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  1218  1219  1220  1221  1222  1223  1224  1225  1226  1227  1228  1229  1230  1231  1232  1233  Next

Comments 61251 to 61300:

  1. The Skeptical Science temperature trend calculator
    OPatrick: Thanks! It didn't occur to me check browser compatibility of save-as. This feature depends on the browser providing a tool to turn an HTML5 canvas into a virtual image. A quick check now shows that it works in Firefox 3.6 but not in google Chrome 17. If it doesn't work in your browser, I'm afraid you'll have to fall back on using a screenshot tool.
  2. The Skeptical Science temperature trend calculator
    This looks really cool; I may or may not want to play with it a little later. I may not because I'm already disheartened by this bit of news about "...global-mean temperature increases of 1.4–3 K by 2050, relative to 1961–1990, under a mid-range forcing scenario...". Man I hope they are way off; relative to _1961-90_ and _mid-range_ forcing caught my eye. I know, a bit OT; only thinly connected.
  3. The Skeptical Science temperature trend calculator
    A great tool, thank you. At first impressions very user friendly and clearly explained here. One possible problem, though it might just be me - you say "To save a graph, use right-click/save-image-as." However this doesn't work for me, it's not recognising it as a separate image. I can select the section and copy it, but this doesn't give me the scale or axis labels.
  4. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Daniel #39: Watts is indeed hearing-impaired. He even used that as a defense when he made false claims about the initial BEST analysis.
  5. Daniel J. Andrews at 16:18 PM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Watts says "While I can’t hear what Hadfield is saying (he sounds like a British mumble to me)" And it is because of people like Watts that they replace Sir David Attenborough's distinctive clear voice with American actors thereby taking a superb documentary and turning it into just another bunch of pretty pictures with nothing to distinguish it from other nature films. I saw 30 seconds of Frozen Planet while visiting friends and it had Baldwin narrating--it was turned off quite quickly. Without saying anything to each other we all agreed it was much better to wait for it to air in Canada as they'd keep Attenborough's voice in it. On some consideration, I wonder if Anthony needs a hearing aid?? My dad started complaining that people with accents mumble (he's British so pretty much everyone he met in Canada was "mumbling"), but once we talked him into getting hearing aids--only took five years--he could understand people quite well again. Peter H certainly doesn't mumble. He enunciates quite well and is easily understandable.
    Moderator Response: [RH] Anthony Watts does have a hearing impairment which would cause this video to likely be somewhat unintelligible for him. I sent him a private email (cc'ing both Peters) saying I would take the time to transcribe the video for him. I have not heard back from him. It's one thing to not be able to hear it, but it's quite another to not want to and to come to conclusions about what is being said without actually knowing what is being said.
  6. Medieval Warm Period was warmer
    markx @ 119: "Whether it was precisely co-incidental is perhaps not of great importance" Actually, I think it is of great importance. If there were warm periods, but they were at different times in different locations, then that is merely evidence that the earth's climate is somewhat variable. On the other hand, right now, it's warmer everywhere at the same, which seems to be unprecedented for at least the past six or seven thousand years. When it comes down to it, though, it's not just about whether the climate was warmer / cooler in the past. It's about what caused those warmer / cooler periods. And right now, there's only one explanation that stands up to scrutiny for the current warming (hint: it doesn't involve the word 'natural').
  7. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    "Format Your Quote? Would you like us to format the text you copied? Format Text More Options Powered by Curate.Us" Is that a pop-up that should happen? Part of the investigation?
  8. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Peter Hadfield deserves a medal for holding Monckton accountable for his nonsense. Peter's efforts have placed Monckton (and those who aid and abet Monckton's fallaccies and misinformation) between a rock and a hard place :) A very sincere thank you Peter!
  9. Medieval Warm Period was warmer
    Tom Curtis at 13:17 PM on 9 February, 2012 ".....the implicit claim that the MWP was globally warmer than the last two decades for the entire period of the MWP is refuted by the same comparison..." Tom, I'm not sure that IS the claim. The argument is that there exists in various worldwide proxy records some evidence that there was an unknown driver of a temperature elevation which was evident globally within a certain time bracket.(and referred to as The Medieval Warming Period). Whether it was precisely co-incidental is perhaps not of great importance, should a spate of extreme high temperatures such as that be observed today, surely we would label it as evidence of "Global Warming"?
  10. 2012 SkS Weekly Digest #12
    I'm in two minds about the # of articles. I'll just say that I'd prefer SkS prioritised quality over quantity. I try to read every article on SkS. This can be difficult to squeeze around other commitments at times, but it's always worth it. I've learned a phenomenal amount about climate science since finding this site. Comments I sometimes read, sometimes not (depending on available time & whether that particular topic interests me). I post comments when I feel I have something to contribute. And I must say, it's easy to do so here on SkS, because I know that if I get something wrong, the inevitable correction will be a gentle one. :-D
    Moderator Response: [JH] Thank you for the feedback and for being a regular reader. Your humor is also appreciated.
  11. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Barry - speak in code, man! Doug H - that's the obvious difference between the denial-o-sphere and the science. It's all open here. When the professional doubters get cranked up and try to push untruth onto the open side of the ledger, we get Scafetta, Michaels, Lindzen, Spencer, and the usual second-tier oddballs publishing mathturbation at WUWT. This hacking is a milestone for SkS. The range of possibilities is limited: private conversations twisted out of context, a chilling effect (fat f-ing chance), or the possibility of finding something juicy that 99% of the posters here know nothing about. John Cook, you are actually the clone of Friedrich Engels. Gasp! Or perhaps this is some sort of bizarre "payback" for Gleick's action. This is either childish (I know a number of net technicians who have a slim grasp on adulthood, despite their thinning hair), desperate, or just another move in the "yes, my integrity is for sale" game of opinion-making and economic manipulation (probably a combination of all three in different parts of the action). It reminds me of putting someone in a bad position on the chessboard and having their response be "accidentally" tipping the board over.
  12. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    John, I hope you deleted my emails about the eco-warriors' brave struggle to cleanse Gaia of capitalism. Please let me know if otherwise and I will advise the Earthplight underground to sanitise the old safe houses and set up new ones. Long live the Earth-mother.
  13. actually thoughtful at 13:53 PM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Look 16% of the population is rational and analytical by birth For the rest of the population, it is an ill-fitting suit. So roughly half of the non-rational are going to get it right, and half won't - maybe 75% of the rational will get it right (GIGO). so right now it appears we are losing. But CA and BC and Australia and most of Europe are already preventing climate change. We are due for one wallop of an El Nino - polling data tells us people "believe" in climate change more as it gets warmer each summer. So a particularly hot summer could turn this whole thing around, and these ignorant-on-purpose folks will find something else to be silly about. We just need that hot outlier soon, ideally in a US election year....
  14. 2012 SkS Weekly Digest #12
    I reckon the number of items published is pretty good. Yes. I read every post and every comment. There are some I might skim over, though. I do take more time with particular topics that interest me. Commenting? Not being a scientist or a statistician or any other useful occupation, I'm more interested in what some of the really knowledgeable commenters have to contribute. I limit my own comments accordingly.
    Moderator Response: [JH] Thank you for the feedback and for being a regular reader. Your active particpation in the comment threads is also appreciated.
  15. Doug Hutcheson at 13:27 PM on 26 March 2012
    2012 SkS Weekly Digest #12
    • From your perspective, does SkS publish too many, just the right amount of, or too few, articles per week? I read as much as I can find on the topic, here and elsewhere. More would be welcome.
    • Do you typically read each article that is posted? Yes
    • Do you typically read the comment threads? Yes
    • Do you typically post comments? Not often, as I am not a scientist, so have little to add to that side of discussions. I do post when I think I have something relevant to say
    Moderator Response: [JH] Thank you for the feedback and for being a regular reader. Your active particpation in the comment threads is also appreciated.
  16. Doug Hutcheson at 13:18 PM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    I met my first honest-to-God conspiracy theorist on Saturday, while handing out 'How to vote' cards for our State (Queensland) election. He genuinely believes that 9/11 was a USA conspiracy and that there is a small group ruling the world, amongst a raft of other ideas. I didn't engage him on AGW, not surprisingly. Up until then in my life, I have been treating everyone as reachable and teachable. Not any more. I now know there are genuine conspiracy theorists, who sincerely believe propositions that I regard as completely insane. For that reason, my attitude toward the Mighty Monckton has mellowed a little. Previously, I regarded him as an intelligent person who is deliberately spreading misinformation for reasons of his own. Now, I have to admit there is a possibility that he is like my voter: a simple soul who genuinely believes what the voices in his head are telling him. If so, it would explain his religious zeal in spreading the Word to the masses.
  17. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Snake oil salesmen are good entertainment as long as we understand the joke. When they are believed and stop us from taking the medicine we really need, the joke is wearing a little thin.
