The Denialist's deck of cards
Ouroboros_Rex
Peter Franks
> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
Looks like I'm not a denialist -- but I already knew that...
B0NZ0
news:fkeq2b$2bg$1...@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
Yes, how dare they deny the coming global cooling.
There is no room for debate, the coming cooling is settled.
String 'em up!
Global Warming Has Stalled
Friday, December 21, 2007 at 10:24am
Dr David Whitehouse, author of The Sun: A Biography, checks the
temperature:
The fact is that the global temperature of 2007 is statistically the
same as 2006 as well as every year since 2001. Global warming has,
temporarily or permanently, ceased. Temperatures across the world are
not increasing as they should according to the fundamental theory behind
global warming - the greenhouse effect. Something else is happening and
it is vital that we find out what or else we may spend hundreds of
billions of pounds needlessly.
Professor David Deming, an astrophysicist, agrees:
Al Gore says global warming is a planetary emergency. It is difficult to
see how this can be so when record low temperatures are being set all
over the world. In 2007, hundreds of people died, not from global
warming, but from cold weather hazards.
Since the mid-19th century, the mean global temperature has increased by
0.7 degrees Celsius. This slight warming is not unusual, and lies well
within the range of natural variation. Carbon dioxide continues to build
in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased
significantly for nearly nine years. Antarctica is getting colder.
Neither the intensity nor the frequency of hurricanes has increased. The
2007 season was the third-quietest since 1966. In 2006 not a single
hurricane made landfall in the U.S.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/warming_stopped/
--
Get The TRUE Facts At
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html
Excellent Links At
http://www.warwickhughes.com/
Regards
Bonzo
"If the atmosphere was a 100 story building, our annual anthropogenic
CO2
contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first
floor"
D'Aleo
"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for
anything except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree
panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the
National Academy of Sciences
"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the
only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes"
Dr. Richard Lindzen
[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen
John M.
Then why did you feel the need to post a response? The link says
everything one needs to know to identify such people. Using it, plus
your past posts, anyone who wants to can work out whether you are or
not.
Ouroboros_Rex
"B0NZ0" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote in message
news:476b21ba$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote in message
> news:fkeq2b$2bg$1...@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
>> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
>
> Yes, how dare they deny the coming global cooling.
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/05/denialists_deck_of_cards_the_f.php
Ouroboros_Rex
"Peter Franks" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:jOCaj.48699$KU2....@newsfe11.phx...
> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:
>> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
>
> Looks like I'm not a denialist -- but I already knew that...
No, you throw 'em like all the rest.
James
"Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote in message
news:fkeq2b$2bg$1...@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
>
Another sophmoric blog that's been done to death. I guess you got
nothing better. Tsk.
Tunderbar
> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
Interesting example of the infamous rhetorical technique called
strawman arguments. It is a sure way to identify a agw activist.
Peter Franks
?
How am I a denialist?
John M.
> >news:jOCaj.48699$KU2....@newsfe11.phx...
> >> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:
> >>>http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
> >> Looks like I'm not a denialist -- but I already knew that...
>
> > No, you throw 'em like all the rest.
>
> ?
>
> How am I a denialist?
Nine of clubs, ten of hearts ...just for starters.
Ouroboros_Rex
"John M." <john_howa...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c46e553d-5596-4c30...@18g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Damn, now I have to go back to the site. =)
Peter Franks
"Nit pick"?
Hardly.
I ask questions and look for substantiation, but hardly nit pick.
Try again.
> ten of hearts
"You don't understand us"?
Again, hardly. I don't have an "industry".
Try again.
>...just for starters.
Well, bad start.
Try again.
John M.
> "John M." <john_howard_mor...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
Why damn. It should be a pleasure, shouldn't it, reading the thoughts
of someone who has denialists by the goolies?
John M.
> John M. wrote:
> > On Dec 21, 9:28 pm, Peter Franks <n...@none.com> wrote:
> >> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:
> >>> "Peter Franks" <n...@none.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:jOCaj.48699$KU2....@newsfe11.phx...
> >>>> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:
> >>>>>http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
> >>>> Looks like I'm not a denialist -- but I already knew that...
> >>> No, you throw 'em like all the rest.
> >> ?
>
> >> How am I a denialist?
>
> > Nine of clubs,
>
> "Nit pick"?
>
> Hardly.
>
> I ask questions and look for substantiation, but hardly nit pick.
5 of spades
> "You don't understand us"?
>
> Again, hardly. I don't have an "industry".
