tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post282299311699601028..comments2024-02-12T15:25:44.028+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Almost everything we know about fake sceptics like "Joanne Nova" is spot on...Souhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-9142109483622110732014-03-05T15:03:33.778+11:002014-03-05T15:03:33.778+11:00+1.<a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2014/03/almost-everything-we-know-about-fake.html?showComment=1393949297998#c7145250165171801118" rel="nofollow">+1</a>.Bernard J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-71452501651718011182014-03-05T03:08:17.998+11:002014-03-05T03:08:17.998+11:00It doesn't surprise me at all that the "o...It doesn't surprise me at all that the "one" is Ferdinand Engelbeen, who is an all-round good egg. While I don't agree with him on absolutely every detail of the carbon cycle, virtually all of his posts are informative and helpful, and he is also endlessly polite and good natured, whatever the provocation. If only there were more skeptics like him!<br /><br />The skeptic blogs (such as WUWT) should be deeply embarrassed that only 78% of respondents think that the rise in atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic, rather than advertising the fact, given that the evidence for this is quite unequivocal.Dikran Marsupialnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-46777450305161545562014-03-05T00:45:15.192+11:002014-03-05T00:45:15.192+11:00We don't want to be friends then, Sou? Poor Jo...We don't want to be friends then, Sou? Poor Jo, she'll feel like 'once a skeptic always a skeptic' :)cRR Kampenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07571285063752477448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-85107027588919558302014-03-04T23:26:41.607+11:002014-03-04T23:26:41.607+11:00Speaking of soul-selling deniers, COALition member...Speaking of soul-selling deniers, COALition member Dennis Jensen MP is having a bash at climate science on Twitter. What a fracking iriot.<br /><br />I am very pleased though that he is clearly recording for posterity his position, his (and his party's) essentially-criminal negligence, and the drivel on which he bases it. There will be no escaping from this for him, or for his allies. I think that we should make every effort humanly possible to instill in all Australians' minds that the Liberal and National Parties of Australia are the people who determinedly and doggedly moved to dismantle all action on climate change, that they polluted the Great Barrier Reef, that they are attempting to delist World Heritage, and that they are dismantling Australian technological capacity, that they are committing humanitarian crimes.<br /><br />Make sure that all Australians are sure, and <b>forever</b> sure, that it is these people who are responsible. Let there be no doubt. Tell everyone you know that this is mother's milk for the Coalition, their <i>raison d'etre</i>, their morning, noon and night. Make sure that everyone knows for whom you voted, and make them acknowledge their vote for the Coalition if that's what they did.<br /><br />The time will come soon enough when the waves of environmental destruction wash away the sands in which the denialist heads are buried, and when this time comes there must be no doubt that it is these heads that should be on the block. The Australian Democrats set a precedent for what happens to a political party that back the wrong horse... there <i>will</i> come a time I suspect when the LNP similarly loses so much support that it vanishes as an entity.<br /><br />Let's hope that there is a full accounting at this time.<br /><br />Cement this in history, carve it in stone.Bernard J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-83208157700408944662014-03-04T21:32:31.204+11:002014-03-04T21:32:31.204+11:00That sums her up nicely George, she certainly has ...That sums her up nicely George, she certainly has gained more notoriety running her blog than she ever would have as a TV presenter. You could not say however that she is appealing to the more intelligent reader with her continued bleatings about the data "adjustments" and the models being all wrong. A quick review of any of her posts will show any comment by a non denier is met with a tirade of abuse, some of it quite nasty. The main offender was "AndyG55" who now posts as "The Griss". Non-discriminating, conspiracy-loving science-illiterate fringe dwellers is probably being too kind.<br /><br />Whenever she is challenged she will always reply with a question to try and move the goalposts. Also she has no issue with quoting people like Flannery out of context, but hired her own cameraman when filming for "I Can Change Your Mind On Climate" so she could prove the evil ABC edited her comments. The word paranoid comes to mind.