides firstly that "No-one shall be a member of the House of Lords by virtue of a hereditary peerage". Section 2 provides for exceptions. The only exception rule which might apply to Monckton is 2,(6):"Any question whether a person is excepted from section 1 shall be decided by the Clerk of the Parliaments, whose certificate shall be conclusive." The Clerk of the Parliaments has publicly certified that Monckton is not entitled to sit in the House of Lords - Letter to Viscount Monckton of Brenchley from David Beamish, the Clerk of the Parliaments. According to the constitution and common law of our British democracy, the highest law in the land is an Act of Parliament enacted by both houses and signed by the sovereign. Accordingly, the 1999 Act is a manifestation of democratic and sovereign power. Monckton's continual assertion or implication that he is a member of the House of Lords is contrary to fact, contrary to law and contrary to the democratic and constitutional principles and practices of the United Kingdom. In effect, he is trying to apply his own diktat as a trump card over and above democracy. Given what Americans have been through in the past to protect their democratic freedoms I am surprised that they even let Monckton into their country, much less listen to his tosh and piffle. The public also deserves to know that what Monckton doesn't know about science would probably fill the world's science libraries.
  25. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Monckton is the dominate climate demagogue. And his name should be added to the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogy "20th-century American social critic and humorist H. L. Mencken, defined a demagogue as "one who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." But unlike other demagogues - the stakes here are are total. On the spaceship Earth - we are hosting a climate demagogue spouting dangerous hallucinations of how to manage our atmosphere. Disturbing, like seeing a navigator in a jet fighter, playing with the ejection lever. Until now, our imperfect species has always managed to survive by tolerating a 15% lunatic fringe... but now that it applies to technical life-support systems, we are stymied by our inability to shut them down or re-educate them. What a pity.
  26. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online

    DB, perhaps you could do the same for me. As someone who signed up quite a long time ago, I suspect that the email address I signed up with might also not be valid any longer....even 'though SkepticalScience returns my password to my current email address when I "pretend" I've forgotton my password. So I am signed up under the user "chris", and I would like a new password to be sent to the email address associated with that username. ...hope that makes sense...

    Response:

    [DB] I have reset your account & sent an email with the details to the email account on file.

  27. Rob Honeycutt at 05:00 AM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    What's really fascinating is to think back to 1972 when John Lennon was deported for FAR milder rhetoric.
  28. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online

    @ John Cook Hi John, I hope I'm not sounding to impatient as this is my third comment. I still have not been able to change my password. Perhaps I'm not doing everything correctly. Could you either give me precise instructions or delete my user? Cheers, Martin

    Response:

    [DB] I have changed your password, but the email you signed up under for this user ID does not appear to be valid.  Are you also signed up under the user "martin"?  If so, I will send the new password to that email address.