8 of Spades
Peter Franks
> On Dec 21, 10:56 pm, Peter Franks <n...@none.com> wrote:
>> John M. wrote:
>>> On Dec 21, 9:28 pm, Peter Franks <n...@none.com> wrote:
>>>> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:
>>>>> "Peter Franks" <n...@none.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:jOCaj.48699$KU2....@newsfe11.phx...
>>>>>> Ouroboros_Rex wrote:
>>>>>>> http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
>>>>>> Looks like I'm not a denialist -- but I already knew that...
>>>>> No, you throw 'em like all the rest.
>>>> ?
>>>> How am I a denialist?
>>> Nine of clubs,
>> "Nit pick"?
>>
>> Hardly.
>>
>> I ask questions and look for substantiation, but hardly nit pick.
>
> 5 of spades
"Delay Tactics" -- nope, not that either.
>> "You don't understand us"?
>>
>> Again, hardly. I don't have an "industry".
>
> 8 of Spades
"Duh!" -- nope, not that either.
Try again.
Fran
> "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote in message
>
> Professor David Deming, an astrophysicist, agrees:
>
No. He's not an Astrophysicist or a "Professor"
||||
David Deming is an associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the
University of Oklahoma in Norman. He graduated from Indiana University
in 1983 with a BS degree in geology, and received a Ph.D in geophysics
from the University of Utah in 1988. Prior to his arrival at the
University of Oklahoma in 1992, Deming held a National Research
Council postdoctoral fellowship at the U.S. Geological Survey in
California. From 1992 through 2003, Deming was an assistant and
associate professor in the School of Geology and Geophysics[1] at the
University of Oklahoma. Deming is the author of more than thirty
research papers, and the textbook Introduction to Hydrogeology[2]. He
is an associate editor for the academic journals Petroleum Geoscience
[3] and Ground Water [4], and an adjunct faculty member at two
conservative think tanks, the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs and
the National Center for Policy Analysis.[5]
|||
He's very happy though to comment outside his field of expertise ...
||||
There is significant scientific evidence that sex-based differences in
spatial and mathematical abilities may be biological in origin. For
example, male rats do better in mazes than females. I concede it is
possible that those female rats performed poorly because they were
distressed by the lack of proper role models, but somehow this seems
implausible."[8]
Two years later, Deming wrote a letter criticizing Yale University
student Joni Kletter's February 18, 2000 syndicated article on gun
control published in the University of Oklahoma's student newspaper,
The Oklahoma Daily. He received a reprimand from Dean of the College
of Geoscience, John Snow, after 25 people filed formal complaints
about his response in which he stated,
"I just want to point out that Kletter's 'easy access' to a vagina
enables her to 'quickly and easily' have sex with 'as many random
people' as she wants. Her possession of an unregistered vagina also
equips her to work as a prostitute and spread venereal diseases. Let's
hope Kletter is as responsible with her equipment as most gun owners
are with theirs."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Deming
||||
<snip stuff outside theis poseurs field of expertise>
Fran
B0NZ0
"Fran" <Fran...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8db1828c-299d-4c46...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 21, 1:15 pm, "B0NZ0" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
>> "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote in message
>> Professor David Deming, an astrophysicist, agrees:
> No. He's not an Astrophysicist or a "Professor"
> David Deming is an associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the
> University of Oklahoma in Norman. He graduated from Indiana University
> in 1983 with a BS degree in geology, and received a Ph.D in geophysics
> from the University of Utah in 1988. Prior to his arrival at the
> University of Oklahoma in 1992, Deming held a National Research
> Council postdoctoral fellowship at the U.S. Geological Survey in
> California. From 1992 through 2003, Deming was an assistant and
> associate professor in the School of Geology and Geophysics[1] at the
> University of Oklahoma. Deming is the author of more than thirty
> research papers, and the textbook Introduction to Hydrogeology[2]. He
> is an associate editor for the academic journals Petroleum Geoscience
> [3] and Ground Water [4], and an adjunct faculty member at two
> conservative think tanks, the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs and
> the National Center for Policy Analysis.[5]
> He's very happy though to comment outside his field of expertise ...
>
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ...
So why haven't you criticised your pal Gore, who is, even worse, a
POLITICIAN, for doing exactly the same thing then, Fran baby?
Don't look now, but your outrageous bias is showing, Fran baby!
Fran
> "Fran" <Fran.B...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8db1828c-299d-4c46...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 1:15 pm, "B0NZ0" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote:
> >> "Ouroboros_Rex" <i...@casual.com> wrote in message
> >> Professor David Deming, an astrophysicist, agrees:
> > No. He's not an Astrophysicist or a "Professor"
> > David Deming is an associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the
> > University of Oklahoma in Norman. He graduated from Indiana University
> > in 1983 with a BS degree in geology, and received a Ph.D in geophysics
> > from the University of Utah in 1988. Prior to his arrival at the
> > University of Oklahoma in 1992, Deming held a National Research
> > Council postdoctoral fellowship at the U.S. Geological Survey in
> > California. From 1992 through 2003, Deming was an assistant and
> > associate professor in the School of Geology and Geophysics[1] at the
> > University of Oklahoma. Deming is the author of more than thirty
> > research papers, and the textbook Introduction to Hydrogeology[2]. He
> > is an associate editor for the academic journals Petroleum Geoscience
> > [3] and Ground Water [4], and an adjunct faculty member at two
> > conservative think tanks, the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs and
> > the National Center for Policy Analysis.[5]
> > He's very happy though to comment outside his field of expertise ...
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ...
> So why haven't you criticised your pal Gore,
Not my pal ... he's a fully paid up member of the boss class.
> who is, even worse, a
> POLITICIAN, for doing exactly the same thing then, Fran baby?
> Don't look now, but your outrageous bias is showing, Fran baby!
>
Why do you recklessly post stuff that turns out to be wrong?
Fran
John M.
You really are into that 8 of spades, aren't you.
Peter Franks
Asked and answers.
It looks like you have absolutely nothing to contribute to this
'discussion'.
Thanks, have a nice day.
John M.
Oh look. He's played his "joker" and "jack of clu;bs" at the same time.
V-for-Vendicar
> Sorry to expose your lies Popcock (not really!), but temperatures have
> plateaued since 1998 DESPITE soaring CO2 levels.
> Actually the globe has cooled a little since then and is now starting a
> cooling tend proper.
You are a Habitual Liar Bonzo. Here is the temperature data and a plot
showing the
increase in temperaure since 1998.
"HangEveryRepubliKKKan" <Jus...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote
>> 1998 14.57 *********************o*****
>> 1999 14.33 *****************>>>>o
>> 2000 14.33 *****************>>>>>o
>> 2001 14.48 ************************o
>> 2002 14.56 *************************o**
>> 2003 14.55 **************************o*
>> 2004 14.49 *************************>>o
>> 2005 14.62 *****************************o**
>> 2006 14.54 ***************************>>>o
>>
>> Look at all those "o"'s lined up there.
"Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote
> The "0"'s are NOT THE DATA!
> They have created a trend which does not exist in the data.
> Voodoo statistics!
Ahahahahahahahahaha... Stupid KKKonservative KKKlown. A trendline skirts
across the top of the data leaving equal portions of the data above and
below. In this instane 10 dots above, and 14 below as a result of the crude
nature of ascii graphics. Nevertheless it represents the best line that can
be fitted to the data based on minimizing the square of the distance between
the line and the real data. It's called a least squares curve fit.
You are completely ignorant when it comes to statistics and mathematics in
general aren't you Bonzo.
Ahahahahahaha.. You don't know what statistics are, where it comes from,
how it is used, or how to use it, and yet in your vast ignorance, you seem
to think that you know more about science than all of the worlds scientists.
"Voodoo statistics" Ahahahahahahahah... You need to go back to public
school and take a refresher course in basic technical literacy.
Stupid... Stupid.. KKKonservative KKKlown....
"Bonzo" <boo...@optusnt.com.au> wrote
> Here is the data which shows NO TREND!
>
> 1998 366.50 2.5721 14.57
> 1999 368.14 2.6148 14.33
> 2000 369.41 2.6399 14.33
> 2001 371.07 2.6672 14.48
> 2002 373.16 2.7032 14.56
> 2003 375.80 2.7487 14.55
> 2004 377.55 NA 14.49
> 2005 379.75 NA 14.63
> 2006 381.90 NA 14.54
No? Lets plot the data and find out shall we? Here it is along with the
best linear fit to the data shown as "o".
1998 14.57 *********************o******
1999 14.33 *****************>>>>o
2000 14.33 *****************>>>>>o
2001 14.48 ************************o
2002 14.56 *************************o**
2003 14.55 **************************o*
2004 14.49 *************************>>o
2005 14.62 *****************************o**
2006 14.54 ***************************>>>o
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
In fact the equation is...
o = 14.42 + (0.0195 *(YEAR-1998))
This shows a trend of 2'C (3.5'F) per century.
So Bonzo, who is paying you to post lies to this newsgroup?