Army of darkness: 33% of Americans think the sun goes around the earth

[Hat tip "Why evolution is true"]

Sometimes all you can do is weep: 

While I don’t want to engage in simple “American bashing”, it is rather terrifying to think that one-third of Americans believe in a geocentric universe. [1]

Creationism and the denial of climate change have become party platforms of the right-wing/conservative/Republican views since the 1980s.

This is the price American society pays for the so called “culture wars” that have been running since the 1980s under Reagan.

This is the product of the long running “war on science” and the attempt to wind back the Enlightenment.

Conservatives in the US struck a Faustian deal with evangelicals and conservative Christians decades ago. Now it seems the Republican Party has been “captured” by ideologues and ignoramuses.

When Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are the movements leading intellectual lights, you know there is a problem.

Is it me, or does the thought the world’s largest economic and military superpower being populated by millions of people who reject the idea the earth goes around the sun terrifying?

Sadly, I suspect figures in Australia might not be that different.

So many educated, professional people I know subscribe to astrology, alternative medicine and a host of wacky conspiracy theories (faked NASA moon landings, Climategate, Kennedy assassination).

It has nothing to do with “intelligence”.

This is why I battle against the “denial machine”.

It is but one division of the armies of darkness seeking to extinguish the light of knowledge. 

 

[1] Or at least don’t understand how long the Earth takes to orbit the sun

About these ads

133 thoughts on “Army of darkness: 33% of Americans think the sun goes around the earth

  1. We’re a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme
    in our community. Your web site offered us with valuable information to work
    on. You have done a formidable job and our whole community will be thankful to you.

  2. lara says:

    This 1999 Gallup poll reported that 18% believe the sun revolves around Earth.
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/3742/new-poll-gauges-americans-general-knowledge-levels.aspx
    The question wording “…once a year” might have affected the results.

  3. Abraxxas says:

    All I can do is laugh after reading “Scientific literacy” then reading ahead to find “Antibotics.” Seriously disappointing.

  4. Orson says:

    What does doubting the official version of the JFK killing have to do with ignorance of science? You mean, doubting the magic bullet theory makes you a dummy? What are you:CIA? You know what ignorance of science makes you do? It makes you believe that a 110 story building , held together by huge steel girders, with floors of poured concrete laced with metal bracing, could fall to the ground as fast as a ball bearing, as if the floors gave no resistance at all. Now a scientist would say that’s impossible, as thousands of brave engineers, architects, pilots have done. Please, spare me the bullshit.

  5. [...] should be noted that this sort of arrogance of ignorance is widely spread. According to the Watchers of Deniers, scientific literacy has reached ever plunging lows showing that United States Adults and Students [...]

  6. [...] to the Watchers of Deniers, scientific literacy has reached ever plunging lows showing that United States Adults and Students [...]

  7. [...]  And In 2011, 33% Percent of Americans believe the sun goes around the earth: http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/army-of-darkness-33-of-americans-think-the-sun-go… [...]

  8. John says:

    So 33% is roughly a hundred million Americans, which can easily include the entire US population of illiterate and poor, as well as people who do not live within a convenient distance from a center of knowledge–which is plenty of people–and even those without internet access, which last time I checked was as of 2012 around 23% of all Americans. Your statistics don’t really shock me at all. The most important thing beyond numbers however is that question that pops up in elementary school all the time: When am I ever going to need this?

    As “basic” as the idea that the Earth revolves around the sun is, it is a quaint and irrelevant fact to most people. Even in something immediately relevant like orienteering it is easier to assume that the Sun and the stars arc across the sky to find coordinates than to assume that the moving, shiny point in the sky is actually standing still. The math alone would be annoying.

    Sherlock Holmes famously said that he did not know that the Earth revolves around the Sun because such information is irrelevant to his life and work.

    The “shock” value of this survey comes from this democratic-enlightenment belief that such information ‘should’ be as free as air and known like the wetness of water and because it is a poetic in its monumentally simple science. The crutch here is that there is no obligation to “know” what is essentially trivia to at least 33% of Americans.

    Just knowing things is not considered proactive for today’s busy, consuming, building, destroying homo sapien. Knowledge is either useful and thus valuable or not useful and thus unwise to keep knowing. Black and white, yes but most people in this world can’t afford or want to bother with the nitty-gritty of subtlety.

  9. JeffT says:

    johnny byatt,
    Very dramatic and emotive scenario.
    But why don’t you preface that by scrapping the trains and railway system and tearing out the tracks, as your CO2 proposals indicate ?
    ie. Remove the root cause.
    Anyway, you must have been responsible for this bit of dramatic and emotive captrap:-

    Is Quercus another ID of yours ?
    JT

  10. john byatt says:

    Sundance (06:29:00) :
    “Just let me finish and say this. If the world as a whole cut all emissions tomorrow the average temperature of the planet is not going to drop in several hundred years, perhaps as much as a thousand years because the system is overburdened with CO2 that has to be absorbed and that only happens slowly.”

    Tim Flannery

    What can you say to that?

    Reply

    That you do not have any understanding of what is trying to be achieved,
    can we reduce temperature in several hundred years NO
    can we prevent temperature rise going beyond 2DegC, YES we can if we choose to do so ,
    should we choose to do so ? yes , why? because beyond that is a dangerous level for everyone of earth

    • Sundance says:

      John I do better understand the distinction you make. I agree with a key point that you make that people have to “choose” to reduce energy use and environmental impacts. I would suggest though that people really aren’t going to identify with a goal of limiting global temperature rise by 2C degrees because it isn’t personal enough for them. As you can see from recent elections people will resist a forced approach to emissions reduction. I’m still not sure what is the best approach but I do believe it has to incorporate reinforcing positive actions at the personal level.

      • john byatt says:

        sundance

        You see small children playing on the railroad track, a train is racing towards them,

        you can see that no matter how fast you run you are not going to reach them in time.

        you have two choices, stand and watch or run like blazes and hope against hope that you will reach them in time

        I choose to run

        the children’s names are not denial

        their names are apathy

  11. john byatt says:

    No sundance you are getting tipping points confused, you are seeing tipping points as only being a runaway tipping point in the climate, that is not as stated, this is a tipping point that will completely over time melt all permafrost and greatly reduce the current levels of carbon sinks, ie the permafrost will never refreeze to lock away carbon for many tens of thousands of years at least

    What you are trying to relate to this is the absurdity of a runaway venus syndrome, this cannot occur on this planet due to distance from the sun and locked up total GHG, the planet however can achieve a global temperature which would cause the total extinction of all mammals ,

    it is a strawman argument to claim that we are saying that all tipping points are total climate tipping points , you need to sort this out

  12. john byatt says:

    you may have missed the point sundance, human emissions are reversible by cutting emissions be that china ,australia or anyone else,
    emissions as explained released due melting permafrost will not be reversible , can you see the difference, it means that human emissions reduction to prevent beyond 2DegC will have to be larger now than previously required ,

    .

    • Sundance says:

      The whole point as I see it is that the February 2011 Davies et al study illustrates that even when Earth was 24C degrees (9.5C degrees warmer than now), and when tropical SST was as high as 42C degrees, and when the permafrost had all melted, and when all that CO2 and methane was in the atmosphere, there was no irreversible/permanent tipping point in the climate. The point is I don’t find any scientific evidence for proof that future warming of 2C degrees, can cause an irreversible/permanent tipping point. I billion tons of additional CO2 from permafrost melt is a drop in the bucket and no long term threat. I refer you to scientist Ed Dlugokencky, from NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory, who in a written comment on melting permafrost and methane clathrates in the Arctic advised Andy evkin’s readership that any danger was remote and not likely.

  13. john byatt says:

    Why am i so misunderstood, Mr helpfull thats me

    at TCS

    ohn b said…
    Leon, i really want to help, if your letters go in the paper then i get to bag them
    your last letter in a similar vein did not go in locally, i believe that was because like this one you are not actually saying anything, just asking questions , try again but make it a letter worth printing, using 1 2 3 4 etc just confuses people and does not read well in a letter as it usually cannot be laid out that way ,
    anyway if it does get in I will just bring your contradictions to notice, glad to help

    cheers

    john byatt
    March 25, 2011 9:14 PM
    Geoff Brown said…
    Shows your true colours, doesn’t it, Mr CoolFool Byatt!
    March 26, 2011 4:10 AM

    • JeffT says:

      You don’t hold attention for long johnny Byatt,

      “We are talking about global warming or cooling , whatever your science of the day might be and you go on about eugenics , see the problem?, unable to focus .”

      Your unable to relate outside your narrow paradigm -”CO2 causes IT”
      JT

  14. john byatt says:

    and all they can do is deny

    Fingerprints of global warming are indicators of the global, long-term warming trend observed in the historical record. They include heat waves, sea-level rise, melting glaciers and warming of the poles.
    Harbingers are events that foreshadow the impacts likely to become more frequent and widespread with continued warming. They include spreading disease, earlier spring arrival, plant and animal range shifts, coral reef bleaching, downpours, and droughts and fires.
    The RSOE EDIS Climate Change Monitoring Service is taking steps to bring this evidence to the public’s attention, with the goal of building support for action to reduce the heat-trapping gas emissions that cause global warming. We have developed – and always updated – a world map, viewable online and also available as an Online Maps, that shows where the fingerprints and harbingers of global warming have occurred in recent years. By showing the local consequences of climate change, it brings the message home effectively.
    RSOE Emergency and Disaster Information Services (EDIS) Budapest Hungary

    • JeffT says:

      All very EU,
      Herman von Rompuy will be pleased.

      “Fingerprints of global warming are indicators of the global, long-term warming trend observed in the historical record. They include heat waves, sea-level rise, melting glaciers and warming of the poles.”

      That’s history you idiot. I’ve been telling you this for thousands of words ago. But you’ve kept yapping along playing only to the tune in your head’
      And it’s cyclic, measurable and very complex.

      The religious fervour-
      It’s all been done before you robot.
      100 years ago it was eugenics
      Same religious fervour, same strict scientific reasoning, same scare techniques, same backing by scientists, governments, philanthropist, bankers and politicians, including Kings and Presidents.
      But it still was eugenics.
      Deny my RR’s
      I’m a realist, not a bluudy robot.
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        No jeff you are a deluded silly old fool and your grandchildren will live to despise you and everything you have brainwashed them with,

        We are talking about global warming or cooling , whatever your science of the day might be and you go on about eugenics , see the problem?, unable to focus .