  29. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    I myself sent email to Watts thanking his actions relating this stupid little episode. If we can stick to the old proverb "things fight, not people", there's still hope.
  30. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Yes, it is kind of scary, Rob. I'm having a flashback to a M*A*S*H* episode where the 4077th is caring for a bunch of Korean orphans. Col. Potter is reading an army jeep maintenance manual to several kids (probably 1-3 years old), as if it were a kids' bedtime story. The kids don't speak a word of english, but they are loving every minute of it. The moral of the story: it doesn't matter what you say, but how you say it. The speaker is the coach - there to pump everyone up for The Big Game - and the audience only hears the Rah-Rah-Rah boosterism and couldn't care less that the content is jibberish. To paraphrase Elmer Fudd: be vewy, vewy afwaid. They're *not* just hunting wabbits.
  31. Rob Honeycutt at 03:33 AM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    caerbannog @ 18... That is a truly frightening accounting of the event.
  32. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Oh, great. Now the whole world will know that my PW here was "JohnCookIsACyborg". How embarrassing. But on a slightly more sane note, I think this incident is a classic revelatory action. It shows [1] how effective SkS has been in the eyes of the deniers. That doesn't really tell us much about the deniers; you'd have to be too dumb to use a browser not to see the SkS influence online. And they're certainly at least that competent. And [2] it shows just how utterly desperate deniers are to throw sand in the gears of science and efforts to communicate science's findings to a wider audience. Given the nature of this site and the lack of anything "interesting" they could have acquired by their nefarious means, it's one of the last ones I would have expected them to attack. So I have to admit to being slightly surprised. Ever onwards.
  33. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Lord Monckton has appeared more than once on Russia Today. This government-owned TV channel belongs to the Russian government's press agency RIA Novosti and used to feature Western denialists, but on March 17, the famous climate scientists Michael Mann was interviewed. RT was very gracious to Dr. Mann, but they seem to have amnesia, because they blamed denialism on the American politicians and the Heartland and did not take responsibility for also spreading the Climategate lies. RT criticized the Heartland, but the Heartland has cited RIA Novosti's attacks on the climate scientists. Heartland and other denialists deserve our contempt, but the Russian government's press agencies were also spreading the same lies. Now the line has changed: The Heartland, Monckton, and others are tossed under the bus. Still, RT and its parent RIA Novosti were spreading the same propaganda as the Western denialists. Shouldn't the leaders of Russia also be held to account? I think if the Russians are having Dr. Mann on TV, they should also apologize for the lies they told about the climate scientists. I don't know if the Russian leaders will do this or not, but I think they are the leaders of a superpower and will do this before Inhofe or Cuccinelli apologize. Here are the details. http://www.legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2012/03/climate-change-scientist-michael-mann.html
  34. Eric (skeptic) at 02:31 AM on 26 March 2012
    Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Is access to the database " restricted only to myself" (i.e. John Cook) or restricted to John Cook plus the forum software which must access the database to do its job. If the latter (which makes the most sense to me) then the forum software contains both a username and password in its configuration files either in clear text or in a form that can be automatically decrypted by the SW which might as well be clear text. Regardless of that, the only plausible explanation for the leak is external hacking, most likely by exploiting vulnerabilities that Andylee has talked about. My own instance of PHPBB was hacked, it is unfortunately all too common.
  35. funglestrumpet at 02:18 AM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Perhaps we as a species really do not deserve to survive. Just look at the facts: The powers that be observe that the climate is changing and are sufficiently alarmed to set up the IPCC. This enables the world's leading climate scientists and other leading scientists in related fields to pool their expertise and analyse the state of the science in the relevant papers on the subject. From this analysis they then advise those in the legislature regarding policy on the issue. By way of 'thanks', they get a whole army of people: Delingpole, Philips, Hitchens, The Tea Party, The Republican Party, etc. etc. ridiculing them for all their hard work on all our behalves, while speaking from positions of breathtaking scientific ignorance and even invoking Genesis on occasion. They, like sks, get their private details hacked, and in some instances they get court proceedings taken against them. In fact, the list of 'retaliatory' acts seems endless. Perhaps the denialati don't realise that Mother Nature has declared war on us and she has some heavy armaments her arsenal. In a war situation, the last thing anyone should do is try to disrupt the work of the intelligences agency (IPCC) in formulating a 'state of play' regarding