Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience.

[Wild Cobra]

It is.

It is especially true when it might be by someone that is of a group you self-identify with.

Otherwise, you are condoning it by your silence.

This is why I do not hes ate for a second to admit when I think Democrats have done ty things.

LOL...

LOL...

My God man...

I am not about to fill my day with reporting on everything I find wrong in life.

I prefer enjoying life. Not worrying about it.

That just really enlightened me of you. It must be a sad existence you live to worry so much, and why you use your statistics in a way to want to spend endless money on a threat that you think "might" happen. You are worried about an apocalyptic style event, aren't you?

Now... I pity you.

Really man... Get out and stop worrying so much Enjoy life.

[RandomGuy]

you use your statistics in a way to want to spend endless money on a threat that you think "might" happen. .

Not what I say at all.

I know that is what you genuinely think I say, but whatever.

Like I said, I tried hard to have soem respect for you.

Go enjoy life grasshopper.

I know I am.

MMmm beeer.

[RandomGuy]

I like my oatmeal lumpy.

[ElNono]

The last 10 visitor(s) to this page were:

baseline bum
Darth_Hornet
Drachen
DUNCANownsKOBE
lefty
lurker
Poptech
Spursmania
SpursRulez4eVeR
Venti Quattro

[Wild Cobra]

I say there is an association. Is this factual or not?

Yes.

So, by the same token, is the association between Nazis and all right-wing politics. That is just as "factual".

I disagree. There are enough nuance differences. Besides, saying there is association does not mean the association is an accurate representation to extrapolate assumed truth from.

Are there any terrorists found with a lot of skeptic or denier material for example?

A Nazi policy can be more readily applied to the left rather than the right in my opinion. Regardless of my opinion, you can find similarities to both sides, rendering the association rather useless. I of course would argue that Nazi's had far more in common the our political left over our political right. You might argue the opposite.

Observing it is one thing. When you go out though and do something with it, as your post seemed to imply whether you meant it to or not, that is something else entirely, because you attempt to demonize a group, or an idea by the actions of some.

I'm not a proponent of for tat, but how many times are skeptics demonized? how many times are you guys relentless at attacking skeptics? Are you saying the practice is unacceptable, or that it crossed a particular line in the sand?

This is probably an alien concept to you. I don't expect you to fully understand it, no offense.

I do understand. Do you understand nuances?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

antarescrane
baseline bum
jestersmash
KaiRMD1
MannyIsGod
monosylab1k
Poptech check
TinTin
Winehole23
Yonivore

[RandomGuy]

FWIW, I have placed PopTech on my ignore list.

His "attention from Randomguy" card has been pulled.

It is out of simple concern for my own well-being. I genuinely think he is a bit insane, and capable of causing me some harm, if only internet stalking, and/or some form of outing.

Not that I have anything to hide, but who knows what an enraged narcisst might do? Creepy.

[Wild Cobra]

FWIW, I have placed PopTech on my ignore list.

His "attention from Randomguy" card has been pulled.

It is out of simple concern for my own well-being. I genuinely think he is a bit insane, and capable of causing me some harm, if only internet stalking, and/or some form of outing.

Not that I have anything to hide, but who knows what an enraged narcisst might do? Creepy.

I see you're being a sore loser.

[RandomGuy]

I see you're being a sore loser.

Keep telling yourself that.

Because it's better to think that, than to think someone you admire might not be worth admiring, but rather should pitied, or even feared.

I don't expect you to understand my concern. It is not in your nature.

That's ok. You are who you are, and I accept that.

[Poptech]

Maybe PT would care to explain it to me to clear up anything I might have gotten wrong here.

You have created a nice strawman argument as you usually do, well done.

[Poptech]

No its much more shady. this guy gets a crack at your personal information and starts digging. Any smear he find he blows up. In some cases I think he just straight up makes up .

Still can't prove your lies? I've made nothing up, this is why I source everything.

His sourcewatch material he basically got a nice Soviet effigy and copied from some neo-con Borowitz and what is a 'lobbying' group for the beer and tobacco industries, Center for Consumer Freedom. At least thats what the source he is smearing has to say.

I got a recognized socialist image to represent their anti-capitalist views.

He took the greenfyre's real name and went to a research database which popped out that Earth First article. He went from there and posted every single bad thing that he could find about Earth First and uploaded something that looks to be from an old newsgroup on google docs.

I didn't use any special research database, I just know how to use the Internet better than you. Learning this information must REALLY be bothering you that you have to resort to new lies that I "uploaded" it. Did I do this neat trick in 1990 knowing I would use it 21 years later? Now EVERYONE irrefutably knows you are a liar.

DeSmogblog lists its Foundation's contributors. Well he took that information and found out one of their contributors company was investigated and found guilty for gambling so he puts all that up there.

Yeah more IRREFUTABLE facts, that their benefactor, John Lefebvre is a convicted money launderer,

The Truth about DeSmogBlog

He is very butthurt about his banning and the deletion of his posts on on skeptical science. He posted a goofy picture of the admin and whined of being taunted. Why would anyone not want.him around?

You have a very active imagination. I was banned long before I exposed John Cook as the self employed cartoonist he is desperately trying to hide. They deleted all of my hundreds of posts because like you they could not debate me.

He 'revealed' that ClimateScience.org was associated with Al Gore.

RealClimate.org and Fenton Communications.

I bet if he could find something on one of us, he would feel zero compunction of doing the same. In his own little way thats what he is doing with his mini-smear of the RG.

I only do to RG what he does to others. The same with you.

His forum is not so much for discussion as it is to store all of his 'arguments' and 'facts.' Hes argued the global warming from very angle possible angle for most of a decade. He has recently switched the les to include 'alarmism.' That is now his canned response to anyone who doesn't acknowledge how he has moved the goalposts.

Pure lies, you are now digging deep. I only started arguing GW online around 2006-2007 when Al Gore started pushing his propaganda. The word Alarm has been on the list for over two years. It was added as a clarification to the le. I haven't moved any goal posts as the content and inclusion criteria for the list never changed. From day one the list has always included, "The papers support skepticism of "man-made" global warming or the environmental or economic effects of" or an equivalent variation.

You seem aggravated that you cannot use the bull links you desperately Google online to discredit my list as my complete refutations to each one exist.

You can read that and see how his sophistry evolves. Thats how his list got started: he was doing more rebuttal storage for the argument that there weren't many skeptics he started trolling academic databases and cherrypicking a list.

There is no Sophistry. How come when I use an academic database it is "trolling"? Using your logic a list that supports ACC/AGW Alarm is "cherrypicked".

But he does this with most everything, including you if your not careful. If you register on his site, you are a dumbass.

ROFLMAO! Oh please.

Its all the stereotypical neocon bull : climate, unions, alternative energy, how alcohol is good and drugs are bad, muslims are all trying to wipe us off the face of the earth, AIDS is all for drug addicts and s, pure capitalism or its tainted, and all that type of thing. He even goes into that same mode arguing over the security supremacy of Microsoft products or trying to protect their image over the threat that is Linux.

Oh man you are desperate I must have touched a nerve. I am a Libertarian not a neocon. Now you are lumping independent research I have done into one distorted lie. I did not believe that moderate consumption of alcohol was harmful and found extensive scientific evidence for this, mainly for red wine. Regardless I do not drink. And yes drugs are bad, including marijuana - feel free to ignore the science. My AIDs research was because I was interested in if there was scientific evidence that the "scare" (not the disease) was exaggerated and I found extensive evidence of this. I work in the technology sector so I have the same problems with those who lie about Linux, that does not mean I would not use it, I just do not like liars.

It is clear you are completely incapable of debating me so you resort to going to the gutter and you wind up falling in.

[Wild Cobra]

Not what I say at all.

You have clearly made that point in the past. Something about risk analysis. You specified you had no problem spending trillions to combat the unproven AGW because the cost, in your mind, was insignificant compared to the possible degree of threat.

[Wild Cobra]

FWIW, I have placed PopTech on my ignore list.

His "attention from Randomguy" card has been pulled.

It is out of simple concern for my own well-being. I genuinely think he is a bit insane, and capable of causing me some harm, if only internet stalking, and/or some form of outing.

Not that I have anything to hide, but who knows what an enraged narcisst might do? Creepy.

Do you really think he will pull a Michael Moore?

[RandomGuy]

Something about risk analysis. You specified you had no problem spending trillions to combat the unproven AGW because the cost, in your mind, was insignificant compared to the possible degree of threat.

"Something about risk analysis"

After years of me repeating the same thing, over and over...

This is the best you can do to restate that.

Incredible.

I am truly a bit flabbergasted.

This still isn't it. Sorry.

[RandomGuy]

Do you really think he will pull a Michael Moore?

I don't know what he would do.

The kind of lack of empathy inherent in such a person means that he won't have any of the normal inhibitions to all sorts of things.

Like I said, creepy.

[Wild Cobra]

I don't know what he would do.

