They lasted about four days, and never answered any of my questions. Below is their “old message.”
“We will contact you shortly.”
No you didn’t. Just more BS from the usual group of suspects.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Another Ice Age?
- Historic Heatwave
- Historic Heatwave
- Science-Free Journalism
- Why Is Venus So Hot?
- Color Or Monochrome?
- AI Doublespeak
- AI Doublespeak
- Net Zero Intelligence
- “The Green Party dropped nearly 9 per cent”
- Fake Record Heat In India
- RFK Jr’s Plan For $12 Gas
- Hockey Match
- Hockey Match
- Giving Proper Credit
- Conspiracy Theory!
- “No One Is Above The Law”
- CNN Experts Discuss Medicine
- Looking For Their Lost Keys
- Rapid Climate Change
- CBS News 1982 : One Fourth Of Florida To Drown
- Affordable Transportation
- “Why Scientific Fraud Is Suddenly Everywhere”
- She Hates Her State
- Climate Friendly War
Recent Comments
- Charles Higley on Another Ice Age?
- Conrad Ziefle on Another Ice Age?
- Disillusioned on Historic Heatwave
- Terry Shipman on Historic Heatwave
- Mike on Historic Heatwave
- Gordon Vigurs on Historic Heatwave
- Gordon Vigurs on Historic Heatwave
- Bob G on Historic Heatwave
- Bob G on Historic Heatwave
- Francis Barnett on Historic Heatwave
well, get some media Outfit like RedState or HumanEvents, or hell if you need a respectable one try Commentary or National Review, to ask your questions for you!
Don’t just let them weasel out on you!
WHO is CCCSE?
We all know the reliability of the Cook site!
Your 4 questions overwhelmed their abilities.
Didn’t this start out as 700 scientists two weeks ago? Now they are down to John Cook.
in other words—what they had before—700 x 0 = 0
I think that they should answer questions to the general public also, but to attack the reliability of John’s site isn’t the issue here and I don’t see why it was brought up. If you think the site is so unreliable then i’m sure you could point out the scientific inaccuracies over there and they will undoubtedly allow you to contribute as long as it is supported by the evidence.
Do you think they should do what they said they were going to do?
Clearscience go to this http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/03/john-cook-skeptical-science.html for a point by point debunking of the whole of John Cook’s website.
Adam:
You want to confuse the issue by bringing up facts from Lubos! How cruel of you to suggest C S attempt to read something Lubos says! 😉
Rumor had it that 700 from AGU or NAS or APS or some such group were going to respond to questions from political and press persons. As far as I can tell it was a PR stunt done by the leaders of this site. 3 people that were pushing to get AGW scientists to answer questions. These guys are good at cold writing questions to real scientists and corrupting the answers they get as replies.
What better place to pawn off a pile of c@@p PR stunt than MR PR himself. DKS Cook.
DKS is a new title that can be awarded to those that provide so much entertainment with misleading claims such as DKS Cook! (Don’t know S$$$) We could award them a PHD for Piled Higher and Deeper.
True colors came out. More of the hackneyed piffle.
Steven,
It is a genuine disappointment your questions were not answered by the Climate Rapid Response Team. One has to wonder if they even exist anymore? Did they ever exist? Did they ever do anything at all? Hmmm…
Weren’t they going to fan out and confront the ignorance on climate change? Wow. What a dud they turned out to be.
They will only answer questions from useful idiot journalists.
mr duncan has the right idea.
if you cannot find someone to put up some questions and are not beyond a little misrepresentation, just tag a little ‘we are working on a climate piece’, ‘thanks, fort collins free press’ on your submission
Grist claims to have gotten a response from them. We all know the reliability of what we read at GRIST!
It just seemed a good idea at the time. Back to the bunker, let the Twitter chatbot handle it.
Apparently CCSE is run by a retired astrophysicist called Ray Weynman.
Sounds a bit of a nonentity.
And I got a lot of grief from the troll (aka ChrisD) when I asked if Steve really expected a response.. who gets the last laugh on this one ChrisD?????
hahahahahhaha!!!!!!
That is F@*king hilarious.
No response after 4 days, and they call themselves “Rapid response team” ?
I’d call them “Rapidly ridiculous team”.
They were endorsed by The NEW YORK freakin TIMES, so don’t let the emeffers weasel out pretending like this was part of the plan all along.
This is a wonderful opportunity for us folks.
From now on when you post your counterpoint to the local paper’s AGW propaganda, as an addendum you can add these facts gleaned from the Climate Science Rapid Response team website.
Doesn’t matter that the CSRRT never answered question 1. The point is to show the climate science propaganda mill in all it’s true glory.
Steve I need that link.
Where is it?
Pingback: Mother Nature Sends Her Rapid Response Team To Scientific American | Real Science