  15. john byatt says:

    John cook of skeptical science told fielding ,after he arrived back from the states that he would sit in with him for a week, and go through the science with him step by step, fielding refused because he claimed that he already knew it all .

    so fielding was not a sceptic at all, none of you are , you are all psychological deniers and you jefft are a pathological liar , so whatever you say i just don’t believe it . even today you have put up a lie about windsor, you claim the right to call the PM, someone that you do not know , a bitch, well i do not know your wife either jeff , so i am saying that she is also a bitch, get it ?

    • JeffT says:

      That Byatt old sport,
      Is a litany of crap.
      Skeptical Science is a source of climate misinformation. Sen Fielding would have been wise not to waste his time with John Cook.
      I stopped collecting SS as a source of informarion, once it was obvious SS was just another climatism crap website with sources stemming from the UWA.
      There is more about that – it is difficult to find many believers in John Cook and Skeptical Science. I have spent more time that it was worth trying to find believers in that site
      Now you have had your slanderous say about Steve Fielding, can you explain why he went to the US, spoke with various climate and related scientists, attended a Heartland Conference etc. on his own accord ?
      Can you supply a reason ? His religious beliefs ? energy and industry backing? advancement in his political career ?
      You’re the bluudy expert – say something believable.

      From your definition above, you state that none of us are sceptics, but are all psychological deniers. Just name calling schoolboy tactics, as suitable for your mental state.
      Pathetic is my only comment.
      Do you think you are important enough for me to worry about what you don’t believe. The answer to that comes crudely from the comedian Col Bloody Wilson – DILLIGAF.
      Your not important !
      Then you carry on about what I posted about Tony Windsor, pathological liar was the term – cute. What I posted is public knowledge, Google around or -
      To give you more to vent your spleen on – or hyperventilate about-
      http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/tax-betrayal-haunts-independent-mps-tony-windsor-and-rob-oakeshott/story-e6frfhqf-1226014938584
      Herald Sun, a paper of ill repute ? Miranda Devine as the reporter, you can have another day’s wet dreaming rants over those items, you sicko.
      By now you should see what I mean about me being cold – your only an amateur. I’ve had to cope with bigger A**sH***s than you. Including bipolars.
      I find it difficult to remain within the bounds of web decency, but I will and keep archiving it. I might end up with an enviable store of 4T bytes of John Byatt’s ravings.
      Your only up to around 230M at the moment..
      J

      • john byatt says:

        Jefft ” you are not important scumbag byatt, that is why i am keeping a dossier on you and archiving everything you say, because i repeat you are not important , i am a cold, lying silly old fool, so there, i have nearly 4T bytes on your unimportance now,

        Fielding , reason religious beliefs , pressure from his church AOG at the time as stated by Ross,

        ,love them

  16. Ross Brisbane says:

    I copied your post and reworded my reply to communicate back to you. I am responding in a two way discourse.

    I have read Plimer’s Heaven and Earth – and checked out the links and bibliography within that book. I find old established argument and some limited science from a geologists standpoint. In reference to his science discipline unfortunately qualified geologists – much brighter then him have challenged him on his book and rebuked him for his non-science in that book. If only there were a majority of geologists who agree with him but unfortunately its the other way. His book also contains faulty charts and seem to be taken off the back of the Great Global Swindle’s research and Video which in turn established many errors now refuted.

    I watched Bob Carter’s lectures. His statistical analysis is questionable. He has been refuted many times over and challenged. He refuses to hold proper dialogue with the established science disciplines and submit his work for scrutiny to other disciplines as an audit of what he states. He tends to sound authoritarian but lacks accountability with his science and does not have the rigour of other scrutiny.

    You could give your reaction to Bill McKibben’s novel novels. Never heard of him.

    Most of what you post consists mostly of pure hypotheticals and conjecture without any real foundation to the science or its reliability.

    Yet the IPCC is quoted here as source which is fine. Where on earth did you get the idea that thousands of scientists were not involved in these reports? It carries strict rigour and Dr Carter’s statements on the IPCC and a handful of men are patently without foundation or truth. There is grey literature in it contents but is limited to a few studies that you are well aware of. The grey literature in the denial camp is an Everest in comparison.

    The peer reviewed stuff coming by a majority of Climate Deniers tend to have created there own peer reviews boards independently of science mainstream review. Some of the papers (rarely do we get a reasonable argument) are the worst ever published. Carter’s publication is rated as one of worst papers ever gotten through peer review.

    If does not conform to proper analysis then of course the ruling is rejection of the paper.

    Indicative of the ones opinion DOES NOT reflect mentality of this site, John Byatt commenting on – out of the blue – ‘fielding is an idiot’ – nice, simple derogatory and disrespectful.

    Sen Steve Fielding paid his way to the US to investigate Heartland and other so-called sceptic sources, attend the conference, met scientists from both camps, made decisions and brought them back to Australia to query and question the DECC and Senator Penny Wong about CPRS, ETS. He once being in acceptance of the science was COMPELLED and DIRECTED by others (non-elected) stemming the foundational movement which brought forth the Family First Party – Assemblies of God – now renamed in Christian Family Fellowships. This is an ultra conservative fundamentalist movement here in Australia with a mixed bag of eschatology and theology.

    The pressure was placed on him. After being subjected to the worst offending machinery you could ever attend in the US he came back converted to Climate Change denial with the selective famous graph he used. Finally in the dying days of his tenure he updated his graph maintaining re-linking the same CONTRIVED ERROR. Heartland deserves a major investigation and it is only a matter of time before this foundation is exposed. The corruption and use of a majority of scientists even implied are numbered on ones hand. There are also questionable reports of selective data emanating from this foundation that are far far worse then the errors touted in the IPCC reports.

    The Senator is no fool, he is also Batchelor of Engineering- electronics from RMIT and a Master of Business Administration – Monash University. Commercial employment included Hewlett-Packard then management at NEC and Siemens. He stood up to what? Nothing has been served by having him deny climate change. He is more berated for his religious affiliations then being some idiot. There has no smoking gun ever discovered or uncovered by him and I know he tried very hard to find it. Evans and Carter were the first into him after he got back from the States as the softening up had ‘done’ him already. Be aware he failed to seek the mainstream science in any lengthy discourse. I would guess in part there is some suspicion coming through as he never owned up whether he was a 7 day literal creationist. There are two fundamentalist streams here OLD EC and YOUNG EC. It is interesting he NEVER developed any depth of theology that would prepare him to be satisfactory in that office as a representative Christian. All he did on Q&A is obfuscate about his beliefs.

    Lord Monckton has been charged with misrepresentation for his highly selective presentation to the Congress of the US by both sides of the house – Republicans and Democrats.

    Firstly the title is hereditary, but still should be shown some respect.
    He is a good presenter, a very smart orator with an upper class English accent. He does present some older material, but is now involved with Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI).

    I personally find him an enigma. Smooth words and graphs poorly referenced in his presentations. Clever lines of discourse. The anti of Gore. Refuted by many more qualified and upset scientists he himself MISQUOTED. They sent him emails and letters owing to these misrepresentation’s.

    He did the unspeakable by exposing the Copenhagen Climate Treaty draft at St Paul University. I have read that 181 page UN document.

    My thinking here is a confused overlay of apocalyptic fever derived from distorted end times theology mixed and shaken together with his extreme idealisation of what it is to be conservative. I know the theology of this end time drama and it appears that his thoughts are overlaid into this document and UN conspiracy. This has been rife in evangelical churches since the mid 60s! It would find a welcome home in Southern Baptist churches of America. Historically this stems from Plymouth Brothers evangelicalism (1850-1905) who exported wild claims of end times literal prophecy to America. America over time became very conservative – post WW II. The fields were always open to this planted conspiracy of UN / Anti-Christ / Science coalition conspiracy.

    Now we have the baby boomers and older people highly conservative taking in this fear. Lord Monckton is an aberrant combination of evangelical/religious fervour/extreme conservative. Suggestive lesding thr audience with fairy tale conjecture without any foundation in science. The anti of Gore. The denier’s stand in for the Gore element.

    • john byatt says:

      interesting about the Baptists in Australia Ross, my sister in law is baptist and also Yecy, i asked here what the church position was on global warming, they are a member group of churches that supports action, but in name only as she said they do not become involved in political issues,

      So they do not actually deny it but ignore it claiming that it is a political issue rather than a moral issue, have your cake and eat it too

      i think she is waiting for the rapture ,

      .

    • JeffT says:

      Ross Brisbane,
      Too long for reply, but a couple of queries -
      You have read the Copenhagen Climate Treaty draft and that’s it – no comment ?
      As it created a ripple around the world, that the public woke up from their dumbed down condition and took notice, and from some specialists such as constitutional law who I was surprised at , spoke or wrote comment, mostly of warning and caution.
      I kept it as a pdf for a while, unread for a few weeks, so as to not be stampeded by the stir it created. Then I watch Lord Monckton at St Paul video, then I read the document. Difficult to read as being a draft has alternate paths in the text, but I found it disturbing.
      Your explanatory second last paragraph is just your opinion.

      And as I have stated previously Monckton invites all members of his audience to think for themselves. There does not appear to be any evangelistic or religious fervour in his presentations, with the exception of a particulary American trait at American rallies, of audience participation, in the same vein as a Mannatech or similar convention.
      JT

  17. john byatt says:

    well just to stuff up everyones day i went back and have been reading some of the science from six degree of global warming , so how is he going , just about everything has been underestimated,

    from 4 degrees

    At four degrees another tipping point is almost certain to be crossed; indeed, it could happen much earlier. (This reinforces the determination of many environmental groups, and indeed the entire EU, to bring us in within the two degrees target.) This moment comes as the hundreds of billions of tonnes of carbon locked up in Arctic permafrost – particularly in Siberia – enter the melt zone, releasing globally warming methane and carbon dioxide in immense quantities

    so were are we with that, latest paper suggest that the PCB will commence from mid 2020′s and we have a climate fool telling us how clever fielding and the potty Monckton are Plimer’s heaven and earth is pure fiction, a ramble that even his own reference do not support,

    .

    • JeffT says:

      And you believe in this opportunist’s prophecies ?
      How about Tim Blair, he is a reporter, it’s a hilarious read, and if you really want to read the TV script, please go ahead, check with the ABC.

      http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/do-not-feel-afraid-gaia-is-with-us/story-fn6b3v4f-1225980669696

      It’s about as credible as having Greg Ivan Combet as a Climate Change Minister.
      Mining Engineering
      Batchelor of Economics
      Union officer then Assistant Secretary.