The kind of lack of empathy inherent in such a person means that he won't have any of the normal inhibitions to all sorts of things.

Like I said, creepy.

In 2003, Moore, when he was speaking here in Portland, he gave out Lars Larsons personal phone number. Lars dealt with it and didn't change his number because he had too many contacts that had that number. Lars would receive harassing calls and even death threats to himself and family. Not long later, Moore gave out Lars' address, and Lars was forced to move.

[Wild Cobra]

"Something about risk analysis"

After years of me repeating the same thing, over and over...

This is the best you can do to restate that.

Incredible.

I am truly a bit flabbergasted.

This still isn't it. Sorry.

It's been some time. You clearly didn't care how much was spent and regulated and how much damage it would do to the economy since in your view, it was far more important to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.

Please correct me on what I am wrong about.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It is clear you are completely incapable of debating me so you resort to going to the gutter and you wind up falling in.

I stopped debating you awhile ago. Your train of thought is easy to see because you catalog enough of it publicly.

You are also not the only person that I have had experience that behaves like you do. I did not just pull that disorder out of a hat.

Psychologists do their science in a way that you can appreciate. They catalog all of the various 'behaviors' and define them and then try to categorize them. They take special notice in those that they deem to be antisocial. Now one of these categories of antisocial behavior is NPD.

All of this is a a collection of traits they have found within a number of people that they too have studied. Now you may 'think' that you have such and such disorder but the fact is that the two ideas are not mutually exclusive. You can both have this particular disorder and exhibit antisocial behavior.

Now obviously much like meteorology, it is an inexact and unwieldy science but I know with the way that you catalog everything that you can appreciate their approach.

I can only imagine what those other bloggers thought when you posted their particular entries in your 'Truth' series. Pipe bombs and criminals.

Now look I know that you are once again going to do a line by line response and you are going to deny all of this and you are more than a little scary so rather than continue doing this I am going to put you on ignore. I just want to say 3 things before I go.

First, be careful with WC. He seems to have a thing for you. He has been preening for you all day. He stalks people too.

Second, I am sorry for the way that I have treated you. I have intentionally pushed your buttons and mocked you for it. That was very poor form.

Finally, please go and get some help. Re-read that survey and think about what you wrote. Take that to any shrink; they will concur. If you have people you trust then show it to them. Show it to someone.

[RandomGuy]

It's been some time. You clearly didn't care how much was spent and regulated and how much damage it would do to the economy since in your view, it was far more important to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.

Please correct me on what I am wrong about.

I do care how much is/was/would be spent.

I do care about damage to the economy.

I hate having to fit everything into your biases. It is very frustating.

[RandomGuy]

second, i am sorry for the way that i have treated you. I have intentionally pushed your buttons and mocked you for it. That was very poor form.

Finally, please go and get some help. Re-read that survey and think about what you wrote. Take that to any shrink; they will concur. If you have people you trust then show it to them. Show it to someone.

+1

[ElNono]

Panetta Labels Climate Change a National Security Threat

"Defense Secretary Leon Panetta declared global warming a national security threat [Wednesday] during a speech before an environmentalist group in Washington, D.C. 'The area of climate change has a dramatic impact on national security,' Panetta told the Environmental Defense Fund last night. 'Rising sea levels, severe droughts, the melting of the polar caps, the more frequent and devastating natural disasters all raise demand for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.'"

[Wild Cobra]

I do care how much is/was/would be spent.

I do care about damage to the economy.

I hate having to fit everything into your biases. It is very frustating.

I don't remember exactly how you worded everything in that conversation years back, but that is the impression it left with me. I am all ears for clarification.

[Wild Cobra]

Panetta Labels Climate Change a National Security Threat

"Defense Secretary Leon Panetta declared global warming a national security threat [Wednesday] during a speech before an environmentalist group in Washington, D.C. 'The area of climate change has a dramatic impact on national security,' Panetta told the Environmental Defense Fund last night. 'Rising sea levels, severe droughts, the melting of the polar caps, the more frequent and devastating natural disasters all raise demand for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.'"

I didn't know he was an expert. This is very troublesome because of the influence he has.

[Wild Cobra]

Anyone know why the sea level dropped by 5 mm in 2011? Do you guys know it did, or do your alarmist outlets not tell you such things?

[MannyIsGod]

I know it and its been known in the climate community because scientists also know where the water is. Analyzing data from the GRACE satellite has shown exactly where the water is and it does not help your case one bit. This is why sea level change is not analyzed on a year to year basis but as a trend (just like temp and all over climate data).

LOL @ you thinking that people who study this don't know.