in 2001, Gleick told U.S. News & World Report, “The debate is over.”
This is how the global-warming community operates. Activists accuse skeptics of being anti-science and dishonest under the apparent belief that they are honest and analytical. They’re filled with their integrity until they get frustrated. They say that they only want to debate, except the debate is over. Then they wonder why skeptics don’t believe them.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
- Gemini Can See The Future
- Clinton To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Climate Intelligence Means “Making Things Up”
- Comedy From The BBC
- The Climate Afterlife
- Rewriting The Northern Hemisphere
Recent Comments
- Allan Shelton on NASA Sea Level
- Disillusioned on “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Ulric Lyons on Technology Advances
- oeman50 on NASA Sea Level
- Gordon Vigurs on NASA Sea Level
- Lasse on NASA Sea Level
- Scott Allen on “getting smaller”
- Greg in NZ on NASA Sea Level
- arn on “getting smaller”
- Gordon Vigurs on “fair & equitable”
A few days before his freaking out, the peacenik Gleick put up a youtube (v=HKIPL-ksU3k). There was a “ndrthrd” who didn’t like what I had to say in a comment, but my reply to him garnered 9 Likes, while ndrthrd got zero:
sorrey took me long time to repli…i wus at hartlan protest….is so cause I says so….i’yum part of kuncensis.
sincearaley,
nerdturd
“They say that they only want to debate, except the debate is over.”
Damn I missed it. When did they have the debate?
That’s debatable…
No its’ not!
j/k…
The wonders of debate. Ah, but of course ‘talking’ is all that Hitler, Stalin and Mao REALLY needed… just a few words from Mandela, or Obama, or a ‘bright’ like Dawkins, and all would have been roses.
You might also want to read:
http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2012/05/20/negotiating_with_sterrorists_junkiess_progressives
The great enemy are not the hippies. Yes, they are vile, twisted, lying, murdering scum.
The great enemy are the ‘friends’ who not only refuse to acknowledge this, but actively work at covering up for the ‘Comrades’.
Take Bishop Hill: http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/5/23/lying-to-parliament.html
He wants to, and make no mistake this is what would happen in practice, empower the politicos to at their discretion fine and imprison people who lie to them. Given the state of things today, it takes a catastrophic fool to not see how this would turn out.
Then at JunkScience Maurizio wrote: http://junkscience.com/2012/05/22/maurizio-morabito-a-history-of-scientific-uncertainties-on-their-way-to-policymaking-oblivion/
Which is nothing more and nothing less than excusing the hippies for their lies. Its all about ‘uncertainties’ and ‘bias’ you see, and everybody everywhere suffers from it. So no harm, no foul. We’re all good. Well, except for those ‘few’, who must say that they are sorry, and then we can all be friends again.
I started on my journey to giving value to truth the day I decided that being a Satanist was not fun, on the face of it was incredibly stupid (I mean, face off against a Dude who has infinite power, can see through time, and MADE Hell?!) and devils were far too scary to hang out with. So I am quite glad that the Bishop Hills and Morabito’s of the world are going to burn in Hell one day. Such is the fate of those so utterly complicit in the vilest of the evils of the hippies. I’m sorry, but I am not going to pray for the souls of those who knowingly murder CHILDREN using malaria as their tool.
Yes the Living God DOES have the right to mow down His creations like gnats (only a fool of an ant tries to argue with the human who owns the farm) people like Morabito and Hill do NOT. Why? Because HE said so, and HE owns Hell. End of argument (unless you are a hippie… in which case He will toss your azz into Hell… ending the argument.) That is biblical ‘moralizing’: sweet, short, to the point. No hippie moralizing to legalize the murder of children and babies (does anyone want a MORE concrete example than the present-day ban on DDT?), no legalizing groups like NAMBLA (just wait and see).
As the emperor said: “Only now, at the end, do you see.” (May have gotten the quote wrong: starwars ep 6.)
You cannot really chose your enemies, but you certainly CAN chose your friends.
I agree with Gleick (but he is wrong): I also think the debate/war is over, just on my terms (there is no greenhouse effect whatsoever, of increasing temperature with increasing carbon dioxide, and there are no competent climate scientists whatsoever, because they refuse to accept the definitive facts of the Venus/Earth temperatures comparison, which shows that only the ratio of the two planets’ distances from the Sun is needed to precisely explain the Venus/Earth temperature ratio at points of equal pressure in the two atmospheres. Fraudulent “experts” are those who say they will only recognize evidence presented through the peer-review process, even though that has been shown to be merely “pal-review”, and those who say the Venus/Earth comparison result (over the range of Earth tropospheric pressures, mind you) is just a “coincidence”. In other words, the “debate”, on both sides, is insane, and everyone knows why–1) the emotional (not scientific) intransigence of the individual ego, multiplied over the millions of individuals who are invested in the consensus, 2) the ideological (not scientific) linking of the idea of “runaway global warming” with a reasonable concern for the environment, and 3) the political (not scientific) assumption of tight control over the people of the world, on the basis of fraudulent, wrong-headed “scientific consensus”.
Hi Harry. I’ve taken a look at your post on Venus, and I’m impressed. It’s important yeoman work that you are doing, as pointing at Venus is perhaps the main argument of the warmists (really!). Consider an excerpt from a wuwt comment of mine:
So I hope that you will also work, if possible to get what you say about Venus down to succinct layman friendly soundbites. This more concise framing of the Venus issue could be used in selected comments, or situations. Also, a short video, if you had the capability, is “extra-credit.” What you are saying about Venus is important.
Glieck – “These are not the Droids you are looking for”
His problem is we are not imperial storm troopers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y