      With ACTU President Jennie George, Assistant Secretary Greg Combet rallied demonstrators, in what has become known as the 1996 Parliament House Riot.
      90 Parliament personnel injured
      $75,000 damage to entry to Parliament House and the cafe looted.
      This is your Climate Change Minister.

      The only tipping point you should be worried about is your next bipolar event.

      And while your reading Six Degrees suck on this data from Green Econometrics -
      http://greenecon.net/2010-update-on-oil-production-and-co2-levels/energy_economics.html
      Maybe we should export Flannery from Australia (1.4% CO2) to China (22.3% CO2 – 2009) to fix their CO2 problem.
      He could take McKibben with him.
      JT

    • Sundance says:

      What peer reviewed papers are outlining tipping points? I’d like to read them.

      • Sundance says:

        Thanks John. I was already aware of and had read the Schaefer paper and found it weak. I am not very worried about 1 billion tons of CO2 per year from permafrost into 2100 a view that is shared in writing to Andy Revkin of DOT Earth by scientist Ed Dlugokencky from NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory who is responsible for monitoring CO2 and CH4. You should be much more alarmed by the 1 billion/year China has already added in 2009 alone and the 10 billion tons a year China and India will be adding by the 2020s.

        The good news is that a recent study (Februay 2011) based on sediment cores from a marine ridge in the Arctic Ocean it was discovered that:
        “Based on reconstructions of Arctic climate variability in the greenhouse world of the Late Cretaceous, Southampton scientists have concluded that man-made global warming probably would not greatly change the climatic influence associated with natural modes of inter-annual climate variability such as the El Niño – Southern Oscillation (ENSO) or the Arctic Oscillation/ North Atlantic Oscillation (AO/ NAO).”

        All but 20 million of the last 250 million years saw global temperatures above 17C degrees with 150 million years at 22C degrees. Yet ice somehow reappeared. There is no historical evidence based on observable geological evidence that indicates that an irreversible tipping point is possible. Of course people will still believe nonsense like the alarmsit nonsense below that is based on modeling:

        http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/01/climatechange.carbonemissions

        OMG you only have 70 more month to live! ROTFLMAO

  18. Sundance says:

    “Just let me finish and say this. If the world as a whole cut all emissions tomorrow the average temperature of the planet is not going to drop in several hundred years, perhaps as much as a thousand years because the system is overburdened with CO2 that has to be absorbed and that only happens slowly.”

    Tim Flannery

    What can you say to that?

    • JeffT says:

      Sundance,

      Q) What can I say to that?

      A) Tim Flannery

      Any fool that reads and believes Flannery’s climate science, needs to get their library card revoked.
      He was OK in Two men and a Tinny, but should have stuck to his specialties.
      John Byatt will help you spell them.
      JT

  19. Ross Brisbane says:

    Obsessive Compulsive Climate Denier Disorder

    How do i stop constantly re-checking things?

    Like for example before i go to bed at night i turn off my computer. But then I might go back and turn it on again 2 or 3 times and check out the latest climate stuff that reassures me I am okay about my future. I do this with everything. Even counting and trying to remember the latest reassurances. I find myself re-reading it 2 or 3 times.

    It’s like I am always doubting what I know. These thoughts keep popping into my head that I maybe wrong.

    It drives my nuts.

    Answer from the good Doctor:

    I know how you feel. Checking denial about Climate Change is one of the more severe compulsions. Checking all the time. Hours on the Internet. You may think you are wrong all the time. Recently, however it has been found the obsessions cease after facing the horrible truths of Climate Change and the symptoms lessen. You will experience times where you will be worry free and a few days later your consumed with anxiety and doubts again. This is a sign that you have the Obsessive Compulsive Climate Denier Disorder.

    Try to stay busy. Buy good science book on the subject that helps you face the pending complexities of tomorrow and good sound climate change preparation. Mediating and relaxation on creative solutions to the problem will help.

  20. JeffT says:

    Also Ross B.
    have you ever read Plimer’s Heaven and Earth – and checked out the links and bibliography within that book ?
    Have you ever watched any of Bob Carter’s lectures or attended any of his presentations ?
    And have you made judgements, or been influenced by others.
    I could give you my reaction to Bill McKibben’s novel novels.

    You said:
    “Most of what you post consists mostly of pure hypotheticals and conjecture without any real foundation to the science or its reliability.”
    And yet the IPCC is quoted here as source – ?

    Besides a bit of nonsense which John Byatt brings out in me, most of the info I post comes from recognised sources, including extracts from ‘Elsevier’ or ‘Scribd’, I have named peer reviewed papers on relevant subject matter.
    But as it is not conforming with Carbon Climate Consensus that pervades this site, it is wrong and is dismissed.

    Indicative of the mainstream mentality of this site was captured in a “statement” from John Byatt commenting on – out of the blue – ‘fielding is an idiot’ – nice, simple derogatory and disrespectful.

    At least Sen Steve Fielding had the guts and drive to get out, pay his way to the US to investigate Heartland and other so-called sceptic sources, attend the conference, met scientists from both camps, made decisions and brought them back to Australia to query and question the DECC and Senator Penny Wong about CPRS, ETS.
    This Senator is no fool, he is also Batchelor of Engineering- electronics from RMIT and a Master of Business Administration – Monash University. Commercial employment included Hewlett-Packard then management at NEC and Siemens.
    Because he stood up to the consensus, he becomes berated by some idiot.

    Then there is Lord Monckton and the continual berating he has copped here.
    Firstly the title is hereditary, but still should be shown some respect.
    He is a good presenter, a very smart orator with an upper class English accent.
    He does present some older material, but is now involved with Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) – ( don’t bother )
    But in the eyes of the Carbon Consensus, Global Warming believers, he did the unspeakable by exposing the Copenhagen Climate Treaty draft at St Paul University.
    Have you read that 181 page UN document Ross B. ?
    Be interesting to see what you slant is on it.

    Jt

  21. john byatt says:

    Why you are crazy jefft

    First you put up comments claiming it is cooling post after post
    then you put up comments claiming it is warming due to anything except Greenhouse gases

    you are suffering as Ross said from unresolved Cognitive Dissonance
    short term memory loss
    mid term memory loss
    you must be driving your b**** insane

    all you can come up with is “drink the Koolade” , whatever you think that means

    and you expect to be treated like a sane person

    • JeffT says:

      Drink the “Carbonated Green Koolaide ”
      Has been explained ONCE. For a presumed bright lad you do tend to forget don’t you ? You also get people mixed up – confused as well ?

      You wouldn’t know what I have posted, or for that matter the tone it has been posted in.
      Your the one that continually shows bipolar symptoms, and not only toward me, but other poor suckers – I do read others posts as well.
      And you thought it odd that you were asked to leave JG by many members.
      Then we have this boast by Mr John Byatt:
      ” john byatt (19:00:22) :

      google john byatt is a complete and utter bas**rd and then get in the queue”

      Something to be real proud of Johnno. Good stuff.

      My partner, who incidentally shouldn’t be being mentioned on this site is extremely happy with my presence, as she has been for nearly 40years.
      She is also financially independent, as I am, and we are also successful in our own lines of business.
      Do you have a partner John B. ?, or has your partner pi$$ed of and left you?

      The usual carbonista amateur psychologist use of ” unresolved cognitive dissonance” is common and noted as asymptomatic to the fool using it.

      On the confusing ( to you ) matter of the Green Koolaide, I would recommend rat poison would be a better alternative.
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        a lot of nothing there jefft , do you deny claiming that it has been cooling and posting references, and then claiming warming and implying that you know something that no one else on earth knows?

        come on jefft stick to one claim and i bet you cannot even do that
        is it warming
        or
        cooling

        i bet you cannot give a straight answer because then we could debate a reason and you do not want that,

        jefft if everyone on earth is telling you that you are suffering a known psychological problem, the bet is you probably are

        you are as bad as the rest of your truthers on JG, conspiracy theorists

        Tell you a secret jefft, why i was banned on Just Goons, it was the morning that i took out Fib Vorves in the regional paper, tore strips of him and they all threw a hissy fit,

        haha

    • JeffT says:

      I may be crazy JeffT,
      But I ain’t mentally deficient Byatt,
      Do the world a favour, don’t drink the Green Koolaide, drink the alternative.
      JT

  22. Ross Brisbane says:

    • JeffT says:

      Cute Ross Brisbane, real Cute.
      Might impress your children, or John Byatt, but it was a waste of their time.

      You’d be more happy with the 10:10 No pressure video, or the Greenpeace 9/11 crashing planes video, out of Greenpeace Brazil.
      Or to keep it more childlike, the suiciding animals video.
      There’s more, but why bother ?
      JT

  23. Ross Brisbane says:

    I cannot horse to water if it does not drink, let alone human denial of climate change for those who claim to have looked at ALL the science.

    Heck even I cannot after THREE YEARS get through all the true scientific papers on Climate Change from thousands of scientists globally on this subject. I have only scratched the surface.

    Below is One link I posted earlier:

    Building on recent research, the study examines the relationship between global temperatures and high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere tens of millions of years ago. It warns that, if carbon dioxide emissions continue at their current rate through the end of this century, atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gas will reach levels that existed about 30 million to 100 million years ago, when global temperatures averaged about 29 degrees Fahrenheit (16 degrees Celsius) above pre-industrial levels.

    Kiehl said that global temperatures may gradually rise over centuries or millennia in response to the carbon dioxide. The elevated levels of carbon dioxide may remain in the atmosphere for tens of thousands of years, according to recent computer model studies of geochemical processes that the study cites.

    See Video : http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-earth-hot-prologue-future-climate.html

  24. Ross Brisbane says:

    JeffT

    You are very clever at weaving yourself around enough science to sound like someone with credibility but you are a joke to MAINSTREAM science if you follow the likes of Carter, Plimer and Monckton.

    Further you take some weird context of CO2 being heavier then air and use this knowledge and twist the science beyond it own contextual argument and apply this to a cooling hypothesis. How stupid and dumb of you to do that.

    Your understanding of the basic laws and cause of global warming is not only poor but pathetic.

