tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post6986914183841231220..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Tim Ball and his audience at WUWT complain about naming and shaming!Souhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-27608852760970602922013-11-18T15:22:48.452+11:002013-11-18T15:22:48.452+11:00Dr. Ball is back, and Elen left a long comment on ...Dr. Ball is back, and Elen left a long comment on November 16 that seemed refreshingly open minded. So I <a href="http://archive.is/7IfpX" rel="nofollow">responded</a>.Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-51807627316321847082013-11-10T20:55:45.864+11:002013-11-10T20:55:45.864+11:00How about the puppies? He's nice to puppies, r...How about the puppies? He's nice to puppies, right?billnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-10571148974362990122013-11-10T19:14:35.447+11:002013-11-10T19:14:35.447+11:00Given this site exists just to trash Anthony Watts...<i>Given this site exists just to trash Anthony Watts</i><br /><br />You are mistaken. This site exists to "demolish disinformation". It focuses mostly on information from Anthony Watts' denialist blog because he is a clearing house for denialist disinformation like Tim Ball's conspiracy theories discussed above. Or as often, Anthony Watts copies and pastes disinformation from denier articles elsewhere, or puts up silly articles from his readers. <br /><br />Anthony Watts boasts about his large readership, which WUWT definitely attracts. So it makes sense to show how wrong and dumb are the articles he posts. And it makes sense to show him up when he ad homs climate scientists, which is a favourite pastime of his. <br /><br />Anthony doesn't write too many articles himself and when he does they are usually woefully inaccurate and very wide of the mark - like <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2013/08/anthony-watts-visits-greenland-and.html" rel="nofollow">here</a> and the comments he's added to Paul Homewood's latest article <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2013/11/while-thousands-may-have-died-in.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />If you want to sing the praises of Anthony for being energy efficient, that's fine. Energy efficiency is something every sensible person would be aiming for. It doesn't warrant canonisation to be energy efficient. It's just normal responsible behaviour.<br /><br />If you want me to go easy on what he writes, then no. Anthony promotes disinformation about climate science. Not only that but he behaves like a bully. And like bullies everywhere he also behaves like a coward, banning people at the drop of a hat.<br /><br />You'll notice that my comment policy is much more liberal.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-72532529310496023582013-11-10T18:51:04.046+11:002013-11-10T18:51:04.046+11:00Dumb Scientist. It looks like you are a welcome po...Dumb Scientist. It looks like you are a welcome poster at WUWT. Being a frequent poster it's interesting you didn't know about Anthony's very personal reasons against smoking. Do Sou's readers know about Anthony's electric car, extensive home solar panel installation and switch over to LED lighting in his home. <br /><br />Given this site exists just to trash Anthony Watts, a post about his virtues is not likely to make it through moderation. But I can be hopeful Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-63122360445411695712013-11-09T05:59:02.941+11:002013-11-09T05:59:02.941+11:00I spoke too soon; it was just posted.I spoke too soon; it was <a href="http://archive.is/P9oop" rel="nofollow">just posted</a>.Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-20723095653826534952013-11-09T05:54:04.432+11:002013-11-09T05:54:04.432+11:00Thanks for trying, David. The abuse WUWT slings at...Thanks for trying, David. The abuse WUWT slings at you would have shocked me a few years ago. Now all I can say is that you are not alone.<br /><br />Anyway, I <a href="http://archive.is/VUYcf" rel="nofollow">jumped back in</a>, but my most recent comment had two links so it hasn't made it through moderation yet. Here's a copy:<br /><br />Konrad says:<br />November 7, 2013 at 6:54 pm<br />"So the summary of your response is that you have found an excuse to avoid answering six simple science questions and instead reasserted your previous claims about CO2 (which are wholly unsupported by empirical evidence) and claim they are “fact”."<br />----<br /><br />Only at WUWT could 420 million years of climate records not count as empirical evidence. If you didn't like that paper for some unspecified reason, how about this review paper of different studies over the last 65 million years? It yields similar results, of course, because CO2 is a greenhouse gas.<br /><a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7426/full/nature11574.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7426/full/nature11574.html</a><br /><br /><br />----<br />Konrad says:<br />November 5, 2013 at 2:38 am<br />"... the net effect of radiative gases in our atmosphere is cooling at all concentrations above 0.0ppm"<br />----<br /><br />What a <b>fascinating</b> claim! As far as I can tell, the Sky Dragon Slayers argue that greenhouse gases are unrelated to surface temperature. Konrad seems to have outdone the Slayers; he argues that they actually <b>cool</b> the surface. Could he possibly be serious? Let's find out:<br /><a href="http://archive.is/c1lj5" rel="nofollow">http://archive.is/c1lj5</a><br /><br /><br />----<br />Konrad says:<br />November 5, 2013 at 1:45 pm<br />"CO2 is not an insulator. It acts to cool our atmosphere by radiation."<br /><br />Konrad says:<br />November 5, 2013 at 3:45 pm<br />"I am saying that CO2 does not insulate."<br /><br />Konrad says:<br />November 6, 2013 at 3:19 am<br />"... So what would happen if our atmosphere contained no radiative gases? ... Atmospheric temperatures would then rise higher..."<br /><br />Konrad says:<br />November 6, 2013 at 3:37 am<br />"...the net effect of radiative gases in our moving atmosphere is cooling at all concentrations above 0.0ppm."<br /><br />Konrad says:<br />November 6, 2013 at 2:55 pm<br />"Coldest – Thin atmosphere with radiative gases.<br />Cold – Thin atmosphere without radiative gases.<br />Warm – Thick atmosphere with radiative gases.<br />Hottest – Thick atmosphere without radiative gases."<br /><br />Konrad says:<br />November 6, 2013 at 3:36 pm<br />"the net effect of radiative gases in our atmosphere is cooling."<br />----<br /><br />Do you seriously believe that adding greenhouse gases cools a planet's surface? If so, the average surface temperature of the Earth should be lower than that of the Moon because the Earth has lots of greenhouse gases and the Moon has none. Is that the case?Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-50312307228483583402013-11-09T05:42:17.647+11:002013-11-09T05:42:17.647+11:00According to Friends, that's for jellyfish, no...According to <em>Friends</em>, that's for jellyfish, not fires. Using an extinguisher might sway fence-sitters though...Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-55696528570191300132013-11-09T03:56:38.046+11:002013-11-09T03:56:38.046+11:00While it's reasonable to sympathise with Watts...While it's reasonable to sympathise with Watts, I don't. Nor would I piss on him if he were on fire, frankly.Cugelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-22822132089334543442013-11-09T03:27:17.047+11:002013-11-09T03:27:17.047+11:00Here's what I tried to post at WUWT. (I have t...Here's what I tried to post at WUWT. (I have to use pseudonyms there because I am banned outright if I use my real name.):<br /><br />--------<br />Tim Ball is hardly a climate science expert, and this has been admitted in a court of law.<br /><br />After the Calgary Herald published an op-ed by Ball on April 19, 2006, whom the newspaper identified as the first climatology PhD in Canada and a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years, they published a letter on April 23, 2006 from Dr. Dan Johnson, a professor at the University of Lethbridge, who pointed out that neither of those descriptions is true; that Dr. Ball's credential were being seriously overstated. Ball later threatened Johnson and the Herald and ultimately sued for defamation.<br /><br />In their Statement of Defense filed in Court, the Calgary Herald submitted the following:<br /><br />1. "...that the Plaintiff (Ball) never held a reputation in the scientific community as a noted climatologist and authority on global warming. <br /><br />2. "The Plaintiff has never published any research in any peer-reviewed scientific journal which addressed the topic of human contributions to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming<br /><br />3. "The Plaintiff has published no papers on climatology in academically recognized peer-reviewed scientific journals since his retirement as a Professor in 1996;<br /><br />4. "The Plaintiff's credentials and credibility as an expert on the issue of global warming have been repeatedly disparaged in the media; and<br /><br />5. "The Plaintiff is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist."<br /><br />Ball dropped his lawsuit.<br /><br />Source: The Calgary Herald, Statement of Defense – paragraph 50, Dr Tim Ball v The Calgary Herald, In the Court of the Queen’s Bench of Alberta Judicial District of Calgary, Dec 7, 2006 (http://is.gd/brO4uO).<br /><br />More at: <br />http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-vs-dan-johnson-update-0<br />http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-vs-dan-johnson-lawsuit-documents<br />http://www.desmogblog.com/ball-bails-on-johnson-lawsuit<br />David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-19094156964766859322013-11-08T21:54:08.986+11:002013-11-08T21:54:08.986+11:00Whatever other faults Watts may have, he is a huma...Whatever other faults Watts may have, he is a human being and it is perfectly reasonable to sympathize with him in a case like this.<br /><br />The question is, what does he think of his Heartland Institute colleague Fred Singer (and others of his fellow contrarians) who reject the dangers of secondhand smoke? Is he on record about this?Don Brookshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379725341973886243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-50614695733164614532013-11-08T18:03:53.875+11:002013-11-08T18:03:53.875+11:00Wow, so it is possible to sympathize with Watts!
...Wow, so it is possible to sympathize with Watts!<br /><br />One observes that harleyrider's rant would also be a considerable - and squirming - embarrassment in the Lewandowsky sense. He was allowed to run on waaaaaaay too long, too.<br /><br />Surely the episode must have triggered considerable cognitive dissonance, even at Watts'? Even they must see the similarities in the method.billnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-81385665968491625672013-11-08T16:34:22.322+11:002013-11-08T16:34:22.322+11:00Thanks. Here's the most recent archive. I was ...Thanks. Here's the most recent <a href="http://archive.is/Lxsgb" rel="nofollow">archive</a>. I was impressed with Anthony Watts's response to harleyrider1978.Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-10030574972269039342013-11-08T16:21:14.514+11:002013-11-08T16:21:14.514+11:00Dumb Scientist - keep going! Lots of fun reading ...Dumb Scientist - keep going! Lots of fun reading the replies in Sou's latest update link. WUWT has really gone downhill from just 6 months ago. Who knew that smoking's correlation to lung cancer was just a conspiracy? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-10780244685787242013-11-08T11:04:13.163+11:002013-11-08T11:04:13.163+11:00I can see the dilemma for right wing lobby groups,...I can see the dilemma for right wing lobby groups, but in many cases (eg USA, the GWPF) they've been hijacked by the crazies already. (Eg the Unabomber poster, some of the recent US election campaigns).<br /><br />I don't know why Anthony plays with people like Monckton and Ball. They are nuts and Anthony I think aims for an image of "reasonable". Though some of his own comments show that he himself has a "crazy" component too. So maybe he's just giving in to his own conspiracy inclinations, even though he knows the risk to his "reputation". (Of course, thinking that he had any sort of "reputation" to risk would show he's not living in the real world.)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-62038086473684204622013-11-08T09:59:43.420+11:002013-11-08T09:59:43.420+11:00Looking at Tim Ball (and Don Easterbrook, etc.) I ...Looking at Tim Ball (and Don Easterbrook, etc.) I have to say I feel a bit sorry for public relations outfits like Heartland and all the rest.<br /><br />It must be a damned tricky business locating people with the finely tuned, barely-balanced combination of craziness and communications skills suitable for the public face of a campaign. Looking at Ball, he's sort of metastable, flipping between managing to write something superficially persuasive and being simply barking mad.<br /><br />For the PR honcho managing these people, every day will bring the chance that one or another of them is blown, that people draw a line between serviceable op-eds and unhinged screeds and notice it's the same person writing both. It must be truly nerve-wracking. <br /><br />Yet the daily fear and loathing is unavoidable. The people best qualified for the shovel work of swaying popular opinion have to be sincere in their beliefs. A person who sincerely doesn't believe in simple facts governing the behavior of the planet is necessarily not going to be very easy to manage, because one badly crossed mental connection is almost always accompanied by many more. <br /><br />What a quandary.dbostromhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13885863615343906724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-83778041643059818732013-11-08T09:39:38.956+11:002013-11-08T09:39:38.956+11:00Another good 'un by Tim:
The full interview w...Another good 'un by Tim:<br /><br /><i>The full interview was in preparation for a larger documentary on the use of climate science to achieve a political agenda of wider government control that I anticipate will appear in conjunction with my upcoming book on the topic. The need was for an issue that had global impact thus forcing the participation of all nation states and deferral of control to a global governing agency – the UN.</i><br /><br /><a href="http://drtimball.com/2013/climate-science-as-a-vehicle-for-political-control/" rel="nofollow">Climate Science As A Vehicle For Political Control</a><br /><br />No need to imagine this fellow is tormented by imagined conspiracies. He's quite frank about it. <br /><br />How about this?<br /><br /><i>Almost every aspect of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) work is manipulated, selected, and controlled, to prove human CO2 is causing global warming. The objective was to prove the hypothesis, not to perform objective science.<br /><br />The goal was established by the Club of Rome whose member, Maurice Strong transmitted and translated it into world government policy through the United Nations.</i><br /><br /><a href="http://drtimball.com/2012/ipcc-control-calculations-of-annual-human-co2-production-for-political-agenda/" rel="nofollow">IPCC Control Calculations of Annual Human CO2 Production For Political Agendaf</a><br /><br />IPCC is controlled by the Club of Rome and only Tim Ball knows. "They" are everywhere, though it's hard to turn around fast enough to see 'em. <br />dbostromhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13885863615343906724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-51124373795523649062013-11-08T09:25:46.964+11:002013-11-08T09:25:46.964+11:00Tim Ball sees a conspiracy under every rock, appar...Tim Ball sees a conspiracy under every rock, apparently.<br /><br /><i>Once the problem is falsely established, control is not far behind. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) needs a replacement. It must be a natural global resource, little understood by most so they can easily mislead transcend national boundaries and quickly raise passions and concerns. The target, water, is already in play.</i><br /><br /><a href="http://drtimball.com/2013/water-is-replacing-climate-as-the-next-false-un-environmental-resource-scare/" rel="nofollow">Water Is Replacing Climate As The Next False UN Environmental Resource Scare</a><br /><br />Maybe "they" are putting something in his water?dbostromhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13885863615343906724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-2439874905269484422013-11-08T08:31:06.690+11:002013-11-08T08:31:06.690+11:00it was a top effort indeed, it was a top effort indeed, john byattnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-41553801755527463962013-11-08T04:59:48.199+11:002013-11-08T04:59:48.199+11:00Amusingly, Konrad also denied the greenhouse effec...Amusingly, Konrad also denied the greenhouse effect in <a href="http://archive.is/tvliV" rel="nofollow">another article</a>. Steven R. Vada goes down the same rabbit hole in this article, but still can't swallow harleyrider1978's denial that smoking is unhealthy.<br /><br />When RockyRoad <a href="http://archive.is/FsICF" rel="nofollow">babbled</a> about lags, I said: "I chose those examples because CO2 preceded warming during the end-Permian, PETM and thawing of Snowball Earth."<br /><br />When mkelly asks if that's all I got, I said "Also, Venus is hotter than Mercury despite the fact that Mercury is closer to the Sun <b>and</b> darker than Venus."Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-18551109198661805342013-11-08T03:58:47.906+11:002013-11-08T03:58:47.906+11:00As a historical note: for years Crichton was promo...As a historical note: for years Crichton was promoted by Washington thinktanks like George Marshall Institute. Then, Heartland ran incessant articles quoting him, plus ads saying "Crichton was right!"John Masheynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-35727402771488231932013-11-07T22:17:38.691+11:002013-11-07T22:17:38.691+11:00It's self-evident that anybody who knew the an...It's self-evident that anybody who knew the answers to Tim Ball's questions (the difference between weather and climate, name the three major so-called greenhouse gases and explain the mechanics of the greenhouse theory) wouldn't sit through a three-hour lecture from him in the first place. I'd prefer to stick pins in my eyes, and I could easily answer all three of his questions.<br /><br />Perhaps he should survey the general public, not those who are gullible enough to be fooled by him?<br /><br />Tim Ball claims that his "sympathetic" audience were educated - obviously not in climate science, and a three-hour lecture from him didn't even give them the basics.<br /><br />MWS Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-23987231220246428072013-11-07T19:24:05.682+11:002013-11-07T19:24:05.682+11:00"educated people who distrust government and ..."educated people who distrust government and were sympathetic to my information. I decided to illustrate my point and concern by asking a few basic questions. Nobody could tell me"<br /><br />So for Tim Ball, "educated" is consistent with "doesn't know anything" as long as one distrusts government?jqbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-25098797686084992752013-11-07T18:19:22.578+11:002013-11-07T18:19:22.578+11:00A valiant effort, Dumb Scientist. I wonder whethe...A valiant effort, Dumb Scientist. I wonder whether your comments will last the distance. That article and thread was truly amazing. The article for being a content free gripe and the comments for doing exactly what Tim Ball was complaining about.<br /><br />And Anthony's reaction - lol. I can imagine him stomping and flouncing and tearing his hair out, wondering whether he did the right thing a few months back in letting comments appear immediately.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-77865012621113463442013-11-07T18:07:24.170+11:002013-11-07T18:07:24.170+11:00Thanks Sou! I wonder if the person who "outed...Thanks Sou! I wonder if the person who "outed" me clicked on my name before misconstruing my attempt to explain that we all have to struggle to understand science.Dumb Scientisthttp://dumbscientist.comnoreply@blogger.com