Check out this world class clown. He wrote a hit piece against Jim Inhofe over climate, then when I asked him a climate question, he said he doesn’t know anything about climate
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Gordon Vigurs on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Jack the Insider on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
That was funny. Boslough is pretty lame.
Good play, funny how the buffoons are so easy set up!
Mark Boslough works at Sandia labs.
Tony, I very much appreciate you engaging the proponents of CAGW.
I wish all skeptics would, as long as they concentrate on what is clearly wrong with the IPCC, on the benefits of increased CO2, and not on thermodynamic debates other then the wrong models.
This graphic, should be handy to all skeptics. They (CAGW advocates) avoid it like a vampire avoids holy water)
http://www.energyadvocate.com/gc1.jpg
There was a bumper sticker in BC that stated “Where the Hell is Likely”….its in British Columbia…I guess the IPCC will need that sticker in the next report.
DAVID A,
Are you from Edmonton?
Thanksgiving’s come early. What a turkey!
yeah right….why would a physicist understand anything about the physical world!!!
Jim Inhofe is a politician, but he took the time to learn about climate physics. Here we have a physicist who thinks that climate physics has nothing to do with physics. What a drooling imbecile.
Well, he is an honest idiot.
No he is a typical Arrogant Idiot. Many, once they have a PhD, think they know everything about anything and their word on any subject is gold. I have had more than one knock down drag out fight with PhD chemists who were dead wrong because they were spouting of about something outside their field.
Unfortunately I can not find the actual words Boslough said about Inhole.
I looked at the vampire graph & burst out laughing !
Keep it up Steve :).
That Boslough character avoided any semblance of a fact and just spewed invective and ad hominem. WHENEVER these types are challenged their first and last resort is to call names. This guy is Gruber like in terms of arrogance, and this comes after we have the example of Gruber to not follow.
Do you have a link to what Boslough said about Inhole or can you repeat it?
(I do not have a twitter account)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-boslough/npr-finally-stops-referri_b_6165846.html
YUK,
The guy has done ZERO research and is spouting off about things he knows nothing about.
I bet he never even hear of or read the Climategate e-mails or looked at the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change Report.
Until he reads all of that he has no creditability.
You might ask him if he has read the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change Report.
The shadow of the camera vehicle did not stay the same length as the sun moved behind it. A conclusion would be that the sun is higher in the foreground than when it is behind the camera vehicle. And, the sun is higher on the right foreground side of this video than on the left side.
Just read Boslough’s article. Ironically, he behaves exactly the same way that he claims Inhofe is: Boslough makes a bunch of claims without providing one bit of evidence.
Worse he hasn’t even done any actual research into what ‘Deniers’ are saying and if they have any evidence to back it up. The Salem Witch trials had more evidence for their conclusion than Boslough.
Has he answered the question yet? (I, too, do not tweet.)