I don’t expect to see my response posted on Deep DoDo Climate
Heartland’s James Taylor hits new low with defamatory false accusations against NOAA | Deep Climate
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
- CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Deadly Cyclones And Arctic Sea Ice
- What About The Middle Part?
- “filled with racist remarks”
- Defacing Art Can Prevent Floods
Recent Comments
- Russell Cook on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- arn on “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- arn on Harris To Win Iowa
- William on Harris To Win Iowa
- William on Harris To Win Iowa
- arn on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Billyjack on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Disillusioned on Harris To Win Iowa
- czechlist on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- oeman50 on Spoiled Children
Deep Censorship?
That’s about the only thing consistent with alarmist blogs, and why few of them post on skeptical sites: they end up looking even more stupid
It’s the same old nonsense about the fox saying that he did nothing wrong in his very own chicken coop. We expect these NOAA hacks to be objective and even handed when they clearly have an agenda as well as funding at stake? When they have been shown time and time again to be bald faced liars?
Let’s not confuse these people with those who are actually interested in the truth, and could be persuaded by reasoned argument. The facts don’t matter to alarmists.
True story: persona experience. I was a member of the sceptical community and posted a lot on The Skeptics Guide To The Universe. A popular sceptic at Skeptoid did a podcast on DDT where he concluded that the rejection of DDT was irrational and probably lead to unnecessary deaths. A huge uproar followed among a segment of the SGTU crowd. No reasoned rebuttals. All were viscous personal attacks. Now I haven’t done much research on this so I didn’t take a position, but I did want to see what the uproar was about. I followed some of the links to the bloggers who were attacking Skeptoid. The blog posts were also nasty personal attacks… The only factual claim I found in one of these blogger’s postings was the assertion that no green group was or had ever been against the application of DDT…. So I googled for 3 minutes and found on the Greenpeace website (if my memory is correct) a position statement against DDT… So the only factual claim scattered among the insults was actually wrong and it would have taken anyone only a few minutes to establish that.
@Will: If you want more info on DDT, try here:
http://www.breadandbutterscience.com/DDT.htm
The “Facts versus Fears: DDT” and “The Lies of Rachel Carson” articles are good starting points. I also recommend the book “The Excellent Powder: DDT’s Political and Scientific History”.
“1. QC: Quality control (removal of “suspects” and “outliers”).”
ROFLMAO!!!
This used to make my head explode, but now I can’t stop laughing! Just remove those inconvenient truths, then go back and adjust the rest, under even more false pretenses.
The collaborators think we are stupid, and they are now laughable.