tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post4320884413552039887..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: How false denier memes are built on quicksandSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-58360295101493404742016-04-12T22:09:33.931+10:002016-04-12T22:09:33.931+10:00You mean this John McLean.
https://www.skeptical...You mean this John McLean. <br /><br />https://www.skepticalscience.com/John_McLean_blog.htm<br /><br />I thought that he had gone into hiding after being embarrassed by his March 2011 prediction that<br /><br />"it is likely that 2011 will be the coolest year since 1956 or even earlier"<br /><br />http://www.skepticalscience.com/mclean-exaggerating-natural-cycles.html<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-12732297534054899282016-04-12T21:57:56.751+10:002016-04-12T21:57:56.751+10:00it would go against the laws of probability if the...it would go against the laws of probability if the deniers didn't get something right - at least once Tadaaahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07736188830660481871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-84459799838610887712016-04-12T20:26:31.763+10:002016-04-12T20:26:31.763+10:00Anything to distract from what the temperature tel...Anything to distract from what the temperature tells us about what is happening. But still, a climate change denier was almost right about something: that's probably the best any of them have done in the last five years.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-47715521741388259962016-04-12T20:17:57.366+10:002016-04-12T20:17:57.366+10:00Clueless/Anonymous Troll in Non Sequitur Response ...Clueless/Anonymous Troll in Non Sequitur Response Shock!<br /><br />Error Makes No Difference to Result But Will Be Repeatedly Cited by Denier Trolls Without Them Actually Pointing This Out Shock!<br /><br />You're all getting <i>really</i> desperate...billnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-79143759777393677822016-04-12T19:51:12.332+10:002016-04-12T19:51:12.332+10:00Anonymous.
Seeing as you are such a fan, how abou...Anonymous.<br /><br />Seeing as you are such a fan, how about using your real blog handle instead of "Anonymous".<br /><br />Until then I am reminded of the saying:<br /><br />Sometimes it is wiser to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-51368666293139654412016-04-12T18:57:22.615+10:002016-04-12T18:57:22.615+10:00Asked and answered Anonymous. You don't have a...Asked <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/03/how-false-denier-memes-are-built-on.html?showComment=1460450949731#c1890373037288412924" rel="nofollow">and answered</a> Anonymous. You don't have a clue about climate models or HadSST or anything climate, and yet you think you can tell veteran data analyst Nick Stokes about data? Stop being silly. This is a science blog, not a notice board for deniers to post their empty-headed thoughts upon.<br />Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-75934155016587143842016-04-12T18:51:51.905+10:002016-04-12T18:51:51.905+10:00Really David, then how come McClean was just credi...Really David, then how come McClean was just credited by the Hadley centre for spotting the error?<br /><br />I guess I will see lots of humble pie chomped down here, or the blogger will nuke this article maybe, because it is 100% anti science.<br /><br />How long has this problem existed and has that data been plugged into GCMs?<br /><br />The fact Nick Stoke could not see the problem when it was explained to him in detail, shows he is clueless, he doesn't know what he is looking at when he looks at data it seems<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-22453674057288474872016-04-12T18:50:57.498+10:002016-04-12T18:50:57.498+10:00Sheesh, any more exuberance and Google will mistak...Sheesh, any more exuberance and Google will mistake you for a spambot, Anonymous. See the comments below and <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/the-hadsst-error-was-error-and-has-been.html" rel="nofollow">this article</a>.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-18903730372884129242016-04-12T18:49:09.731+10:002016-04-12T18:49:09.731+10:00What models would the data be "plugged into&q...What models would the data be "plugged into" do you imagine. I hope you don't think that the normal general circulation models have these sort of data plugged into them (they don't). <br /><br />The models that might use these data are reanalysis models or weather forecasting models - though I don't think these data are used for that either. AFAIK it's mainly for climate research purposes looking at climate change in general.<br /><br />John McLean is a denier, even WUWT acknowledges that (calling him a "skeptic" which is the denier word for climate science denier). He's been a denier for years. I doubt that's about to change any time soon.<br /><br />See the <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/the-hadsst-error-was-error-and-has-been.html#update" rel="nofollow">update here</a>Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-90617622796745448892016-04-12T18:48:04.928+10:002016-04-12T18:48:04.928+10:00How come? Hadley have acknowledged the error of up...How come? Hadley have acknowledged the error of upside down data and fixed it, and ironically, Nick Stokes looked and didn't even identify the error, so he doesn't know anything it seems.<br /><br />John McClean was 100% accurate, so I guess he is not a denier and Nick Stokes must eat much humble pie, I bet this makes you zealots angry too, spout sometihng like "yeah well DENIER" or something :D<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-87617866348610528122016-04-12T18:43:01.624+10:002016-04-12T18:43:01.624+10:00Hold your horses. Don't get excited, Anonymous...Hold your horses. Don't get excited, Anonymous. Nick Stokes was 100% correct and has no need for any of your pie. <br /><br />See <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/the-hadsst-error-was-error-and-has-been.html" rel="nofollow">this article</a>, to which I've also <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/the-hadsst-error-was-error-and-has-been.html#update" rel="nofollow">included an update</a> which is a comment by Nick Stokes. He points out what was corrected, as well as what was wrong with the original claim.