tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post572244789234645853..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Anthony Watts promotes Ari Halperin's climate conspiracy theories at WUWTSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-67666443478205144892016-02-19T16:57:55.141+11:002016-02-19T16:57:55.141+11:00True, but why that particular event (if that's...True, but why that particular event (if that's what he was thinking of. It might have been the establishment of the IPCC). <br /><br />Why not 1861 when Tyndall first showed it experimentally, or 1896 when Svante Arrhenius first published his calculations, or 1938 when Callendar published his. By 1884 the science of the greenhouse effect was popularised (it was written about in a rural newspaper in Australia). <br /><br />Or he could have jumped ahead to 1965 when Revelle informed the US President of global warming, or the First Earth Summit in 1972, or 1974 with Kellog and Schneider in Science, or 1975 when Wallace Broecker's paper was published in Science, or some other year in the 1970s (I was introduced to the greenhouse effect in 1975 or 76 IIRC).<br /><br />What I'm saying is that by 1988 scientific consensus that there is a greenhouse effect was very well established. The UN couldn't have acted to set up the IPCC otherwise.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-29871404256841315112016-02-19T14:37:21.994+11:002016-02-19T14:37:21.994+11:00Sou,
1988 is the year Dr. Hansen went to Washingt...Sou,<br /><br />1988 is the year Dr. Hansen went to Washington:<br /><br />http://climatechange.procon.org/sourcefiles/1988_Hansen_Senate_Testimony.pdf<br /><br />A year which shall forever live in infamy, not least because that's also the year when I obtained a license to operate motor vehicles.Brandon R. Gateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031044715994785956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-13083393461219635802016-02-19T02:32:58.693+11:002016-02-19T02:32:58.693+11:00Typo: markl seems to think there has been some off...Typo: markl seems to think there has been some official <b>degree</b> in the USAJohn Hugheshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10317679860236605037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-85353602990816637522016-02-18T22:12:38.158+11:002016-02-18T22:12:38.158+11:00"the fake scientific consensus has been growi..."the fake scientific consensus has been growing"<br /><br />That phrase seems to be denying its own meaning.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-42349410028070158632016-02-18T21:36:25.102+11:002016-02-18T21:36:25.102+11:00The term climate change denial is strange on its o...<i> <b>The term climate change denial is strange on its own: skeptics do not deny “climate change,” but rather debate its nature, definition, magnitude, causes, and consequences. But the really striking thing is how the use of this incoherent term skyrocketed after it first entered book publication in 2004. Just in 2007 alone its use increased 7 times! This term did not appear because of some real-world event. Instead, somebody made it up, then ensured that it stuck and spread. This suggests the existence of a centralized or semi-centralized body behind climate alarmism, making decisions on strategy and messaging and then passing these decisions down. Foot soldiers and even lieutenants do not need to know the process, and the marching orders might be conveyed in the form of recommendations. One small example is this Media Matters article, which provides instructions in the form of New Year’s resolutions. Media Matters is just one component of George Soros’ shadowy political empire. And Soros is not necessarily a member of the decision-making body, whatever he thinks himself.</b> </i><br /><br />Ari you are a bright, shiny, spectacular moron<br />http://climatecrocks.com/2016/02/11/truthsquadding-ted-cruz-climate-denial/PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10807913317731807617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-3716528199227412122016-02-18T21:05:15.131+11:002016-02-18T21:05:15.131+11:00"1. The alarmists first declared “scientific ..."1. The alarmists first declared “scientific consensus” in 1988, and have been digging their heels in, persecuting skeptics..."<br /><br />Persecuting 'sceptics' with facts, while acknowledging their right to their own malicious stupidity. Poor paranoid Ari and the Wattsies.<br /><br />Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09537772941984056434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-84441341823312294502016-02-18T21:01:12.672+11:002016-02-18T21:01:12.672+11:00I use Google's ngram viewer for other purposes...I use Google's ngram viewer for other purposes, but for tracking the use of terms in climate change, it is worse than useless. Firstly, the x axis stops at 2000. Secondly, it searches Google books, not the internet!<br /><br />The "Albert Einstein, Sherlock Holmes etc." graphic is the ngram viewer default, not a former search by you. If you want to see how it could be useful for writers, etc. enter "today, to-day" and you will see when each version of "today" was more common in books. I use it when I am creating free ebooks from public domain works. I have to decide if I should remove a hyphen from a word split across lines or pages. Many words which aren't hyphenated now, were when the original book was printed. Ngram is very helpful in those specific circumstances.MWSnoreply@blogger.com