The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > When you have nothing left with which to argue, please avoid the smear… > Comments

When you have nothing left with which to argue, please avoid the smear… : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 10/3/2015

What comes out of it, to me, is that real loss that science and research are suffering as a consequence of forgetting that science is about scepticism, not consensus.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Bugsy, what is the consensus to which you refer? There is no science to demonstrate any measurable effect of human emissions on climate.

There are ludicrous assertions by the IPCC, I think the current one is that it is “94% certain” that human emissions cause global warming. The increased CO2 content of the atmosphere is alleged without foundation to be due to human emissions.
In any event the “high” CO2 content has not caused the warming predicted by the IPCC from computer modelling, and global warming has stopped, despite the assertion by the fraud-backers that it has” paused”. Support of the AGW assertion can only be based on dishonesty or ignorance. I am sure you will not plead ignorance, and are well aware that there is no science to support the assertion of human caused global warming. If you wish to assert that there is any science to support AGW, please refer us to any science which demonstrates a measurable effect of human emissions on climate.
Foyle, why should we be interested in dishonest books by fraud-backers?
Posted by Leo Lane, Saturday, 14 March 2015 8:28:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One constant in OLO threads, is when a fraud-backer is asked for science, they acknowledge their dishonesty by disappearing, so Bugsy joins a long line.

Nigel Calder’s words about “The Hall of Shame” are appropriate again:

“What if the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had done a responsible job, acknowledging the role of the Sun and curtailing the prophecies of catastrophic warming?
For a start there would have no surprise about the “travesty” that global warming has stopped since the mid-1990s, with the Sun becoming sulky. Vast sums might have been saved on misdirected research and technology, and on climate change fests and wheezes of every kind. The world’s poor and their fragile living environment could have had far more useful help than precautions against warming.
And there would have been less time for so many eminent folk from science, politics, industry, finance, the media and the arts to be taken in by man-made climate catastrophe. (In London, for example, from the Royal Society to the National Theatre.) Sadly for them, in the past ten years they’ve crowded with their warmist badges into a Hall of Shame, like bankers before the crash. "
http://calderup.wordpress.com/2011/08/24/cern-experiment-confirms-cosmic-ray-action/
Posted by Leo Lane, Monday, 16 March 2015 8:35:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Leo, on many threads, there is often a point in which it is pointless to continue. This is one of those times.
You will never accept what I have to say, no matter what I say.

Your triumphalism is unwarranted however, as many in the 'skeptics' camp have done the same. Ignore those you don't care to answer (or label them 'trolls' and then ignore them).

I haven't completely disappeared, I just don't come to visit much anymore. Much like many others on this site.

I've done the numbers, this opinion site is on the decline, it peaked around 2009. Last year it had as many comments and articles as in 2006, with a less diversified field of authors. With multiple diehard last-worders like you lurking around spouting the same crap over and over, it's not hard to see why.
Posted by Bugsy, Monday, 16 March 2015 11:04:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder how many people have actually read the paper by Monckton et al which is the subject of Don's article? It actually accepts that elevated CO2 in the atmosphere causes global warming/climate change. But it also says that the amount of heat being trapped by CO2 is much less than the computer models and IPCC reports claim. So the paper is not per se a sketical one, denying climate change or denying anthropogenic causes, but it questions the absolute amount of heat trapped by CO2.
So good on you Don for writing this interesting and potentially very important article. I would welcome people putting posts up about where the science contained in the Monckton et al paper is wrong.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Monday, 16 March 2015 11:31:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks, Bugsy, for confirming that you have no science to support your backing of the AGW fraud. Any support you continue to give it can clearly now only be based on dishonesty.
The point of your whining about OLO is not clear. It will continue after you are forgotten. You appear to be complaining about being nailed with the truth (which you refer to as “the same crap”)
Posted by Leo Lane, Monday, 16 March 2015 11:32:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gee, you're doing well with avoiding that whole smear thing Leo...
Posted by Craig Minns, Monday, 16 March 2015 11:48:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy