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
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on Mission Accomplished
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
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.