    As for POP science – you are very choosy whom you find. If you find alternatives in support of your belief of course you will gravitate to them . Heck mate some of the stuff you drag up is a serious joke. You never investigate properly. This is without any depth and it is just appalling how you do not challenge your own scepticism.

    Just get on the proper wavelength about science and just stop it.

    Maybe then we can go back to some politeness. If you are going to continually act like some mad hatter about science there is little hope for a reasonable debate.

    I find no evidence from you over a six period of dialogue and no satisfactory explanation as to the cause of global warming in alternatives. Most of what you post consists mostly of pure hypotheticals and conjecture without any real foundation to the science or its reliability.

    JettT – You do not win a debate or an argument by using clever out of contextual verbiage directed to one who disagrees with.

    • JeffT says:

      From your latest post Ross B., I must assume that unless it is Carbon Concensus science, it is an invalid topic in this forum.

      A word I learnt to use on this forum is “obscurantism” and derivatives of that word.
      Whenever a subject comes up that does not conform to the Carbon Consensus science, I have been a whole load of carbon dioxide based climate “information”, tossed at my post, as though I haven’t been there and studied, read or discussed that before in other arenas.
      Any scientific information that may exist within this information is hidden by obscurantism, a messy muddying of the water.
      RB says:-
      “Just get on the proper wavelength about science and just stop it.”

      I am nearly afraid to mention GCR’s, because that watch dog of climate truth, John Byatt jumps in.

      Another word comes to mind – heretic, as I am going against what appears to be a religious zealotry based on carbon consensus science.
      As has been said before -
      “If it’s consensus, it ain’t science. If it’s science, it ain’t a consensus.” Period.
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        Jefft
        Another word comes to mind – heretic, as I am going against what appears to be a religious zealotry based on carbon consensus science.

        But you are going against it with absurdity and a total lack of any understanding,

        yelling out stupid already dismissed whacko theories and “it might be fairies or any other scientific sounding name i can find without even understanding anything whatsoever, you are a very confused old man ,

        ,
        ,

  25. john byatt says:

    JeffT

    - Supply me answers as to why Universities and Governments around the world have built and installed Muon particle counters around the world, and a very large and deep (2.5km) Neutrino counter Observatory in the Antarctic ice at the Amundsen – Scott base.

    Do we have to?

    This is what science does , it studies stuff, we do it because we can and we want to,

    no global warming conspiracy here

    • JeffT says:

      Oh please do,
      particularly to explain items such as Forbush events, geo-magnetic anomolies and indexes and why these events and metrics are collected.
      This should be a (Total Solar ) Illumination.

      And you mind adds “no global warming conspiracy here”.
      See – your minds wandering already.
      Have you taken your Lithobid today ?
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        Jefft you cannot even understand the stuff that you yourself post ,

        NOAA no human fingerprints, not even the faintest idea what it was about ,

        ,

  26. Ross Brisbane says:

    On thin Ice and hanging by a “thread” is the continual demise of the Arctic Sea Ice extents. A kind of annual in your face event that indicates the globe is NOT COOLING.

    When will the faith in that its not CO2 caused climate change ever get through to the deniers with their alternative fringe rubbish science?

    • JeffT says:

      Ross Br.
      That has to be a silly grin your wearing in your pic. Right ?

      On thin ice and hanging by a “thread” – - Arctic Sea Ice extent ???

      You’ll be right now RB, the Arctic sea ice IS melting, now you’ve got less than six months of bleating about it before it reaches it minimum in early Sept. and then starts the cycle off by increasing again.
      You might be right, the globe may NOT be COOLING. But there are a lot of Russians, Indians and Chinese scientists wouldn’t agree with you.

      But if you want a more available understanding, see this from NOAA:
      http://www.climatewatch.noaa.gov/2010/articles/forensic-meteorology-solves-the-mystery-of-record-snows/all/1/

      “No human fingerprints”
      Ross B. says:-
      “When will the faith in that its not CO2 caused climate change ever get through to the deniers with their alternative fringe rubbish science? ”

      NOAA – faith ? fringe rubbish science?
      Ah, you’ve got to have faith Ross, no logic, lack of scientific method, lack of belief in scientific data (unless cherry picked) but you must have faith.
      JT

  27. john byatt says:

    There is a discussion at unleashed, Were they extremists?

    JeffT
    Poor (???) old Tony W. , just waiting around for the next increment in his parliamentary pension – after he sold his farm at Werris Creek at an inflated price to a Coal Seam Gas Co. – on the Liverpool Plains, with critical ground water reserves.
    It a wonder he didn’t end up with a twelve gauge up his gunga and a lead enema.”

    .

  28. Ross Brisbane says:

    The heavier then air theory. Sprinkled with false claims that is sound science.

    Older folk tend to resort to THERMODYNAMICS of heat rather then getting a proper on radiative theory and how this works.

    The misleading claim and lack thereof of only seeing what one wants in the science without proper conveyance of contextual argument.

    Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions. Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

    Experience can clash with expectations, as, for example, with buyer’s remorse following the purchase of an expensive item. In a state of dissonance, people may feel surprise, dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment.

    People are biased to think of their choices as correct, despite any contrary evidence. This bias gives dissonance theory its predictive power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational and destructive behavior.

    A classical example of this idea (and the origin of the expression “sour grapes”) is expressed in the fable The Fox and the Grapes by Aesop (ca. 620–564 BCE). In the story, a fox sees some high-hanging grapes and wishes to eat them. When the fox is unable to think of a way to reach them, he surmises that the grapes are probably not worth eating, as they must not be ripe or that they are sour. This example follows a pattern: one desires something, finds it unattainable, and reduces one’s dissonance by criticizing it. Jon Elster calls this pattern “adaptive preference formation.”

    JeffT in a classical example of this dissonance maintains that nowhere has he has he sighted the radiative science of the physical properties of the greenhouse gas CO2 leakage of CO2 radiative forcing into outer space and further claims this is not taken into account.

    Nothing could farther from the truth and the daily energy budget of the earth is well known. If fact it is shown in ALL studies within any study of the radiative forcing and the energy budget.

    CO2 is well known to be a WELL MIXED GAS in out atmosphere and also measured in the WELL STATE (I just shipwrecked two claims by JeffT right here)

    Further CO2 radiative “brightness” factor increases as the TRACE concentrations increase. It also directs and re-radiates the energy from the earth surface in ALL DIRECTIONS. Part of this increased “brightness” reflects downward and the balance nearly 80% reflects into outer space. What JeffT fails as a classical denier is this interpretation that this is cooling or reversal of global warming! This silly notion overturns all science and creates in his mind POP cultured science – the direct reverse he claims mainstream is!

    As we see more and more of this cognitive dissonance feeding into the public view we understand the mental gymnastics folk like these must perform daily in their minds in justification of their belief systems.

    The internet is not for the faint hearted. If you carefully read over this thread and folk like our JettT you will find mainly a bent to conspiracy, paranoid viewpoints on science, extreme political idealisations, mistrust of society in general and a siege mentality of high order.

    I would hate to think when I approach my over 60′s my mind shuts down to new information that contradicts my former conclusions or dearly held beliefs.

    Abbott displayed stupidity and political suicide standing with such movements that highlight this paranoid view of the world.

    It will end badly for him.

    A simple apology was all required. Sorry Prime Minister you do not deserve such treatment in being called a “bitch” and in future I will not associate with such fringe organizations.

    The People’s Revolt always were frightened folk used and abused by those with the power to weld public opinion.

    • JeffT says:

      Yes rossbrisbane,
      Looks like you should keep both hands on the keyboard as well.

      Heavier than air theory – LOL.
      Ross says-
      “The heavier then air theory. Sprinkled with false claims that is sound science.”
      Sound science rossbrisbane ? – Try engineering, the practical use of science.
      Can’t you read SG tables ?

      Lake Nyos and Mammoth Mountain where examples of natural occurring CO2 – AT GROUND LEVEL.
      Wanna go camping in a backpacker tent ?
      How about we send rossbrisbane up suspended below a CO2 filled balloon. Waiting for lift-off (LOL)
      Better still, how about we take rossbrisbane up to a high place (Grand Canyon) and cast him adrift suspended below a CO2 filled balloon.

      You must just assume that I don’t know about the Atmospheric Obserevatory site on Mauna Loa at 3400m elevation,as well as others around the world. Mauna Loa being the standard.
      Hmmm, assume ? – Yes I would expect that as typical “place words in your mouth” from a carbonista .
      And
      “CO2 is well known to be a WELL MIXED GAS in out atmosphere.” WELL, WELL how about that ? mixed BY what ? another additional factor ?
      The WELL I mentioned were wells in India, where workers had died from CO2 at the bottom of the well
      And,
      an extract from Nature re atmospheric testing at various altitudes:-
      http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v288/n5789/abs/288347a0.html

      Your “Heavier than air theory” statement is hilarious, as it stemmed from another John Byatt post (00:48:42), criticising Ken Ring a Kiwi meteorologist.

      With my TIC answer JeffT (02:02:22)

      “Ah but says, John, that’s different carbon dioxide, it’s not from anthropogenic sources (LOL)
      With total CO2 being ONLY .039% of the atmosphere and CO2 characteristics being:-
      Specific gravity of 1.5189, compared with air (1.000) at 20degC, @ 1.00 atmosphere of pressure, sure looks like Ken Ring might be onto something.

      So there must be other factors – maybe ground level heating and verbal turbulence by the warmistas at the UN, IPCC, DECC’s around the world that without the scary monster of CO2 – would be out of a job.”

      Answer consisted of some scientific/engineering data on CO2, with some TIC about verbal turbulence. Rossbrisbane has just added some more verbal turbulence.

      What rossbrisbane doesn’t realise with this statement:
      “What JeffT fails as a classical denier is this interpretation that this is cooling or reversal of global warming! This silly notion overturns all science and creates in his mind POP cultured science – the direct reverse he claims mainstream is!”

      is he makes a fool of himself with the reference to “POP” cultured science.

      There is billions of dollars being put into Solar physics, Solar Observation, Solar orbiting satellites, Solar weather and solar weather forecasting.
      So if rossbrisbane can come up with another explanation for all this “interest” in the Sun, I’d be interested for him to explain his enterpretation of “POP” cultured science.

      Some more “POP” cultured science for you rossbrisbane -
      To do with Galactic Cosmic Rays and Cosmic Rays.
      - Supply me answers as to why Universities and Governments around the world have built and installed Muon particle counters around the world, and a very large and deep (2.5km) Neutrino counter Observatory in the Antarctic ice at the Amundsen – Scott base.
      More “POP” cultured science rossbrisbane ?