what the enemy is doing (Mother Nature) and offering advice on what our strategy should be in response. Yet that is exactly what Monckton and a whole army of like minded individuals are doing. Perhaps, difficult as it is to believe, the likes of Monckton actually want Mother Nature to have her wicked way with us. Perhaps they think that they and their progeny will be able to survive the troubles that lie ahead and come out on top, so to speak, in much the same way the collaborators in WW2 believed they were in for a good life at the end of hostilities. Perhaps those who are fans of Monckton have not spotted that His Lordship has a much more interesting life than they almost certainly do, flitting around the world as he does giving the same old same old (complete with known misleading statements) to audiences of adoring fans. Keith Barry and Derren Brown deceive their audiences, but only for the purposes of entertainment. It is difficult to work out the motives behind Monckton's audience deception. I for one would love to see who pays for all this globe-trotting and associated expenses. Perhaps his need to be in the limelight is so desperate, he pays for it all himself. Perhaps Peter Hadfield is right in allowing for the possibility that Monckton's misleading statements are genuinely unintentional. I would do the same if they did not include so many misrepresentations of hardworking scientists who are engaged on our side of the fight; misrepresentations that appear very deliberate to me. Perhaps we should not view Monckton as a collaborator, but it is hard not to. Perhaps he is not receiving any benefit from his actions on climate change other than a fun life being the centre of attention, something that he appears to crave. But there again, perhaps we really should view him thus. What really saddens me is that so many young people support his efforts to blight their future; like the cannon fodder of WW1 admiring the generals who were sending them 'over the top' to their almost certain deaths in a war they had been told was the war to end wars. ("Well, young Willy McBride, it's all happened again and again and again and again.") Perhaps Mother Nature is not really at war with us. Perhaps all she is doing is reacting as Gaia to a virus infection called humankind that has reached a tipping point in terms of its population and needs culling. When a person gets sick with a virus infection, the usual response is a rise in temperature. It would seem that the earth is only doing likewise. Perhaps Monckton is only acting as an anti-body, or somehow sees himself as such. Perhaps I should admit defeat, but I cannot. I regard Monckton and all those like him, together with their supporters that give them the oxygen of publicity, as my enemy, my children's enemy and the enemy of their children, unborn and unnamed. With that in mind I will fight them with all my might. Perhaps in Monckton's case Mother Nature will do the job for me. When a soldier runs away, as Monckton has so clearly done on this occasion, instead of standing their ground, the usual response is a court marshal for cowardice, followed by a blindfold and a target marker over the heart. I wonder how Mother Nature will deal with his cowardice. If he were genuinely worth his peerage, he would have the courage to either offer a defence of his seemingly misleading statements, or admit his error and amend his presentations accordingly. Perhaps he will, but I doubt that he has the courage.
  36. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    #11: At the beginning of the event, the audience was told about opponents who were trying to get the event cancelled, to suppress their freedom to "hear the other side", yadda, yadda, yadda. It was made clear that anyone disrupting the proceedings in any way would be tossed out immediately. When Monckton asked people in the audience to raise their hands if they thought that global-warming could really be a potential problem, I raised my hand, and was almost the only one in the audience to do so (in fact, I may *have* been the only one). Questions to Monckton were to be submitted on 3x5 cards, and he did trouble himself to answer several "backside-kissing" questions. No need for question-screening with this audience! The event was structured in a way as to prevent any direct challenges to Monckton. Monckton just *loves* adoring fans, and events like this are specifically taylored to serve those fans up to him. BTW, Monckton got *three* standing-ovations during his show. At any rate, trying to engage Monckton in any sort of "reality based" debate would have been about as productive as taking on Duane Gish in a megachurch. One of Monckton's talking-points was the old "hockey-sticks from random noise" claim. To rebut that, you would basically have to explain stuff like autocorrelation lengths, eigenvalues, etc. to "Bubba". #15 AFAICT, the event was publicized only in the right-wing "orthogonal universe", i.e. via "tea party" web-sites, etc. I found out about it when I saw a climateprogress.org piece about the California GOP inviting Monckton to speak in Sacramento. Did a bit of Googling to see where else Monckton might be going; got a hit on a tea-party web-site and followed a couple of links from there. In retrospect, I feel a bit silly and naive about my on-line attempts to get some UCSD/SIO folks to attend the event -- I mean, just what *was* I thinking???