  18. Doug Hutcheson at 11:49 AM on 26 March 2012
    Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Sadly for the SkS hacker, I have nothing to hide. I stand behind everything I have posted here and any emails exchanged with John. Wow, that'll make exciting reading for someone! "Look. look, Doug thinks the Earth is warming!" Big deal. Not.
  19. 2012 SkS Weekly Digest #12
    SkS is great. I tweet a lot of the material and I learn a lot from the articles and comments. Very helpful and a tremendous contribution to the continuing discussion with those in denial. I don't comment much because I don't feel scientifically versed enough.
    Moderator Response: [JH] Thank you for the feedback and for being a regular reader. Please don't be shy about posting on our comment threads. You do an excellent job of defending climate science on the comment threads to articles on The Huffington Post.
  20. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    John, I have solved all the problems you are dealing with many times before on the social networking sites that I run, and would to help you with my experience and tools. This testimonial on my linkedin page is quite apposite: "Andy is a multi-talented iconoclast. He's exactly the guy you want on your team when Russian hackers decide to take down your server. However, don't be surprised if you discover him playing piano late one night (or early in the morning) at your local watering hole. I'm 100% certain that Andy has capabilities that I haven't even considered. What I do know is that he is honest, loyal and hard working - the right kind of guy to have in your corner."
  21. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    FWIW, Over at Hot Topic this issue arose, and a regular poster (from the other side - one who has considerable expertise in this area, however) has downloaded the zip file and tells me the following:
    The user.csv file contains usernames, date of joining, user level (an integer 1-14 or so) and email addresses The email addresses are not really redacted as such. They seem to drop the last part of the domain (e.g) .com) Example would be joe@gmail,so therefore it is pretty easy to deduce the full email address in most cases. There are no IP addresses in the user csv, but I have since noticed that IP addresses are logged against user names in the forums (these are the “private” forums where mods and other power users are discussing SkS strategies etc). There are no passwords from what I can see. John Cook posted on SkS that passwords are encrypted on his website, so a hacker would have to get hold of the encryption key.
    (Or crack them via the method andylee discussed above, I suppose, but it's really hard to see any great benefit being derived from this.) Anyway, he echoed Gareth's statement, as reiterated above, that it would be prudent to change any passwords, especially if you share your SkS password with any other websites. I've certainly not noticed any influx of spam or hatemail, thankfully!
  22. Same Ordinary Fool at 11:06 AM on 26 March 2012
    Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Why didn't I think of that?..........Caerbannog's #10 and #18 accounts of Monckton's chosen venue of an unpublicized appearance to an underworld-from-reason of the right wing could have been predicted. When the debunkers are always there after every public appearance, correcting his errors, for all interested people to see - it was always inevitable that he would some day have to retreat. And leave the lecture circuit of simulated scientific discussions for something else. Here, to that of rabble rousing applause lines. Even so, it is depressing and scary now that it has happened. These are people who don't believe in evolution. Despite the obvious proof that every single fossil has been found positioned in evolutionary order. And none in creationsist order - no giraffes amidst the dinosaurs. Think about how much harder it will be for creationists to learn from experiencing global warming's consequences - which will always be interspersed with the occasional old fashioned cold spell (resulting from weather variability). However, though we decry what comes next, this is progress, and a success for the debunking community. The more he's quoted from such appearances, the less welcome he will be at semi-serious-science occasions, to spread his climate science errors. After watching all of Potholer54's Youtube videos..........I'm inclined to give Peter Hadfield (and Peter Sinclair) much of the credit. Video, Marshall McLuhan's "hot" medium, is best for exposing the errors of a denier like Monckton. Typeface on paper or screen is better for presenting ideas or science. A reader can proceed at his own speed, go back, repeat, scan forward, and generally jump around. It is also simpler, less labor intensive, and cheaper: since all one needs is a keyboard. However, it cannot convery as much as quickly [that picture-is-worth-a-thousand-words thing]. Show, don't tell..........Peter Hadfield, in his 5 part Youtube series, amply demonstrates that video is the best medium for Monckton. And that it can be effective without resorting to the boring scientific details that might be misinterpreted by a general audience. .....Him misstating a research paper, followed by a visual of the paper and the contradicting statements in it. .....Him misstating a quote, followed by a visual of the original source of the quote. .....Him misusing graphs, as by cherry picking. Which is quickly demonstrated, by showing the correct graphs. .....Him being contradicted by himself - via videos from his other presentations. .....Him denying in emails that he'd made the mistakes pointed out by Peter Hadfield, followed by examples of same. Monckton's non response..........could also have been predicted by anyone who had just viewed those 5 videos. It's obvious that it has always been a mistake for Monckton to engage with Peter Hadfield. Because Monckton would always be expected to lose the least gullible among his potential believers - if they actually watched the videos.
  23. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Good point, Dana @#32! And, similarly, they just can't get The Word out properly because of the suppressive impact of all the co-conspirators and their masses of dupes. I've been surprised by Monckton's leaping right in on this, because he's been relatively cagey on the Birther thing previously. Sure, he said this to a Tea Party Rally in 2010:
    “America!Land of opportunity! You can be born in Kenya and end up as president of the United States!”
    But then upbraided upstart journalists who dared credit the English meaning of these words; this was, after all -
    what we on the Right call “A Joke”
    - and it's also what the crowd wants to hear. If he's really decided to nail the Nutters' colours squarely to his mast on the basis of Arpaio's 'research' I'd suggest he's made a significant tactical error in what 'I on the Left' might call "the Real World". ;-) Because it's such a clear indicator of the quality of 'evidence' on which he is prepared to make the most outlandish of claims, and his capacity to critically examine that evidence. And the parallels to other aspects of his position on climate are also clear, as pointed out by Dana. Now, holding this example in mind, anyone with their critical facilities somewhat intact is bound in turn to be somewhat leery or similar Lordly pronouncements... The base won't care, of course.
  24. 2012 SkS Weekly Digest #12
    I like the amount of SkS articles per week. I don't read most of them anymore, as now I feel I have covered the basics of the issue. But I like to see what kind of news are coming up, so every now and then an article gets my attention and I read it through. My comments have also become more sparse and shallower in content, as my patience with 'skeptics' diminished. I like the cartoon. Maybe a big victory of the manufactured controversy is making global warming a touchy subject on the media. Maybe this was the whole point of the manoeuvre. I was listening to an interview with David Attenborough at BBC these days and he mentioned global warming as a serious danger. The interviewer, Mike Williams from One Planet (an otherwise great reporter, IMO) was quick to point out that "many people don't agree with that". I wonder what kind public service they would offer if BBC said, similarly, that abestos causes a number or diseases and quickly added "but it's controversial, since this and this doctor claim otherwise".
    Moderator Response: [JH] Thank you for the feedback. It is indeed difficult to deal with the deniers on a continuing basis without losing one's temper now and then.
  25. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Reposted with editing corrections: The claims that I saw Monckton present could all be easily shredded by students at UCSD/SIO. The professors wouldn't even need to bother. Franky, I didn't see Monckton present anything that would be worth even a minute of a busy professor's time (unless it was to use as an exam question intended to start the grading-curve somewhere above "0"). The scientific community is not kept on the "up and up" by asking scientists to waste their time correcting freshman blunders.
  26. New research from last week 11/2012
    Now that I think about it some more, Hudson's claim is extremely egregious, it is sickening to see people in the media continuing to misrepresent the science. Someone ought to insist that Hudson correct the blog post or a complaint will be filed against him and/or the BBC with the ombusdman.
  27. Peter Hadfield Letter to Chris Monckton
    Here's what I don't understand about Monckton's birtherism. He says he's not a birther because he doesn't know where President Obama was born, but he's certain the birth certificate is a forgery. Well, why would Obama create a fake birth certificate unless he wasn't born in the USA? Monckton's position is akin to saying "I'm not a climate denier, I just think climate scientists are falsifying data." Oh wait, that's his position on global warming too. Well, at least he's consistent.
  28. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    SKS donation link: http://www.skepticalscience.com/donate.php
  29. 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...
  30. 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
  31. 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.
  32. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Thanks DB, all good now.
  33. New research from last week 11/2012
    But whatever will Steve Gddrd do with his triumphant proclamation of recovery?
  34. 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.
  35. 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.
  36. Skeptical Science hacked, private user details publicly posted online
    Sorry you were hacked. Hope you can catch them.
  37. 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.
  38. 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...
  39. New research from last week 11/2012
    But the BBC's weather blog has assured us of a strong recovery ... who you gonna believe?
  40. 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.
  41. 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]
  42. 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.
  43. 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 !
  44. 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?
  45. 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."
  46. 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 :)
  47. 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.
  48. 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.)
  49. 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.
  50. 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...

Prev  1218  1219  1220  1221  1222  1223  1224  1225  1226  1227  1228  1229  1230  1231  1232  1233  Next


The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


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