      GCR’s, CR’s, Solar radiation, Solar brightness, Solar geo-magnetics,
      geo-magnetics, high energy particles, voltage pressures aren’t POP cultured science fairy stories. If you believe that, then that fizzy Green Koolaide is affecting you as well (CO2 will do that every time LOL )
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        nature,

        ir samples, collected cryogenically at different heights of the stratosphere, were analysed for carbon dioxide with an IR absorption technique. Supplementary tropospheric air samples were taken aboard commercial airliners. The results reported here show that the CO2 mixing ratio is not constant with altitude but rather decreases in the stratosphere, by about 7 p.p.m.v., between the tropopause and 33 km. One conclusion is that recently increased concentrations of CO2 in the troposphere have not propagated far into the stratosphere.

        he just does not even have a clue what this is all about

  29. john byatt says:

    At CP

    On March 7, 2011, Arctic sea ice likely reached its maximum extent for the year, at 14.64 million square kilometers (5.65 million square miles). The maximum extent was 1.2 million square kilometers (463,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average of 15.86 million square kilometers (6.12 million square miles), and equal (within 0.1%) to 2006 for the lowest maximum extent in the satellite record.

    On Monday, the National Snow and Ice Data Center announced the maximum, “the largest sea ice extent during a given year.” It “marks the end of the growth period for sea ice, and the start of the melt season.”

    This isn’t a big surprise since the Arctic has seen the lowest December, January, and February (tied with 2005) sea ice extent in satellite record. The more important three-dimensional metric of ice volume also continues its long-term decline (see Navy’s oceanographer tells Congress, “the volume of ice as of last September has never been lower…in the last several thousand years”)

    • JeffT says:

      What bit of imaginative journalism did that crap come from Byatt ?
      Watts carried the same story with a query.
      Can’t you read a bluudy graph ?
      Can’t you read the bluudy data figures ?
      If you looked at Denmarks DMI graphs you’d see it is about the same as 2010.
      If you looked at Arctic Roos, Nansen, from Norway, you would see same data sourced, different graph output.
      If you had enough smarts to look at AMRS-E maps you would see there is still 50% Sea Ice in the Gulf of Bothnia and the Gulf of Finland (remember the Estonian ice breaker – Nyet, he probably can’t).

      Comparison of a single date (Mar 7, 2011) max. extent, against an average max. extent of years 1979 to 2000 is just to look worst case.
      Single dates (min) compared- IAXA-JAXA
      2005 min 5506563 sq kms -13/9/2005
      2010 min 4813594 sq kms -18/9/2010
      gives a decrease of 696,929 sq kms, an amount that can change in a couple of days.
      Navy’s Oceaonographer may be up for review or funding decrease ?
      But the Byatt bleating continues.
      J.

  30. john byatt says:

    What world do these morons live in?

    “JeffT (12:21:03) :
    If the moderator of this site doesn’t take that as unnecessary and unwarranted slander and fix it up, I have no other recourse than to take Mr Byatt’s posts and copy it around as many sites as I can muster.”

    signed Mr JeffT of cyberland

    thick as a brick

  31. john byatt says:

    it would seem that the guy standing behind Abbott with the sign “Bobs browns bitch” was a leftie commie pinko , the hid of the press just focusing on that one sign

    at just grounds

    “Denise the offensive placards are a worry – they demean the genuine people at the rally. I am of the opinion that the rally was hi-jacked by the carbon supporters and that those placards were ‘plants’ to discredit those attending to protest at this Tax On Everything. Get-Up and their ilk do not like the older generation as they know we have the wisdom that comes with age and a great deal of life experience behind us and that raises questions about their own perceived superiority. ”

    conspiracy theories rule

  32. john byatt says:

    it is very Bazaar Klem. your post that is ,

    BIZARRE Twit

  33. klem says:

    “33% disagree that the earth goes around the sun once per year.”

    This is a joke of course. The obvious ambiguity included in the question is; do 33% of Americans disagree that the earth goes around the sun? or do they disagree that it takes one year? In a properly designed questionnaire, that question would have been reframed, unless the designers intentionally wanted to record skewed results. They obviously did. The fact that you are including it in this blog shows your bias, and your lack of cred. You gotta do better than this surely. Cheers.

  34. klem says:

    And how is this any more bazaar than the belief that a carbon tax will save the planet from climate catastrophe? Lol!

    I think you lefty alarmist herd might want to take a look in the mirror a bit on this one.

  35. JeffT says:

    If the moderator of this site doesn’t take that as unnecessary and unwarranted slander and fix it up, I have no other recourse than to take Mr Byatt’s posts and copy it around as many sites as I can muster.

    Ross Brisbane had the temerity to attack me recently on this site, only because I didn’t show respect for John Byatt. Where is he now that Ross Byatt has shown his real talents.

    I have now mirrored the above posts as web images to identify the posts as genuine, including header and all data form and linkages. This has been recorded and verified in toto.

  36. john byatt says:

    It is a wonder that Jeff’s bitch does not wash his mouth out with soap and water

  37. john byatt says:

    this is possibly the reason that the report does include warning light being cut,

    where were you that night jefft?

    If it’s confirmed that they can’t rule out tampering then I’m not prepared to put the bus back out and risk people’s safety,” Mr Besseling said. “If a sump plug is missing and a bus has already done 1000km since its last service, you can understand why I’m suspicious and why I referred it to police.”

    A spokeswoman for Peter Besseling, Sharon Fuller, said Mr Besseling’s father, Col, had driven the bus back from a meet-and-greet session with candidates in the village of Harringon about 50km from Port Macquarie, and had parked it outside his home in King Creek overnight.

    Ms Fuller said Col Besseling had driven the bus barely one kilometre from his home when the oil warning light came on.

    • JeffT says:

      Where did your information come from ?
      Regional Press, Fairfax Media ? Which has shown considerable bias, favouring independents both State and Federal.

      I can verify the oil slick as I saw the warning markers, start and end on the Oxley Hwy, about less than a kilometre from where the bus was allegedly parked.
      The media (2MC-FM) and (Prime TV MNC )reported wires had been cut, the day of the reporting. Yet in your copy and paste, you can clearly see in the last paragraph:-
      ” Ms Fuller said Col Besseling had driven the bus barely one kilometre from his home when the oil warning light came on.”
      So it appears the report was put out to media in a rush, then amended later.

      But the point you overlook is they reported it to the media, local radio, TV and press before they reported it to the police.
      Lucky that it wasn’t one of his children that had been kidnapped, instead of a oil leaky bus causing accident and injury.

      I believe, as the police have stated, that the bus was old ex-gov transport bus, and had a worn sump plug and /or fibre sealing washer.

      You usual smart RR’s bit of mischief making -
      “this is possibly the reason that the report does include warning light being cut,

      where were you that night jefft?”

      on a pending investigation could also involve you and this site in legal action.
      Therefore as below, I have recorded the TOTAL thread from this website as a mirrored Web site image
      I feel sure some of the people you have denigrated, slandered or what ever other dirty little tactics you have used would just love to see some/all of this put into open forum.
      The attitudinal problem of someone such as John Byatt would not be unique to WtD, Agmates, Just Grounds, but would be spread around under various ID’s.
      Now Byatt old soul, I’m watching.
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        jefft “I can verify the oil slick as I saw the warning markers, start and end on the Oxley Hwy, about less than a kilometre from where the bus was allegedly parked.

        so you are a local Jefft ?

  38. JeffT says:

    Yes well,
    Only the John Byatt types could come up with “3000 heads = 1500 sub-humans”.

    Most of the climate realist protesters that would have liked to attend the Canberra Anti Carbon Dioxide Tax rally, would have been working, looking after their jobs.
    But you could bet that most of the opposition, and GetUp followers were on the dole, were having “sickies” or in some cases paid to participate.

    At least both sides of this argument can still protest, unlike China, where you may end up as spare transplant parts.

    Poor (???) old Tony W. , just waiting around for the next increment in his parliamentary pension – after he sold his farm at Werris Creek at an inflated price to a Coal Seam Gas Co. – on the Liverpool Plains, with critical ground water reserves.
    It a wonder he didn’t end up with a twelve gauge up his gunga and a lead enema.

    I notice you didn’t mention the alleged threats to Federal Independent MP Rob Oakeshott’s wife – conveniently taken to the media before going to the police.

    Or the alleged “sabotage” to State Independent MLA Peter Besseling’s campaign bus, where the sump plug had allegedly been loosened, and the oil light warning light wire had allegedly been cut. The resulting oil dropped on the Oxley Highway cause a 3 car pile up with at least 3 people injured.
    This also was conveniently was reported to the media, before the police were called.
    Later police report does not report warning light wire being cut, and it is still being investigated.
    As the song goes – “Never let a chance go by Oh Lord, Never let a chance go by ”

    Are Johnno, you’ve amazed me again.
    JT

  39. john byatt says:

    Police confirm rally numbers 3000 heads = 1500 sub-humans

  40. john byatt says:

    Army of darkness 1500 strong

    http://www.mamamia.com.au/weblog/2011/03/ditch-the-bitch-seriously.html

    What is Australian politics coming to when our alternative PM and two of his most high profile female shadow ministers appear in front of semi-literate hate mail? Last month, Independent Tony Windsor revealed he’d received death threats. Now this? Broadcaster and comedian Meshel Laurie wonders how low one must go, in pursuit of the highest office in the land. She writes:

    .
    “I think there’s an apostrophe missing from your little sign there, Sir. Did you mean to call the Prime Minister “Bob Brown’s Bitch”? Or did you mean to tell the alternative Prime Minister and accompanying media scrum, “Bob Browns Bitch” ?

    I mean, “Bob Browns Bitch,” literally means that a bloke called Bob, turned a bitch brown, doesn’t it? Which bitch? The “Witch” bitch your mate’s upset about? How does he even brown bitches, this Bob?

    Gosh! It doesn’t bear thinking about. I can see why you’re so upset.

  41. JeffT says:

    Oh Sailrick,
    It is so easy to trigger you lot off isn’t it ?

    “That’s not part of any climate science I’ve ever heard of. what are you talking about? It seems you have disproven 187 years of science on the greenhouse effect. Amazing.”
    Not a matter of ‘prove or disprove’ 187 years of science (Eh?)

    An observation from reading more than it’s worth about radiation and re-radiation from GHG’s.
    If a molecule has it’s temperature raised by ‘x’ degree/s from long wave IR emitted by the earth’s surface, the only thing of interest to the modeller is the radiation returned from that molecule back to the surface.
    I cannot find data on radiation from the molecule in any other direction. (like back into space, an infinitely larger and colder mass )
    A test I would like you to try:-
    Take a small block of metal and hold it in pliers or similar above an infrared hotplate, radiating IR to that metal block. Give it some time proportional to it’s mass.
    And then tell me which side of it is hotter when you place it in your hand.
    If you look at the data on ‘grey body radiation’ on E.T.B. you will see an explanation.
    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/radiation-heat-transfer-d_431.html

    In particular the diagram.

    In my field I have to account for heat transfer to heatsinks from hotter bodies (power electronics) to cooler bodies (heatsinks) which then re-radiate the heat absorbed to the atmosphere – effectively cooling the electronics.
    This heatsink will attain heat evenly, as a matter of conduction, and if not in an airflow will become as hot as the electronics it is supposed to be protecting from heat.
    To prove this point, unplug the fan on the heatsink of your nice new computer’s microprocessor, then run the computer.
    It will complain very quickly and give you an expensive lesson in grey body radiation, as it tries to radiate heat from every direction, not just from the heat source.
    So maybe that poor old CO2 molecule does re-radiate heat in every direction.

    I still believe the CO2/GHG effect is over rated, a scientific theory picked up and promoted very early in the scene by the entrepeneurs of Enron Corporation, and some others.

    If in your wisdom you want to counter this – please explain the “next Ice Age is coming” threats promulgated on the public, by media and many scientists including the much hallowed Dr. Stephen Schneider – naturally, from Stanford University.
    ( promulgate : to make known (as a doctrine) , known by open declaration – Merriman – Webster Dictionary )
    JT

  42. JeffT says:

    Good Morning Gentlemen/Ladies,
    While you are all busy ‘Watching the Deniers’ in your mirrors, I thought you-all needed to get away from Johnno’s obscurantist’s arguments and get down to some real reported incidents of the planet’s cooling.
    As listed at Popular Technology -
    http://www.populartechnology.net/2010/12/1000-references-of-global-cooling.html

    I can imagine the howls of scorn being placed on these listings as “denialist fabrications”, but sorry fellas, it’s a listing of reported cooling incidents as reported on media from around the world. Includes the picture of the UK completely enshrouded in that “white stuff”.

    Of course, you can leave them unopened and crap all over them – like a flock of seagulls – that I even expect from the “committee”, complete with the usual ad homs and Johnno’s estimation of IQ’s, research capability and even reading capability.

    Now about those cardigans John B. ?
    Add some sensible socks and warm comfortable shoes.
    JT

    Keep up with your support of Get-up, it will make sure the Labor Party loves you-all

    • john byatt says:

      How did the Agenda 21 rally go Jefft?

      Labor MP Nick Champion described the crowd as “oddballs and misfits” and described placards alleging conspiracy theories about world domination.

      “He appealed to the extremists in this country, he appealed to the far right in this country, the League of Rights, One Nation, Pauline Hanson and an assorted collection of misfits and oddballs,” Mr Champion said.

      Canberra backbencher Andrew Leigh said Mr Abbott should apologise to Australians for his association with extremist groups.

      “Words like witch, bitch, suggestions of fraudulent criminals, organisations like the League of Rights, One Nation, the Citizen’s Electoral Council – these are groups that are on the far fringes of Australian politics,” Mr Leigh said.

      But Liberal backbencher Don Randall – who was at the rally – said organisers tried to remove the “JuLIAR, Bob Brown’s bitch” placard from behind Mr Abbott.

      “People involved in the rally asked the guy to take it down and he wouldn’t,” Mr Randall said.

      “Tony didn’t know it was there.

      • john byatt says:

        They did not have Bob Brown’s. they had Bob Browns the same as they had FORIEGN , retards

      • john byatt says:

        a bit more on the kooks

        Organisers overestimated the numbers, as they always do, but they were significant nonetheless. (Three thousand, reckoned the Revolters. One and a half, corrected the cops)

        The camera’s eye was caught by the placards of the extremists, as it always is: “Stop Gillard Raping Australia”. “Illegals Stay. Ozzies Pay”.

        The superstars of the revolt – Pauline Hanson, Angry Anderson, 2GB’s Chris Smith – enjoyed disproportionate airtime, as you’d expect.

        There was an element of kook: “The Polar Bears Are Fine,” read one placard.
        “Stop Taxing Our Breath!” pleaded another.

  43. john byatt says:

    sensible cardigans and thats about it

    http://blogs.abc.net.au/drumroll/

    • john byatt says:

      they proclaim their stupidity by being there, cop the spelling and not an apostrophe to save your life,

      average IQ rough guess,,, 65 ,
      average age rough guess,,, 65

      • JeffT says:

        Uh-Oh
        Science Master John Byatt now becomes English Master John Byatt.
        Estimating IQ’s as well ? So also a possible a Professor of Phrenology, a pseudo-science used to measure intelligence by measuring heads.
        Oh you are talented Johnno.

        And YOU will also become part of the average age – “a rough guess,,, 65″, at a time in the near future – does that also relate to your IQ ?

        Missing apostrophy, particularly in Bob Brown,s case may not be missing at all, just misplaced to where Brown may like it placed.

        It was an anti carbon(dioxide) rally with placards, J.B. , not an English essay.

        As you keep on bringing GetUp (Australia) into the scene, don’t you think you should also mention the linkage to international GetUp, to George Soros’s MoveOn , George Soros’s ” Institute for New Economic Thinking” and direct connections to left wing Labor in Australia.
        JT

  44. john byatt says:

    Ianash, someone was listening

    Activist group GetUp is taking on Sydney shock jock Alan Jones, demanding the broadcaster withdraw comments disputing the science of human-induced climate change.

    The organisation is launching proceedings with the broadcast watchdog, demanding Jones publicly and immediately revoke what it calls fabricated statements.

    ‘It’s wrong for ultra-conservative shock-jocks like Mr Jones to deliberately mislead their audience,’ GetUp’s acting national director Sam Mclean said in a statement on Wednesday.

    ‘We have standards in this country which demand the truth from our broadcasters.’

    Action is also planned against another Macquarie Radio broadcaster, Chris Smith, organiser of Wednesday’s anti-carbon tax rally in Canberra.

    Under the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s (ACMA) code of practice, broadcasters are required to make reasonable efforts to ensure that current affairs material, presented as factual, is reasonably supportable and to correct errors of fact at the earliest opportunity.

    GetUp has set its sights on Jones over his comments that nature produces nearly all of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

    Jones has said that human beings produce .001 per cent of the carbon dioxide in the air.

    GetUp argues that statement is factually inaccurate and prominent climate scientists have agreed that humans have contributed at least 28 per cent of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

  45. john byatt says:

    TCS over the past few weeks

    CO2 is a GHG that cools the planet
    CO2 and CH4 are not GHG’s
    The planet is cooling
    The fact that the planet is warming
    we are heading into an ice age
    Australia does not warm the planet by very much
    climate change is not happening
    we do not deny climate change
    they got rid of the term global warming
    the term global warming is scary

    cannot be that many loonies left by now

  46. Sailrick says:

    JeffT

    “John, that re-emitted longwave radiation, who does that warm the earth ?”

    You might want to wander over to Science of Doom and read the series of nine articles called –
    “Understanding Atmospheric Radiation and the “Greenhouse” Effect”

    “And tell us all about the CO2 molecules that only reradiate downward”

    That’s not part of any climate science I’ve ever heard of. what are you talking about? It seems you have disproven 187 years of science on the greenhouse effect. Amazing.

    If your comments are an example of what goes on over at Curry’s polite denial site, no thanks.

    • john byatt says:

      even sceptic Roy spencer has a good post on the subject ,
      and very easy for even jefft to understand , jefft stands by the downward reradiation theory to try to gain something out of the cold atmosphere cannot warm a warmer earth nonsense ,

  47. JeffT says:

    John Byatt,
    Did you go look at Mammoth Mountain, that is if you can spare time from criticising the old blokes. ?
    The laws of science hold even for John Byatt – gases with a higher S.G. sink to a lower level than those of a lesser S.G.
    JT

    • john byatt says:

      jefft if you wish to believe that all 240 co2 monitoring stations for levels of atmospheric CO2 are in on the conspiracy, go for it , you are only making a complete nutter out of yourself

      you are a usefull idiot that helps to keep plimer in coal cash

      During the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009 (COP15), Plimer spoke at a rival conference in Copenhagen called the Copenhagen Climate Challenge,[56] which was organised by an Exxon-funded lobby group called Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow.[57][58] While COP15 attracted 33,200 delegates, the rival sceptic conference was attended by 60 people (15 journalists, 18 speakers, 27 audience).[56] According to Lenore Taylor of The Australian, the attendees had an average age “well over 60″.[59] In closing his speech, Plimer stated that “They’ve got us outnumbered, but we’ve got them outgunned, and that’s with the truth.”[56] Plimer also stated that “It’s been freezing in Perth and bucketing down”. In fact, Perth (Western Australia) had below average rainfall in 2009, and, as Plimer spoke, temperatures in Perth reached 38°C (100°F).[60]

      • JeffT says:

        Ah John Byatt,
        Start looking at who are funding the Climate Change Cabal.
        Yes Big Oil have thrown a few crumbs at the sceptics, but in most cases, big oil in the form of BP, Royal Dutch Shell and even Exxon have put large amounts int Climate Change and climate studies.
        From another source :
        International Emissions Trading Association
        members list-
        http://www.ieta.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=168&Itemid=136
        You will find BP, Conoco-Philips,Shell, others would be from coal and gas. Some oil companies names I do not recognise.

        Post Copenhagen press release.
        http://www.ieta.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=58:copenhagen:-opportunities-missed,-but-the-direction-is-a-little-clearer&catid=21:archived-press-releases&Itemid=107

        You can also Google IETA for more articles.

        CFACT – Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow has received $582,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
        Source – Greenpeace’s Exxon Secrets
        CFACT received $710, 000 between 1991 and 2002 from Richard Mellon Scaife controlled foundations, the Carthage Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.
        Source – Greenpeace’s Exxon Secrets
        Which even John Byatt would have to agree is a little drop in the funding bucket.
        Unless you’d like me to start putting up the cost of climate change.