  37. Philippe Chantreau at 01:18 AM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Off course, Monckton can't answer. Hadfield's video is full of footage of Monckton himself putting his foot in his mouth and ramming it down as far as it will reach. It is so plain and obvious that it takes Watts all his denial power to wiggle away from it.
  38. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Caerbannog, I've spent many good hours also, wasted, debating things with the intellectually derailed or dishonest, and I have to say the efforts have helped me fill in holes in my understanding of the science. By now (and in fact, probably for the last year), the diminishing returns have gotten infinitesimal. There seem to be now three kinds of postings- those by conservative ideologues with no intellectual integrity, hired shills, and the truly paranoid. The first are, unfortunately, people I think still must be engaged. The second should be identified and exposed ( I have NO idea how to do that, but it's got to be possible) and as to the third, as soon as you realize it, I think the response should be the same as during an in-person exchange, when you suddenly realize that you are speaking with someone delusional or psychotic, you back away slowly, showing your hands, making calming sounds.
  39. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Password successfully changed, no problem for me there. No sign of unusual spam etc as yet either. It seems to be becoming some kind of a (rather twisted) badge of honour to be targeted by illegal hackers - a nod to the high quality of work done by SkS. It seems to be all the hackers can resort to as they are totally lacking in evidence for their point of view. paulchevin #75, for a while on one of the SkS articles there was an image that was linked (IIRC) to a NOAA page, which triggered a random login popup window for NOAA, not sure if that would be related?
  40. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    caerbannog: Do you know how this event was publicized beforehand? It would be interesting to see how 'they' were able to attract such a distinguished audience and get some of those folks out of their bunkers. This could be an early warning of another active summer for the teabag crowd - like the summer of the health care debate.
  41. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    "From what I saw tonight, I would have to say that most of the people who attended the Monckton show are very unlikely to be moved by appeals to evidence and logic." Well, I spent more time than I would have liked yesterday--on a beautiful Saturday, no less--"debating" with just such idiots (Canadian ones, FWIW.) Second Law, yadda yadda, Faith-based AGW, yadda yadda, lying scientists, yadda yadda. I (and a few other masochists dedicated posters) keep giving 'em facts, which invariably sink without a trace in what passes for consciousness with such denialists. I just have to keep reminding myself that it's the reader passing by, not the ostensible opponent, for whom the truth may be important. (The worst of that is, there have got to be very few lurkers as such threads spin out--sensible, normal folk must flee them in droves. It does raise questions about the efficient use of time.) All of which is to say that my appreciation for Peter Hadfield's efforts runs deep. It takes a lot of work and patience, and he's done a magnificent job. There can be no question as to whether Monckton is a serial fabulator--you can, IMO, write QED on the file.
  42. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    caerbannog thank you for sharing your experience with the Monckton-Tea Party crowd. Although in any country we have skeptics and deniers there are traits characteristic of the anglo-saxon world that aren't easy to decipher for us "barbarians" (as strangers, the original meaning of the greek word).
  43. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Well, I had no difficulty changing my password. It was unique to this site, anyway. Like others here, I'm not in the least bit surprised that SkS has been targeted for an unethical & illegal attack by the 'other side'. Sorry to see they've been somewhat successful, though. And I'm happy to admit that my opinion of Anthony Watts just went up a few notches after reading this thread.
  44. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Um so Watts can understand His Lordship's British accent, but not Peter Hadfield's British accent? Extraordinary! And strikingly convenient. Throw in a little guilt-by-association, and a handy strawman about 'obsession', and you can wander away from the scene while whistling just a little too loudly in the dark, all the while waiting for something shiny to turn up and distract the troops from the whole sorry mess. As it will. Inevitable conclusion: Monckton cannot answer Hadfield. And Watts knows it. But on the whole their audience doesn't care, because they'd rather believe - it's what they're good at - whether it be in faked birth certificates, global Communist conspiracies, or English aristocrats who are smarter than the entire trained scientific establishment, don'tchaknow?
  45. Sapient Fridge at 20:10 PM on 25 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    caerbannog, doesn't sound like a good event to express opposing opinions. I assume you kept your mouth firmly shut on the night? ;-) Looks like Monckton's doing a runner and isn't going to reply to potholer54's points. This post (24/03/12 8:13am) from Anthony Watts seems to indicate that he wants to end this embarrasing debate early, without needing any reply from his Lord: REPLY: While I can’t hear what Hadfield is saying (he sounds like a British mumble to me) they seem totally infatuated with their manhunt, so much for Hadfield’s repeated claims of being “dispassionate and logical”. Thanks for posting this. When he starts colluding with that hateful “greenman”, all semblance of rational debate is destroyed. This video then cements my decision not to provide any further space to Hadfield here. – Anthony
