• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

ClimateGate - A great new Website

mhaze

Banned
mhaze
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
15,718
I just wanted to pass along a great website - ClimateGate - Anthropogenic Global Warming - History's Biggest Scam - which is an index of common claims against Climategate and effective counter-arguments. This is very similar in format to the famous Index to Creationist Claims by Talk Origins. There's even a facebook and twitter link, which I've already used on a few occasions to set someone straight about Climategate in the few days I've had it on my computer.

Enjoy, and go increase your carbon footprints!
 
Twins, I tell you! Twins!

mhaze said:
I just wanted to pass along a great website - ClimateGate - Anthropogenic Global Warming - History's Biggest Scam - which is an index of common claims against Climategate and effective counter-arguments. This is very similar in format to the famous Index to Creationist Claims by Talk Origins. There's even a facebook and twitter link, which I've already used on a few occasions to set someone straight about Climategate in the few days I've had it on my computer.

Enjoy, and go increase your carbon footprints!
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's just like Talk Origins. Except for the small detail that Talk Origin is a scientific and rational response to BSCPs (Bat ◊◊◊◊ Crazy People), and ClimateGate seems to be BSCP spewing Monty Pythonesque Argument Clinic responses against climate science.
 
paiute said:
Yeah, it's just like Talk Origins. Except for the small detail that Talk Origin is a scientific and rational response to BSCPs (Bat ◊◊◊◊ Crazy People), and ClimateGate seems to be BSCP spewing Monty Pythonesque Argument Clinic responses against climate science.
Click to expand...

Close, but no cigar...

British, yes:

Sir John Houghton (1995):
"Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen."

​
And so the (manufactured) climate disasters commenced.

Do you side with this type of liar, because you believe his ends are worth his means?
 
mhaze said:
Sir John Houghton (1995):
"Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen."

​
And so the (manufactured) climate disasters commenced.
Click to expand...

Maybe you'll be the first one that provides a primary source for that quote. Because Sir John denies ever saying or writing it.

Do you side with this type of liar, because you believe his ends are worth his means?
Click to expand...

Considering the kind of lies you spread, why would anyone side with you?

Of course, you can embarrass me by providing a primary source for that quote.
 
Coulé!

mhaze said:
Close, but no cigar...

British, yes:

Sir John Houghton (1995):
"Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen."

​
And so the (manufactured) climate disasters commenced.

Do you side with this type of liar, because you believe his ends are worth his means?
Click to expand...

I'd be careful calling a Knight a liar unless your rapier skills are up to date. I'm pretty sure they are allowed to carry broadswords.
 
mhaze said:
Close, but no cigar...

British, yes:

Sir John Houghton (1995):
"Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen."

​
And so the (manufactured) climate disasters commenced.

Do you side with this type of liar, because you believe his ends are worth his means?
Click to expand...


He never said that.

Now, who exactly is the liar here?
 
When I see something like "History's Biggest Scam" in the web site's title, four questions immediately come to mind, which I trust are answered in the necessary detail:

(1) A scam perpetrated by who?
(2) A scam organized by who?
(3) A scam funded by who?
(4) A scam created to what purpose?
 
Is THIS fake, then?

Perhaps the above quote is a paraphrase of what he wrote here. The date's are right, the meaning intact, the wording slightly different...
 
Last edited:
mythstifieD said:
Is THIS fake, then?
Click to expand...

Apparently it isn't, but why should we care?

What I care about is mhaze supplying the primary source for the quote he presented.

Perhaps the above quote is a paraphrase of what he wrote here.
Click to expand...

There is no indication that it is a paraphrase in mhaze post. Also, that fake quote has been doing the rounds for some time now.

The date's are right, the meaning intact, the wording slightly different...
Click to expand...

The meaning intact? Are you serious? Is english your first language?
 
Deetee said:
He never said that.

Now, who exactly is the liar here?
Click to expand...

Don't bother. Mhaze will likely just slink away and not return to this thread until many pages separate his fallacious comments from the current discussion. Then, I predict, he'll make the same fallacious comments again somewhere else, maybe even in this same thread.
 
mythstifieD said:
Is THIS fake, then?

Perhaps the above quote is a paraphrase of what he wrote here. The date's are right, the meaning intact, the wording slightly different...
Click to expand...

The meaning isn't intact at all. That's like the difference between saying:

(1) "Until some worker dies the irresponsible company management will do nothing to improve security."

(2) "Unless we claim some worker died, the irresponsible company management will do nothing to improve security."
 
mythstifieD said:
Is THIS fake, then?

Perhaps the above quote is a paraphrase of what he wrote here. The date's are right, the meaning intact, the wording slightly different...
Click to expand...
The context is quite different.
The quote as is being spread by those who are against the concept of AGW suggests that the scientists will announce disasters in order to generate interest.
What the Daily Telegraph piece explains is that it often requires some disaster to happen before anyone will sit up/take notice and alter environmental policy. He even gives an analogy to explain the context in which he says this.
So, "meaning intact"? I think not.
 
Deetee said:
The context is quite different.
The quote as is being spread by those who are against the concept of AGW suggests that the scientists will announce disasters in order to generate interest.
What the Daily Telegraph piece explains is that it often requires some disaster to happen before anyone will sit up/take notice and alter environmental policy. He even gives an analogy to explain the context in which he says this.
So, "meaning intact"? I think not.
Click to expand...

Given the number and variety of disasters we've had "announced" I think so.

Want an enumeration of them?:)

My favorite is still the giant snakes invasion.
 
mhaze said:
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/02/sir-john-houghton-is-liar.html#more

http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/houghton-and-god.pdf

Wording is slightly different - meaning is the same.

"If we want to have a good environmental policy in the future, we'll have to have a disaster....the only way humans will act is if there has been an accident".

And so the (manufactured) climate disasters commenced. ALL HAIL THE GORACLE!
Click to expand...


So I take it that from now on you will only ever quote John Houghton in the following manner, here and on every other internet forum, in full and without bits removed from the quotation:
"If we want a good environmental policy in the future, we'll have to have a disaster. It's like safety on public transport. The only way humans will act is if there has been an accident".
Click to expand...
 
Deetee said:
So I take it that from now on you will only ever quote John Houghton in the following manner, here and on every other internet forum, in full and without bits removed from the quotation:
Click to expand...

Good luck with that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom