Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1

[Poptech]

Talk about meltdowns - this is epic. I can't wait for all the followup posts from "FuzzyLumpkins" the psychotic drug addict.

[Th'Pusher]

Talk about meltdowns - this is epic. I can't wait for all the followup posts from "FuzzyLumpkins" the psychotic drug addict.

PT, are you denying that you said that you believed you suffer from a mild form of Aspergers?

[Poptech]

The truth is your list represents a vanishingly small portion of the available evidence.

This is incorrect.

Aside from your stated purpose, you don't have the honesty to point this out anywhere on the page.

If you were intellectually honest, you would point out this fact at the top of your website.

Why would I point out a lie?

That you do not bother to do so says volumes. It would not trouble you in the slightest that someone sympathetic to your viewpoints might think that this evidence is the only scientifically valid evidence about our climate. Neither are you going to lose any sleep if some with even less critical thinking skills than you possess can't see the weaknesses in your arguments

I never include lies in my work. Let me know when alarmists link to my list so they stop misleading people on the skeptic side of the argument.

The when I started combing through your precioussss lisssst, I found, unsurprisingly, material that only thinly supports your claims, if interpreted very generously. From what I have read of other critiques, others have come to similar conclusions.

Every paper on the list supports skeptic arguments against ACC/AGW Alarm. Cherry picking papers from my list and then falsely applying them to the whole is disengenous.

Sure your list is, barely, what you say is.

The list is exactly what it says it is, which is why it is such a problem for you.

The truth is, when weighed against the bulk of other available evidence, and viewed with honest skepticism, it is hardly compelling evidence to support the "harmless" theory.

Keep telling yourself that as it keeps growing!

[Poptech]

PT, are you denying that you said that you believed you suffer from a mild form of Aspergers?

Shhh... I have him mass emailing people that my list was updated. Isn't self-marketing great?

[Th'Pusher]

Shhh... I have him mass emailing people that my list was updated. Isn't self-marketing great?

Ah. You're super smart. You were not answering my direct yes or no question in an effort to execute a diabolical plan to get Fuzzy to promote your website. Nice

[Poptech]

The plan does not include you so please help me out.

[DarrinS]

The values range from -0.4 to 0.6 and you think the proper way to compile a graph with those values is to set the range from -5 to 5?

But when they make the range from -0.5 to 0.7 that is misleading?

If you were having a meeting with your boss and showed him a graph of how much your new product has increased the company's profits, and the graph had a range of one dollar, I don't think your boss would be very impressed -- unless he was a complete moron.

[RandomGuy]

The truth is your list represents a vanishingly small portion of the available evidence.

This is incorrect.

Ok, then, how much of the available evidence do you think it represents?

Rough guess, mas o menos 10%

Would you say that all the papers on your lisssst represent evidence that strongly supports your preferred "no harm" thesis?

[RandomGuy]

The list is exactly what it says it is

[RandomGuy]

The list is exactly what it says it is, which is why it is such a problem for you.

I have no problem with the truth. Follow the evidence to where it leads.

If your no harm theory is right, that is a good thing, in my book.

Prudent risk management, however, requires that we consider the possibility that you and people who share your beliefs are wrong about your favored interpretation of the available evidence.

Because prudent risk management requires that consideration, it is big a problem for you.

[RandomGuy]

If you were having a meeting with your boss and showed him a graph of how much your new product has increased the company's profits, and the graph had a range of one dollar, I don't think your boss would be very impressed -- unless he was a complete moron.

How would that boss react if told to invest hundreds of millions of dollars on something based on incomplete or outdated data?

[MannyIsGod]

If you were having a meeting with your boss and showed him a graph of how much your new product has increased the company's profits, and the graph had a range of one dollar, I don't think your boss would be very impressed -- unless he was a complete moron.

Lol such a fantastic analogy. No, really. Amazing critical thinking.

[MannyIsGod]

Dupe!

[RandomGuy]

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought we were discussing Roy Spencer's credibility as a scientist.

Perhaps you could help me clear up my confusion about the issue so I can avoid future mistakes, given that I dont' understand the science and have to make judgments about who to believe is probably right.

If a scientist expresses a belief in Intelligent Design does that indicate one should assign more or less credibility to that scientist overall?

Dr. Spencer's impeccable climate credentials have been presented,

[lengthy copy/paste omitted for brevity]

Your obsession with those who hold religious views different than your own is irrelevant to his climate science credentials and scientific arguments against AGW Alarm. The purpose of every climate science discussion is not for you to demonstrate your religious bigotry.

Yet another question you have tap danced around.

Intelligent design is not a scientific theory.

You brought up the issue of credibility with your list of credentials.

Again, as a general question:

If a scientist expresses a belief in Intelligent Design does that indicate one should assign more or less credibility to that scientist overall?

[DarrinS]

How would that boss react if told to invest hundreds of millions of dollars on something based on incomplete or outdated data?

You unwittingly make a good point for no action on CO2 emmissions.

[RandomGuy]

You unwittingly make a good point for no action on CO2 emmissions.

[snark redacted]

Not really, but if it makes you happy to think that, by all means, be my guest.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you were having a meeting with your boss and showed him a graph of how much your new product has increased the company's profits, and the graph had a range of one dollar, I don't think your boss would be very impressed -- unless he was a complete moron.

That took you two days to come up with or was it just instant stupidity?

If the graph was profit anomaly per unit and it ranged up from .50 to a $1 you bet they would hate it?

Thats the point, dimwit, you fit the graph to the data. Not to make it look small.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So you are going to report him to the climate blog, run by the cartoonist?


Damn, Fuzzy, I realized you were lame, but I didn't know you were a ing psycho.

I guess. I sent it to everyone on his truth series as well to NASA-GISS, BEST, IPCC, and NOAA.

I really think its only fair since he misrepresents their works, groups all us AGW alarmist as drug crazed psychotic liars.

Maybe they do not care but I imagine given the amount of stink he generates as loudly and widespread as he does forum the world over, many of them know exactly who he is and will appreciate the levity that his admission of mental illness gives.

[Drachen]

Dupe!

50000 my ass. more like 25k

[Wild Cobra]

HOW

ING

PATHETIC




Are there any ST rules of etiquette against lame-ass like this?

Ban this mofo -- PLEASE.

Talk about meltdowns - this is epic. I can't wait for all the followup posts from "FuzzyLumpkins" the psychotic drug addict.

No .

You have owned him so completely with your calm bantering. Maybe he's had enough. Don't need to send him to a padded room.

[Wild Cobra]

I have no problem with the truth. Follow the evidence to where it leads.

Oh I so disagree. Did you figure out the CO2 and ocean thing yet?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I came here to correct the lies, misinformation and strawman arguments you made against the list. When you were unable to debate me on the facts your resorted to your new drug-induced smear campaign.

It is well do ented how you have forum stalked me here, trolling every thread with your drug-induced smear campaign. All your threatened actions demonstrate is your stalking obsession.

I have conflated nothing with communism. Earth First is extensively do ented at my site as engaging in terrorism. Please let everyone read my completely verifiable facts. Make sure to link to where you failed to debate me and resorted to this psychotic episode delusionally believing you are a psychologist.

Drug addicts like yourself cannot put anything into context because their brains are so fried they do not even know what reality is.



The psychotic drug addict is attempting to black mail me! Melt down indeed. This is the second melt-down you have had here.

Now I need to make more truth articles!!

Let me make something perfectly clear to you, I WILL NEVER TAKE DOWN MY TRUTH ARTICLES and there is nothing you can do about it. There is nothing you can do about my list either. You will just have to live with the humiliating failure that you could not debate me.

Thank you for confirming how devastating the truth is to alarmists.

This is pure comedy gold.

Yeah this wasn't textbook narcissistic rage...

Drug addicts like yourself cannot put anything into context because their brains are so fried they do not even know what reality is.

YOU WILL NEVER!!!!

I AM INVINCIBLE!!!

[DarrinS]

I guess. I sent it to everyone on his truth series as well to NASA-GISS, BEST, IPCC, and NOAA.

I really think its only fair since he misrepresents their works, groups all us AGW alarmist as drug crazed psychotic liars.

Maybe they do not care but I imagine given the amount of stink he generates as loudly and widespread as he does forum the world over, many of them know exactly who he is and will appreciate the levity that his admission of mental illness gives.

What you did is ing pathetic. I'm sure the folks at NASA-GISS, BEST, IPCC, and NOAA, really give a rats ass what FuzzyWumpkins on the ST political forum thinks. What a loser.

[Wild Cobra]

What you did is ing pathetic. I'm sure the folks at NASA-GISS, BEST, IPCC, and NOAA, really give a rats ass what FuzzyWumpkins on the ST political forum thinks. What a loser.

No .

Fuzzy is seriously butt-hurt. Isn't he.

LOL...

Had to remove the IGNORE to follow more completely his breakdown. He thinks I don't know Kelvin compared to Celsius...

He always got things wrong and made lame accusations. Just another one against me. Guess his stupidity shouldn't matter. It's more the reason I had him on IGNORE than anything. Just tired of dealing with such a low IQ.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What you did is ing pathetic. I'm sure the folks at NASA-GISS, BEST, IPCC, and NOAA, really give a rats ass what FuzzyWumpkins on the ST political forum thinks. What a loser.

If that is the case then no skin off my ass. I do imagine the people that he posts pictures of their homes, insults their jobs or conflates with communists, criminals and terrorists will care ona public forun that he promotes will care.

As for the rest well its important that Poptart knows that they know.