Not that long ago denmor graduated from simpleton cartoons and crude name-calling. Now he's learning the art of 'copy and paste', usually of long slabs of senseless rants against science from insignificant little denier blogs. This time he comes up with two pieces of idiocy in the same short post. Both from "the world's most viewed" anti-science blog - WUWT.
1. Are engineers and geo-scientists who work in the oil sector less likely to accept climate science?
Um - yeah? No? Not quite the point of the research? And if it were true, what did you expect?A recent study reported that 36% of geoscientists and engineers surveyed, most of whom are reliant on or whose work relates to the Alberta tar sands or petroleum sector in general, are adamant that humans are causing global warming and we need to take decisive action. (They "view the Kyoto Protocol and additional regulation as the solution").
That can be seen as equivalent to: thirty years ago 36% of engineers (not medical researchers) who develop the packaging for cigarettes being adamant that smoking is a health hazard and urging international agreements be put into effect to force people to quit.
The anti-science illiterati give a decent round of applause. (HC rids itself of educated people as fast as they stray into their corner of cyberspace. Often without a mod having to press a keystroke.)
The Lie
Poor denmor (probably all unknowing given that deniers rarely read let alone absorb scientific papers) quotes from a blog article that quotes from another article that refers to a research paper in the social sciences/management journal "Organization Studies". (No respectable denier - except Brad - would go straight to the source.) Let's be generous and say, because he was too lazy or incompetent to read the paper in question, denmor wasn't aware that he was spreading a lie. He also seems blissfully unaware that very few oil engineers and geo-scientists would be involved in climate research. All scientists and engineers probably look the same to him.Looking at the categories ('Frames') in the paper, there were 'only' 24% (Frame 2) who "believe that changes to the climate are natural, normal cycles of the Earth". All other groupings (68% of respondents) included people who knew that humans are at least a partial cause of global warming, with a full 36% being adamant that "humans are the main or central cause" of global warming. (Eight per cent were unable to be categorised. One group, the 'economic responsibility' frame (10%), included rampant deniers as well as people who thought that climate change is both natural and human caused.)
Beknownst (or unbeknownst) to denmor, the researchers deliberately targeted an industry (petroleum) and locale (Alberta Canada) that is economically tied to CO2 pollution so they could get a big enough cohort across the full spectrum (including deniers). They were keen to find out more about how people of different viewpoints frame/rationalise their thinking within the context of organisational management.
HotWhopper Petrol Award
Before leaving the topic, let's award an honourable mention to the resident anti-vaxxer jantimot (who by now is probably also feeling left out).
Jantimot probably thinks he's in the majority of the general population. Instead he would be aligning himself with the majority of petrol heads who work in the pollution sector of whom only 24% chant the 'it's all natural' refrain. (I'm not sure how or if aligning himself with ecological vandalism of tar sands fits with his homeopathic purity.)
Goodness knows why jantimot implies climate scientists are extrovert compared to petroleum engineers and geo-scientists. (You need go no further than Ian Plimer to find a geo-scientist who loudly
Not everyone jumps at the chance to work in tar sands, especially not people who understand the ramifications of CO2 pollution.
2. Bombshell!!!! The Arctic froze this winter!!!!
denmor 'blown away' again;
(Imagine a litre flask half full of water. How much extra water does it take to fill it? Now imagine an empty litre flask. How much extra water does it take to fill it?)
There were too many climate bloggers to count who accurately predicted that deniers would fall for the 'amazing winter recovery' after last summer's record low ice cover. (So much for deniers who say you can't predict the future!)
As 'proud to be a denier' Dr Inferno pointed out way back in way back in September last year:
Arctic Sea Ice Increases Past FOUR MILLION Square Kilometers For The First Time Since Records Began!It took another four and a half months before Anthony Watts of WUWT woke up to the fact of this startling turnaround. But as denmor reported, Tony has finally picked up the message and heralded it to the world, writing:
...Arctic sea ice has made a stunning rebound since the record low recorded in the late summer of 2012...
...With a few weeks of growth still to occur, the Arctic has blown away the previous record for ice gain this winter. This is only the third winter in history when more than 10 million km² of new ice has formed.Duh!
Now some readers may be wondering where in the Arctic all this extra ice can have formed. Does it mean that the ice is starting to extend down to near the equator? After all, there's only so many square kilometers available in the Arctic.
If you are one of these readers, check how the ice cover has changed from 13 February thirty, twenty and ten years ago compared to 13 Feb 2013 - from The Cryosphere Today.
Umm - there's less ice this year? How can that be?
Still think denmor's onto something? Click here and look at this interactive chart and follow the 2012 (dark pink) and 2013 (yellow) lines before making as big an idiot of yourself as denmor and Anthony Watts.
Here's a snapshot - you might just be able to make out the yellow line for 2013, in among the lower quarter of the records to the left of the image. The dark pink line for 2012 is fairly clear.
For more fun and enlightenment, read Tamino's take on all this - and see what his readers think about Anthony's bombshell!
(HC rids itself of educated people as fast as they stray into their corner of cyberspace. Often without a mod having to press a keystroke.)
ReplyDeletethis is to true.
I agree. H.c. is a community of Neanderthallic rednecks. Anti-intellectual and anti-academic.
ReplyDeleteDenmor post 626104 on HotWhopper -
ReplyDelete"Then there’s People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which does, well, typical PETA things such as using half-naked models in street theater to attack bacon. Like HSUS, PETA also attacks farms for their use of maternity pens. Despite many leading veterinarians supporting the use of maternity pens to ensure sows remain safe, these radicals oppose them so your bacon will cost more."
Yes Denmor is a low life. Apart from his inane climate rantings he also condones animal cruelty and despises Greenpeace, RSPCA and PETA.
He launches a barrage of abuse on PETA (People for ethical treatment of Animals) and there stance against the most cruel practise of putting pigs in maternity pens.
God forbib this pig had top pay a few cents more for a free range bacon.