  46. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    A few days ago (sorry, I can't remember exactly when) I received a popup message when I visited SKS. It was a standard Windows prompt for me to log on. I chose to ignore the message, closed the window and found that I was already logged on. I don't know sufficient about computers to say whether this could be relevant to what has happened, but it has certainly never happened before or since. Paul
  47. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    OK folks, I took one for the team and went to see Monckton do his thing. Drove up to the USD campus (where Monckton was speaking), parked the car and started looking around for the auditorium -- when I spotted a parked car with a "Show Us Your Birth Certificate" bumper-sticker, I knew that I was close. Saw some other (ahem) "interesting" bumper-stickers, including a variation on the ecumenical "Coexist" bumper-sticker. But instead of being spelled out with various religious symbols in an inclusive manner, the "Coexist" letters were formed from various types of automatic weapons. Well, when I got to the auditorium, I very quickly found myself in a parallel (no, make that *orthogonal*) universe. There might have been as many 500 people there (300-seat auditorium and a big overflow room) -- can't say exactly, but there were way more people than could fit into the auditorium. The event was MC'd by California GOP assemblyman Brian Jones, and he was not shy about serving up plenty of full-strength Koolaid. There were references to the UN, "Agenda 21", evil, lying scientists, etc. etc... The global conspiracy against America is truly far-reaching, nebulous, and ill-defined. Based on the reactions to the MC's dog-whistling, it didn't take me very long to realize that many of the people sitting around me were completely unhinged -- we are talking tinfoil-hatville to the max. Monckton served up plenty of "red meat" during his presentation -- he did not hesitate to dish out hate and bile directed at the scientific community -- he singled out Naomi Oreskes for special attention, referring to her as "that monstrous woman", and then he said something along the lines of "We in the UK are working to decertify the University of California as a legitimate academic institution". This California crowd then erupted into loud applause. I knew that the tea-party types are a bit "off", shall we say -- but the paranoia and conspiracy-mongering were even more than what I was expecting. It's really a bit more than spooky, when I come to think of it. When I was a kid, people like these would be seen handing out leaflets at airports -- now, they call the shots in a major US political party. And as for Potholer54, all I can say is that as much as I appreciate his efforts and love his videos, Monckton has tapped into such a lucrative "mother lode" of American loonery that he can simply ignore the good Potholer. Any refutation of Monckton's claims, no matter how well documented and presented, will simply be folded into the right-wing paranoid conspiracy narrative. From what I saw tonight, I would have to say that most of the people who attended the Monckton show are very unlikely to be moved by appeals to evidence and logic.
  48. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Jeez - what a weekend. Friday afternoon we find out what has happened and start investigating. By Friday night frantically changing passwords all over the place and manage to knock coffee over keyboard in process, and Saturday get a new keyboard and return to discover the whole town's telecoms are down - broadband, cashpoints, the lot. This morning by contrast seems a bit more normal! So I can now catch-up: it's good to read that Watts, despite our frequent differences, has vetoed spreading what is basically a stack of personal data further. The climate debate can be a street-fight at times, but perhaps we should all reflect that vigorous disagreement is one thing, but a line should be drawn as to what constitutes fair play. Things like this go well beyond that.
  49. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Oh, and here's a quote from Bishop Hill (Montford) himself on the thread below the leak story, attacking the one person brave enough to defend SKS on the thread: "Hengist, If your contributions were less dishonest I think people would be more inclined to be civil to you." Mar 24, 2012 at 7:54 PM | Bishop Hill Montford's defending the vitriolic attacks other posters have made against Hengist. Compare that to how SKS responded to criticisms of Antony Watts on this thread. How people treat their opponents is often more telling of their character than how they treat their friends... http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2012/3/24/behind-the-scenes-at-skeptical-science.html
  50. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Clearly Anthony Watts is a far better man than Montford. Who knew?

Prev  1208  1209  1210  1211  1212  1213  1214  1215  1216  1217  1218  1219  1220  1221  1222  1223  Next



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us