<br /><br />Codling's Codswallop would be a more appropriate title for her blog.SPMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-78669145774720846592014-03-04T16:16:23.491+11:002014-03-04T16:16:23.491+11:00In the genre of "I'm not a climate scient...In the genre of "I'm not a climate scientist but …"<br /><br />I'm not a forensic psychologist however, Jo Nova is a 'media tragic' as witnessed by (a) the use of a stage name, (Joanne Codling not being good enough - Jo Codling has the phonetic encumbrance of Joke Oddling) (b) the website photo of herself, i.e. the poseur shot, with the head thoughtfully tilted to one side, that comes from her audition resume/CV and (c) her U-turn on climate science to enable a 'successful' entry into the climate denialosphere after the TV gigs dried up. She craves relevance, not just in a personal sense but also amongst a wider audience. What better way to achieve that than to appeal to the non-discriminating, conspiracy-loving, science-illiterate fringe dwellers? <br /><br />In my non-professional opinion, JoN ova realised that she was small change in the Climate Science community and took to the contrarian path because it was easier for her to be negative, pedantic and nit-picking than to contribute to providing a genuine analysis or insights into climate science research. She has a status amongst the illiterati that she could never achieve in mainstream climate science. Plus, what angry, conservative white male wouldn't be a sucker for the perceived allure of an ex-TV personality who is 'easy-on-the-eye' and has views that align with theirs? It's the old 'to hell with substance, pander to the audience's prejudices' gambit to achieve a successful career. Excluding blind faith, there's not a lot of difference between Jo and Ken Ham, the Noah's Ark entrepreneur. Actually, if Nova really believes what she writes, the blind faith difference between her and Ken disappears. And who knows, one day it may all pay off for Joanne when she is invited by a Republican senator to appear before a US Senate Environmental Policy and Public Works Committee.George Montgomeryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07042191140401441348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-46372423568322201692014-03-04T04:27:52.460+11:002014-03-04T04:27:52.460+11:00When Jo Nova was a children's tv entertainer s...When Jo Nova was a children's tv entertainer she was a "warmist" - here's <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20080719032221/http://www.joannenova.com.au/Joanne/hotlinks.html" rel="nofollow">an archive of her old website</a>. <br /><br />I think it was after she left that she decided to become a born again denier. She published her skeptics handbook shortly after. <br /><br />I'm not sure that she's found being a fake sceptic is quite as lucrative a career change as she planned. She could change back again and write another book - "how I saw the light and became a warmist", or something like that. But she'd probably have to find a new set of friends, which would be a big ask at her time of life.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-36630168676617994352014-03-04T03:30:36.374+11:002014-03-04T03:30:36.374+11:00Here's an even more interesting article since ...Here's an even more interesting article since it's supported by a study:<br /><br />"Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change unrelated to science literacy" | May 27, 2012<br /><br />Are members of the public divided about climate change because they don't understand the science behind it? If Americans knew more basic science and were more proficient in technical reasoning, would public consensus match scientific consensus?<br /><br />A study published today online in the journal Nature Climate Change suggests that the answer to both questions is no. …<br /><br />http://phys.org/news/2012-05-yale-apathy-climate-unrelated-science.html<br /><br />~ ~ ~ <br />The study itself"<br />The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks<br />http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n10/full/nclimate1547.htmlcitizenschallengehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04559990934735912814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-86543063832065045912014-03-04T02:59:09.061+11:002014-03-04T02:59:09.061+11:00Let me try that again without the typos this time:...Let me try that again without the typos this time:<br /><br /><br />How do obviously intelligent people, such as J. Nova, descend into this world of smoke and mirrors. Have they lost all self-skepticism because they are so attached to their ever bigger cars and other fancy toys that they've actually become blind to the impossibly of endless growth and riches? Or is it because J.Nova is so desperate to be in the lime-light that she does not care what she needs to say to stay there.<br /><br />The self contradictory nature, and cognitive dissidence, of these fake skeptics in amazing - <br /><br />PS.<br /><br />Is Cognitive Dissonance Fueling Conservative Denial of Climate Change?<br />by Rania Khalek | Published on Wednesday, June 15, 2011 by CommonDreams.org<br /><br />https://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/06/15-3citizenschallengehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04559990934735912814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-1915377291289658422014-03-04T02:55:25.090+11:002014-03-04T02:55:25.090+11:00This comment has been removed by the author.citizenschallengehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04559990934735912814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-64740368772999816722014-03-04T02:54:10.847+11:002014-03-04T02:54:10.847+11:00This comment has been removed by the author.citizenschallengehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04559990934735912814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-29300135986197684362014-03-04T02:29:51.970+11:002014-03-04T02:29:51.970+11:00Euan is very pragmatic and as you note his comment...Euan is very pragmatic and as you note his commentary on the UK O&G industry is second to none in the blogosphere...<br /><br />FFs are going to get burned, whether we like it or not... Even if there was the political will to phase out FFs, it will still take at least 20 years to get there...<br /><br />My own prediction is that those corporate entities with a vested interest in promoting FUD will soon be touting the "reliable" output of the very GCMs that doubt is being currently cast on when they that show stratospheric S02 spraying will "fix everything"....Flakmeisternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-87014222384088871452014-03-03T20:32:16.493+11:002014-03-03T20:32:16.493+11:00UKISS.
I have a file from 2008 where I listed the...UKISS.<br /><br />I have a file from 2008 where I listed the ten stages of human-caused global warming denial, which I would likely have posted in soome form on Deltoid or at Eli's. I know that others had said pretty much the same thing before I did, but I don't remember the first time I saw the shifting of these goal posts - I too would be curious to see the history...Bernard J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-12746514177145075792014-03-03T19:19:14.848+11:002014-03-03T19:19:14.848+11:00Just stepping back for a moment, as I was reading,...Just stepping back for a moment, as I was reading, I remembered somebody saying, about 5 years ago, that deniers would start shifting their own goalposts as more and more evidence piled up against their increasingly tenuous positions. I wish I could recall exactly who it was or had kept a screenshot, but I do recall that this person mentioned the deniers would shift from "flat out denial that there was any global warming" to " there is warming butits natural" to "there is CO2 induced warming but it won't be catastrophic". I've noticed the narative in a number of the standard deniers and their faithful flying monkeys has shifted to include "catastrophic". The loony fringe is getting frayed. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-82090158826965913622014-03-03T10:36:05.060+11:002014-03-03T10:36:05.060+11:00Deniers have nothing to gain by being relevant. Th...Deniers have nothing to gain by being relevant. They just need to produce something that sounds comforting, like a mother crooning to a babe. The fact they mention something means it must be relevant, otherwise why would they mention it? Goes to reason. Like if something's on the news it must be newsworthy, you know?<br />Cugelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-92082021916143162472014-03-03T09:19:04.042+11:002014-03-03T09:19:04.042+11:00The seasonal cycle of CO2 is also nearly irrelevan...The seasonal cycle of CO2 is also nearly irrelevant. The temperature response to the energy imbalance takes many years, decades.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-80009466567855040182014-03-03T07:55:56.059+11:002014-03-03T07:55:56.059+11:00If they are still wittering on about climategate t...If they are still wittering on about climategate then its hard to believe they understand written English let alone science.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-51852472109597005632014-03-03T00:16:33.970+11:002014-03-03T00:16:33.970+11:00See also Euan Mearns for someone 'skeptical...See also Euan Mearns for someone 'skeptical' who allows all sorts of nutty comments on his blog to go unchallenged (or worse, agreed with) yet engages much more critically of anyone who supports the consensus i.e. only skeptical when it suits him.<br /><br />A shame as he writes about things which I find interesting, yet he's a die-hard oil and gas man who can't see the damage his industry causes. What's worse is that he apparently lectures to undergraduates. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com