        As you have cut and pasted a numeric referenced article, you also should have included direct reference to the original.

        Ian Plimer is not a meteorologist, and COP15 was the main arena.

        And in your usual idiotic way of expressing yourself, you have missed the point about S.G. of gases.
        In my answer to Mr Brisbane:
        “So carbon dioxide may be a well mixed gas, in the open and subject to wind and other natural forces.”
        So where is my faulty scientific logic ?

        One of these days you will give us an explanation about wind and climate, mixing of atmospheric gases. (when you can find a cut and paste) – in between ad homs , of course.

        Tut, tut, J.B. your frothing at the mouth again.
        JT

      • JeffT says:

        Pardon,
        “you are a useful idiot that helps to keep plimer in coal cash”

        I don’t use coal personally, and I have only purchased one copy of ‘Heaven and Earth’.
        Plimer is retired, but his longtime friend and colleague John Nethery wouldn’t agree with you on your “attitude” to Plimer.
        Neither do I.
        JT

      • JeffT says:

        The post above stated:

        “John Byatt,
        Did you go look at Mammoth Mountain, that is if you can spare time from criticising the old blokes. ?
        The laws of science hold even for John Byatt – gases with a higher S.G. sink to a lower level than those of a lesser S.G.
        JT ”

        From which we see John Byatt tip-toe through the CO2 breathing tulips.
        Maybe John Byatt is Tiny Tim re-incarnate.
        Maybe he could not admit to opening and reading a simple link on a natural phenomena.
        JT

      • john byatt says:

        maybe all the CO2 is at the bottom of the planet jeffT?

  48. john byatt says:

    Chief denier liar geoff at TCS is up to his old tricks , insulting and ad hom ing real scientist against his own rules. then has put up a post by some old NZ liar who claims that he was an IPCC expert reviewer

    Vincent R. Gray (born 1922, London) is a New Zealand-based chemist, retired coal industry researcher, [1] [2] climate author[Need quotation to verify], and founder of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition. He has a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from Cambridge University. Since 1991, Gray has devoted his attention entirely to climate. He has been an alleged “Expert Reviewer for the IPCC” since 1992,[1][3] although this consideration has been challenged and considered misleading since it does not require any expertise at all, but only that “he asked to see the draft report”. [4]

    their comment section does not seem to be operating at the moment

    • john byatt says:

      give me a week , the guys at climate depot and climate scum will need therapy when i am finished, just good fun

      • JeffT says:

        Oh aren’t you a tiger* John Byatt ?
        Everybody will quake with fear (NOT) – more likely RAFLTAO
        More likely they will think/say – “Who was that pratt ?”
        Particularly if you use one of your Anonymooses.
        JT

        *toilet paper tiger (used)

      • john byatt says:

        how is the therapy going Jefft?

        not too good by the sound of your latest confusions of CO2 sitting on the ground and not being a part of the greenhouse effect ,

        short term memory loss also needs looking at but i do not think it is my fault, i blame the all ice flow videos ,

    • JeffT says:

      Good one Sundance,
      That was an illuminating illustration of the intelligence of Greenpeace members.
      And the attendees to Copenhagen Climate Conference 2009 and then the Cancun Climate Junket 2010 fell for the same thing.
      And they also signed a petition to cripple the US economy.

      http://www.cfact.tv/2010/12/08/un-climate-kooks-want-to-cripple-us-economy-and-ban-h2o/

      Don’t you feel all safe and secure about the planet’s future now, we’re in their hands ?
      JT

  49. Ross Brisbane says:

    JeffT

    You sure speak a lot of rubbish. It is scientifically proven that CO2 is a well mixed gas and does not cling to the ground.

    In outbreaks of ground leaks where the gas infuses quickly into the atmosphere besides being soluble if it rains. It is the free CO2 that is a source of concern as greenhouse gas but NOT in the concentrations.

    Better try Chlorine – now that is a heavy gas – used in WW I with great effect harming hundreds of thousands, but highly soluble in water and reactive.

    I am well aware of all non science argumentation. We well know its effect on climate since 200 hundred years ago. Double the greenhouse effect now and DOUBLE it again in 100 years. This means it is a compounding calculation for the greenhouse effect and its LAG time. Then double its effect 50 years from then. By 2300 if the calculations are correct we’ll be doubling its climate effect EVERY 25 years!

    Yes I’m worried but JeffT won’t be worried by then he’ll be long in the grave turning to dust or “dusted” quickly.

    Just will not do. JeffT ultimately is anti-science as his record on this subject is full of fringe science without foundation. I say this after conversing with him and his faulty logic after six months.

    • JeffT says:

      Jeez Ross B.
      That was very informative, all that scientific information about chlorine being heavier than carbon dioxide – BUT then Cl with a S.G. at around 2.5 is not a natural atmospheric gas, unless you live next to a volcano where it is emitted as hydrochloric acid (HCl) Specific Gravity 1.268 – lighter than carbon dioxide.
      And carbon dioxide is heavier than air, even Ross B. cannot change that, even being emitted in tiny amounts from decaying vegetation it is still heavier than air.
      Carbon dioxide collecting in wells, has killed people cleaning them out.
      Carbon dioxide in breweries collecting in lower levels has killed workers.
      So carbon dioxide may be a well mixed gas, in the open and subject to wind and other natural forces.
      So where is my faulty scientific logic ?

      That is crap about “We well know it’s affect on climate since 200 years ago”
      Your 200 year figure would have been inclusive of Fourier:
      “Fourier’s conclusion that gases in the atmosphere could not form a stable barrier like the glass panes may have contributed to atmospheric warming later being known as the ‘greenhouse’ effect despite the actual mechanism of atmospheric warming being different than that found in an actual greenhouse.”
      Doubt -
      Svante Arrhenius used enclosed CO2 in his experiments to show absorption, not “well mixed gases”.
      His results where also criticised by another Swedish scientist Knut Angstom who also created methods for spectrographic analysis of absorption of solar energy by gases.
      Yes I do know about Callender and Keeling.
      Yes all atmospheric gases do have an absorption co-efficient.

      Arrhenius had been involved in The Swedish Society for Racial Hygiene (Eugenics), founded in 1909, followed later by his being involved in the creation of the State Institute for Racial Biology (Eugenics)1922.
      This institute has been responsible for the sterilization of upto 63,000 people up to 1975. Which makes him a Malthusian.

      Back to -
      “In outbreaks of ground leaks where the gas infuses quickly into the atmosphere besides being soluble if it rains. It is the free CO2 that is a source of concern as greenhouse gas but NOT in the concentrations.”

      So by your definition, if carbon dioxide is concentrated (Mammoth Mountain), it is not a free gas (nobody except Ross B. mentioned rain and solubility)
      Read about all the “free” carbon dioxide at Mammoth Mountain in California -
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammoth_Mountain
      Note the levels in a cabin and in tents. Wind does blow on Mammoth Mountain.

      Even if it is as you say “Double the greenhouse effect now” (120ppm increase Ross, 120+270=390ppm – not 270+270=540ppm), then double it in 100 years plus it’s lag time is all very “fine and marvellous” if power generation remains coal fired, and transport remains hydrocarbon based, of which neither will remain in these forms.
      And advancement in a democratic, technological society can only be achieved by financing from within the industries, without the hobble of gross taxation.

      Anti-science my RR’s. Ross B. ? – Anti-pseudo-Globull Warming science – you bet.

      There are many other sciences that study climate, without your green CO2 fairies at the bottom of the garden.

      And yes Ross B., I have children, grandchildren and now great grand children, so I am concerned. That’s why I examine all avenues.

      The avenue that takes the carbon(dioxide) route, leads to the Gores of this world, International insurance financiers such as Swiss RE, Munich RE, – and bankers falling over themselves to get carbon dioxide classed as the villain.
      And that leads to the future costs and reductions in living standards to my offspring.
      Ross Garnaut is an economist
      Lord Stern is an economist
      The UNIPCC is not a scientific organisation
      Even the President of the European Council, Herman von Rompuy is a qualified economist.

      JT

      • john byatt says:

        Jefft, you are claiming that CO2 remains on the ground except when it doesn’t , you are claiming that the greenhouse effect is not well named, what does that have to do with anything ? nothing,
        most people would not even know how a normal greenhouse operates, immaterial junk , “The Greenhouse effect’ gets the meaning out about what is happening in a layman term ,
        most of you opaque language is untranslatable,

        .try therapy

  50. john byatt says:

    Earth shattering news,

    the final nail in the coffin of AGW,

    Ken Ring on CO2
    New Zealand space scientist and long-range weather and earth quake forecaster Ken Ring explains that carbon dioxide molecules are heavier than air molecules and fall to the ground.

    .

    • JeffT says:

      ‘Cause they will John B.
      Lake Nyos in Cameroon because of a seismic event burped CO2 in large quantities. This gas did not go up into the atmosphere, it went down into the local village and suffocated 1800 people and 3500 cattle.

      And you would know there is various volcanic National Parks in the US that have dangerous CO2 levels at GROUND LEVEL, with warnings not to get too close to the ground.

      Ah but says, John, that’s different carbon dioxide, it’s not from anthropogenic sources (LOL)

      With total CO2 being ONLY .039% of the atmosphere and CO2 charateristics being:-
      Specific gravity of 1.5189, compared with air (1.000) at 20degC, @ 1.00 atmosphere of pressure, sure looks like Ken Ring might be onto something.

      So there must be other factors – maybe ground level heating and verbal turbulence by the warmistas at the UN, IPCC, DECC’s around the world that without the scary monster of CO2 – would be out of a job.

      Ah John Byatt, you give me my grin for the day
      JT

      • john byatt says:

        Jefft you should post that at denialdepot or maybe it was TCS , hard to pick the difference sometimes re ken ring , comments of ken’s wisdom

        Endorphin Monkey said…
        I was blown away by this video! Some much wisdom in just a few minutes. And he has a handheld device that beeps and has numbers on it that change. Now that’s high tech! His thoughts remind me of a discussion between two other wise men – Abraham Simpson and Dr. Nick Riviera – on the subject of medical science.