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-85111438502373560022016-04-12T18:42:42.414+10:002016-04-12T18:42:42.414+10:00Except HAdley have confirmed McLean was indeed cor...Except HAdley have confirmed McLean was indeed correct. You Nick Tokes and the blogger and all the folks saying "deniers" were and are WRONG.<br /><br />The data was upside down. You never looked at the data and pass comment, you are not entitled to an opinion if you didn't investigate it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-39892825959973238292016-04-12T18:39:28.007+10:002016-04-12T18:39:28.007+10:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-50399828662344148912016-04-12T18:36:46.949+10:002016-04-12T18:36:46.949+10:00So if this data was plugged into models.. how long...So if this data was plugged into models.. how long has this been a problem? are some questions only skeptics will ask.<br /><br />John McClean pretty much did solid work here, and ye all called him a denier. Shameful nonsenseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-52852697527270190532016-04-12T18:34:51.911+10:002016-04-12T18:34:51.911+10:00Nick Stokes was 100% in error, as Hadley have conf...Nick Stokes was 100% in error, as Hadley have confirmed, will Nick Stokes eat humble pie?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-78186205260238325592016-04-12T18:33:05.030+10:002016-04-12T18:33:05.030+10:00The Hadley centre have acknowledged the error and ...The Hadley centre have acknowledged the error and credited John McClean on their site for finding it.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-80473615399304619362016-03-31T09:08:12.016+11:002016-03-31T09:08:12.016+11:00Also being Jewish, I see no anti-Semitic remarks. ...Also being Jewish, I see no anti-Semitic remarks. Also speaking as a Jew, I tire of the ultra-hyper-cyclotronic, over-the-top sensitivity of a lot of 100%ers, who see anti-Semitism in ANY comment. <br /><br />Ain't seeing it.Harry Wigglesonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-70842378314418383782016-03-28T13:49:53.806+11:002016-03-28T13:49:53.806+11:00I haven't read all the comments and haven'...I haven't read all the comments and haven't seen any anti-semitic ones. Most of them constitute libel though. It's been a while since deniers were dogwhistled to defame Michael Mann. A lot of pent up falsehoods are being regurgitated. <br /><br />If he wanted to, that thread would be strong grounds for Professor Mann to start another defamation suit - against the commenters, WUWT and Anthony Watts (as publisher).Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-21570526754584875932016-03-28T13:10:17.872+11:002016-03-28T13:10:17.872+11:00What anti-Semitic comments?What anti-Semitic comments?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-63946169968204676412016-03-28T11:26:04.018+11:002016-03-28T11:26:04.018+11:00 Game over.... Willard is so in trouble for a cou... Game over.... Willard is so in trouble for a couple of antisemitic comments towards Dr Mann on Easter Sunday that his blog moderator saw as perfectly acceptable.<br /><br /> https://archive.is/QRw0iAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07604184699513441116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-26799485138272002672016-03-27T10:37:52.436+11:002016-03-27T10:37:52.436+11:00Clearly, comment moderation at WUWT is intended to...Clearly, comment moderation at WUWT is intended to give the authors protection from reasoned criticism and correction for a few hours or a day or two. Some competition-free space for the fragile nonsense to survive briefly.<br /><br />After sufficient filler or 'plaque' builds in the comments, and a few more nonsense posts are added to the roll, a little competence is allowed in to attempt to maintain Watts' vanity conception of his site as a science blog.<br /><br />I think it's about time competent commenters ignored him completely...leave him to his fools and ranters, and don't allow him to exploit good faith comments to give his blog even a thin veneer of credibility.<br /><br /><br />Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09537772941984056434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-69083701087680284462016-03-27T08:21:56.757+11:002016-03-27T08:21:56.757+11:00Comments that challenge their gullibility, really....Comments that challenge their gullibility, really.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-25579367106684478232016-03-27T07:58:41.688+11:002016-03-27T07:58:41.688+11:00"Comments that challenge their "skeptici..."Comments that challenge their "skepticism," really."<br /><br />There...FIFY....😬Paul the Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01438610595968420392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-88983242700491352072016-03-27T06:40:09.992+11:002016-03-27T06:40:09.992+11:00Comments from knowledgeable people are not particu...<i>Comments from knowledgeable people are not particularly welcome at WUWT</i><br /><br />Comments that challenge their skepticism, really. Windchasershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11554275410734284781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-27646531579593987242016-03-27T06:30:07.294+11:002016-03-27T06:30:07.294+11:00This post is really just the climate debate in a n...This post is really just the climate debate in a nutshell.Windchasershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11554275410734284781noreply@blogger.com