        I just realized something about his bold pronouncement that CO2 falls to the lowest level, so plants don’t grow hundreds of feet to access it. That implies that tall trees don’t actually exist. Nor do plants growing on mountains. And there’s more that the “megaspiracy” is keeping from us…

        Ken says that if you fly 8 miles up (in an aeroplane), you can’t actually see the ground. I guess all those mountains and islands and stuff that I saw were optical illusions or projected images. It also means that satellite photography is a fraud! The conspiracy must be so big, it costs more than the economy can generate. That’s the real reason for out-of-control public debt.

        There’s so much more. The five year CO2 volcano cycle, the fact that the CO2 bubbles in a can of Coke are cold, the fact that miners are threatened by falling CO2. I could say more about this scientific genius but I don’t have time. A load of manure has come for the garden and I have to go spread it.
        20 March 2011 17:02

  51. Nescio says:

    Sadly, we have yet to find a cure for stupidity.

    • JeffT says:

      Drink the Carbonated Green Koolaide Nescio,

      And tell us all about the CO2 molecules that only reradiate downward, and how all this magic happens through cloud and pre cloud (water saturated clear sky that allows aircraft contrails ).

      Don’t forget convection for the up trip, and heat reradiation (360deg), and specific gravity 1.5 times heavier than air for the down trip.

      That should illicit a ten page cut and paste lecture from our friend John Byatt.
      JT

  52. ianash says:

    Guys

    Have a look at Media Watch tonight (watch on iview later). Shows how retarded most commercial radio presenters are wrt climate change. They think Plimer and Carter are experts!

    Apparently the only reason ACMA does not investigate the denier jerks on commercial radio is that they have not received complaints!

    How about we give them some complaints?

    • JeffT says:

      Here we go again ianash,
      Roll out Plimer and Carter again.
      Betcha their qualifications are few tiers above those on this blog.

      But aw, that doesn’t matter, they’re climate realists, so they’re fair game.
      J.

      • john byatt says:

        This is one of your blokes jefft, this is not from the denialdepot site , its from TCS

        peter laux said…
        John, that re-emitted longwave radiation, who does that warm the earth ?

        If you can tell me how then we can make a fortune with a perpetual energy machine.

        Its incredible! Energy comes from the sun heats the earth which reemits radiation which co2 absorbs then a small percentage is reradiated from the colder upper atmosphere then heats the warmer earth!!!!
        So the same energy multiplies itself, amazing ! (if we can reproduce this incredible effect, it in say a thermos, we will have solved the worlds energy needs ! )
        March 21, 2011 11:33 PM

  53. john byatt says:

    this comment certainly makes your point mike, fox news blog i thin

    cwheeler introduces a new system of punctuation. He is also worried the antarctic polar bear population might disappear, and yes of course something about muslims again:hummmm????? 100 nukes, above ground,,, I see one safe (maybe) place for that,,, antartica,,,, no wait, we cant do that,, pengins polar bears, walrus’s, seals…,,,, better make it ny, frisco, baltimore, boston, vermont, maine , new hamp, ,,,,, darn,,, those are libs,,,, I guess its the middle of the u.s. then. and cant be wi,,, they got all the mus/ims up there

    • JeffT says:

      HO, Ho, Ho Johnno Bozo,

      “Top of the planet and bottom of the planet, is this bloke for real”

      I did that just for you John B, I didn’t want to get too technical, or you’d run into more of your “obscurantism”, particularly the rant bit.
      JT

  54. JeffT says:

    An example of what is dumbing down science in Australian schools -

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/climate-change-film-for-schools/story-e6freuzr-1225943893760

    This includes in at least some Australian Universities. (evidence from my grandaughter, who at 19yr old was thoroughly p—– off )

    It is also shown across the US in schools as well.

    With Gore’s “the earths core is millions of degrees just a few miles down” as aired on a prime time TV show in the US – no wonder people get dumbed down.
    - If it was Earth it would be a sun not an inhabited planet.
    J.

    • john byatt says:

      Go and put up a comment at denial depot jeff great fun, i put one up

      john byatt said…
      Dear Mr Denier, after being alerted to your blog by real scientists and having read your posts it is quite obvious that you are just a shrill for big lipstick, big baby oil and big candles, all products that well you know are up to their eyeballs in maintaining giant oil well production

      i hope that you can sleep at night

      you will fit right in jeff

      • JeffT says:

        Not if they continually rave about carbon, and continually rave on about watching themselves in the mirror.

        I could just about safely bet you believe the earth core a few miles down is millions of degrees hot.

        And how smart are you with “antarctica —— polar bears” ?
        You do know one’s at the top of the planet (thousands of polar bears) and t’other is at the bottom of the planet (Antarctic, all that white stuff, penguin colonies around the edges ). But then you’ve always had those inverted and mixed ideas as part of mental capabilities.
        Must be all those Muslims ( LOL ).
        JT

      • john byatt says:

        Top of the planet and bottom of the planet, is this bloke for real

  55. john byatt says:

    This has to be the best denier parody site there is ,

    it is so good that the deniers flock there and back him up,

    http://denialdepot.blogspot.com

    its a treat

    • JeffT says:

      OK John Byatt,
      It was a joke right ?
      Or is this where you get your denier information from ?
      You know that climate realists don’t believe that sort of crap -
      eg. “no such thing as GHG’s”

      Back to dumbing down of science – and the Al Gore statement listed.

      You’ve got a strange view of the world Johnno.
      J.

      • john byatt says:

        Jefft if you go to the TCS blog you will see that peter laux is in effect claiming that there is no greenhouse effect from CO2 or CH4 , see the post “CO2 CH4 and the IPCC”

        you need to get over there and explain a few things to peter laux

    • JeffT says:

      Then John B. hasn’t checked out Judith Curry’s refereed papers.
      I’m not claiming a ‘whitewash’, just stating facts.
      Curry’s climatology goes back well before Berkeley.
      Just denigrate some one because they don’t believe your Climatism religion.
      Sad really.

      Curry’s C.V. is impressive, her universary qualifications include”
      2002- Chair, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology
      1992-2002 Professor, University of Colorado-Boulder, Department of Aerospace Engineering Sciences
      Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
      Environmental Studies Program
      1989-1992 Associate Professor, Department of Meteorology, Penn State
      1986-1989 Assistant Professor, Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University
      1982-1986 Assistant Scientist, Department of Meteorology, University of Wisconsin-Madison
      Curry has been producing peer reviewed papers since 1983

      And all Byatt can achieve is to blog on about everyone else that doesn’t agree with J.B of being wrong or some other ad hom.
      Sad really.
      J.

      • Mekhong Kurt says:

        Her CV is indeed impressive.

        That deniers praise it surprises me, however, since for every two or three people with similar backgrounds and qualifications who are also deniers there are 97 or 98 with the same who say climate change is happening and we are contributing to it significantly — but deniers denigrate those 97 or 98 equally well-qualified scientists’ credentials or simply dismiss them, and accuse the scientist of graveling for research money, being socialist/commies/fascist/nazi conspirators, seekers of some “New World Order,” blah, blah, blah.

  56. Human Ape says:

    “To be fair the 33% disagree with the Earth going around the sun once a year.”

    If I remember correctly, 20% of Americans think the earth circles the sun.

    What is interesting to me are the biology deniers. They call themselves creationists because they invoke a creator with a magic wand to explain the diversity of life. Other science deniers invoke the same magic wand for the development of the modern human ape species. They think magic is one of the mechanisms of evolution. Only 16% of Americans accept evolution without magic which makes us about even with the Muslim Middle East. Our Christians have a lot in common with terrorists.

    darwinkilledgod dot blogspot dot com

  57. Human Ape says:

    “To be fair the 33% disagree with the Earth going around the sun once a year.”

    If I remember correctly, 20% of Americans think the earth circles the sun.

    What is interesting to me are the biology deniers. They call themselves creationists because they invoke a creator with a magic wand to explain the diversity of life. Other science deniers invoke the same magic wand for the development of the modern human ape species. They think magic is one of the mechanisms of evolution. Only 16% of Americans accept evolution without magic which makes us about even with the Muslim Middle East. Our Christians have a lot in common with terrorists.

    http://darwinkilledgod.blogspot.com/

  58. To be fair the 33% disagree with the Earth going around the sun once a year. It may have been in Dawkins The Greatest Show on Earth, or somewhere else, but I remember hearing that some people believe it Earth goes around the sun, once a day, once a month… etc – not necessarily believing in a geocentric system.

    I hear you in regards to buying into superstition and the unverified / unverifiable; I was also partly compelled to produce my blog following a number of heated debates regarding spirituality and climate change with otherwise intelligent family members – not that I’m a strong atheist, I just don’t buy into new age mysticism nor see reasonable evidence for life after death.. hence they saw that I required an education lesson.

  59. john byatt says:

    Berkley , at climate progress

    Berkeley group’s draft paper, which of course would be expected to be revised before submission.

    Their preliminary results sit right within the results of NOAA, NASA, and HadCRU, confirming that prior analyses were correct in every way that matters. Their results confirm the reality of global warming and support in all essential respects the historical temperature analyses of the NOAA, NASA, and HadCRU.

    Their analysis supports the view that there is no fire behind the smokescreen put up by climate science deniers.

    • john byatt says:

      Wait for it WHITEWASH

      problem for them is CURRY

      ,

      • JeffT says:

        You know John Byatt,
        If it wasn’t that Judith Curry turned on the “Climate Establishment” after the Climategate e-mails, you catty remark wouldn’t exist.

        Her list of refereed and peer reviewed papers is impressive, especially if you’re a ‘climatist’ .
        But she has committed the cardinal sin of changing her opinion, just like many other scientists, and is now in “Coventry”.
        J.

      • john byatt says:

        jeff you are hopeless , judith was the token climate related scientist for the berkley study, the study backs the temperature record, if you claim a whitewash then you will implicate Curry in that,

        i know that just because you appear thick does not mean that you are a troll

  60. Adam says:

    The graph you show displays the “scientifically LITERATE”
    Which is going up. Which is a good thing.

    Still, the figures are not good enough for a developed nation.

    • Watching the Deniers says:

      Fixed.

    • Tio says:

      These responses indicate a population that is a long way from scientific literacy. Either the poll is defective or the literacy graph is optimistic. In either case, it is a time to either shut down the education system and send the students to the workplace, or challenge all of the emphasis on class size, mainstreaming, teacher pay, and all the other irrelevant nonsense, and get serious about those willing to teach, teaching those willing to learn.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 773 other followers

%d bloggers like this: