WHT -
I believe the Climate Despot site is run by the political operative Marc Morano, who worked for senator Inhofe and for Limbaugh in the past.
Creating a tribalistic environment is, no doubt, a coordinated effort; it serves a political agenda. I’d say that it’s a stretch to say that those kinds of attacks are coordinated. The problem, IMO, is that some folks fail to see any connection between fanning tribalism and the resulting tribalistic behavior (no doubt, on both sides of the debate).
If taking another measurement requires climbing back up the ladder and reaching over to hook the measuring tape, the need for a third number to break the tie might seem less important. If cutting the piece of wood too short isn’t likely to be seen except by someone who’s looking for errors (in other words, doesn’t affect the overall outcome to a significant degree), but cutting it too long would mean it wouldn’t fit and thus require climbing back down off the ladder to make a second cut, a third measurement might not be worth the time involved.
In other words, as a former carpenter I’d say that motivated reasoning often affects the decision-making process. Shocking, I know.
Historical perspective on the Russian heat wave:
Consider this from Ponder the Maunder–
Dalton Minimum- 1790 A.D -1820 A.D.
Napoleon Bonaparte was another one of history’s well known generals who faced the extreme cold of the Little Ice Age. During Napoleon’s retreat from Russia, only 30,000 of the 600,000 troops survived on the way back to France in the Winter of 1812.
The extreme cold of the Dalton Minimum was worsened by the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815, which cooled the temperatures even further because its debris went into the atmosphere, blocking the suns rays. The following year is known as the year without a summer and caused a large migration of people from New England to the west.
The Gingrich development is particularly interesting. I guess he decided that the climate change debate was more political than scientific in nature.
Or it could be that climate is on the backburner due to a crap economy, idiotic current energy policy, and the GOP base isn’t champing at the bit to implement carbon taxes. IOW addressing climate comes after fixing energy policy, which is a reflection of what can be realistically addressed and in what order. Pragmatism rules.
Claiming that re-ordering the priority list indicates a rejection of science is simply dishonest.
“Nice to see that you’re up on both of these events, Judith: The Gingrich development is particularly interesting. I guess he decided that the climate change debate was more political than scientific in nature. Curious that not only he, but also Romney and even Huntsman also suddenly interpreted the data differently once they were on the campaign trail.”
Joshua, why would this development be curious? They have to appeal to the right fringe at this time in order to gain the nomination. It should not be surprising or curious for anyone middle aged or older to know this is exactly how politicians behave…
“Does anyone know who is behind these kinds of attacks? Is this something Limbaugh and the dittoheads are taking credit for? I don’t think it is spontaneous, seems too well organized.”
I am not familiar with Katherine Hayhoe or her climate change position. She says she is in the middle. She expressed she is a christian several times, married to a minister and apparently conservative in her thinking. Curious to me is how she probably would disagree with you, Louise, and Michael on 99/100 issues, but the one issue that apparently has brought her hate mail by the likes of Limbaugh followers is strong enough for three liberal minded individuals to come running to her defense. It goes to show how biased everyone can be in the way they pick and choose who to defend…. it just depends on the what the issue is.
For example, we see a liberal minded person like Mark Lynas ‘open his mind’ about questioning the workings of the IPCC and bam, the left is all over him like a wet blanket and the ‘skeptics’ cosy up to him as a new pal. Do you think he received a few hate mails? I dunno, but I guess he probably did based on what I read during that debate. Take Steve McIntyre as another example. He’s a liberal thinker and full believer in AGW, yet gets branded as an AGW skeptic by those who don’t know what his mission is. Who is behind that propaganda campaign? The folks over at RC and those that tag along on their coat tails?
I am largely a conservatively minded person. IMO, Limbaugh is a blowhard and I can’t stand listening to him. He is all about polarization because that is what makes him popular among his followers. What that says to me is… there are those who can think for themselves, can study an issue fairly from both sides and forge an opinion and there are those who follow a leader and ape his/her message because it does not involve any personal thought and examination. I think we are dealing with the latter half wrt those who have sent hate mail to Katherin Hayhoe.
“Why are alarmists suddenly and quickly loosing support in public opinion?”
Because the public, in their wisdom, smell a rat, without knowing the details. When you’re told that there’s a new problem whose solution just happens to align perfectly with the post-1960s leftist world-view, it’s not unreasonable to be skeptical. If this is just good science, they ask themselves, how is it that the only possible solution is to turn the nation and the world over to the hands of the people who lost the cold war? This wisdom is intuitive, rather than science-based, but it’s perfectly rational.
Three years hence, I am not sure if I agree now with myself, with Feyerabend, or with both!!
Thanks Judy for the link.
There is really a lot to be learned from Tony’s analysis. Preindustrial temperatures fluctuated like today, but the events lasted longer. After industrialization, cold events still happen, just they become more just one season events today. With gas engines, farmers and municipalities can clear snows, drain fields, break ice bound sea ways. Most snow pack can’t carry over long enough to impact the next season.
Industry has made life easier and had an impact on climate. Just not so much as individual impacts, but collectively.
Jon D, you are asking; ”who am I following” Jon, I follow THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AND COMMON SENSE. I don’t follow Al Gore or Ian Plimer; because both of them think that they have abolished the laws of physics and both are common sense deficient. I can see on many blogs people are constantly trying to score a point; regardless if it makes sense / if one is correct or not. As soon as I have 100 honest people, to adopt the laws of physics and my formulas; start to utilize common sense; I will go fishing. I’m here to bring sanity back; because, millions of hones people are getting robbed / destroyed / brainwashed by the propaganda.
Then I’ll go fishing, I love fishing, I hate internet / computers – then I will leave all in the hands of people that enjoy internet debates. My English is limited, fishing is my meditation; for me internet is boring. Plus internet is taking too much of my time, no time to finish writing my second book
Read what is on my website; you will see that I have all the solid proofs, to see the end of the propaganda. Anybody prepared to stand-up for the truth, with REAL PROOFS, should join me and stop wasting his time with outdated fairy-tales. Same laws of physics that are today, will be in 100years. What those laws and my formulas don’t approve, is WRONG!
What, too “radical” for you Montford?
I started writing that list yesterday morning, saw that the topic was on radical science methods, somebody mentioned crackpots, so I commented with the link.
Sure, mocking is mean, but how about the engineering professors who rightly have to flunk out 50% of the enrolled class because they are telling the honest truth about their potential? The problem is you can’t just tell the crackpots they flunked, because they never signed up for the course in the first place!! It’s like experiencing an episode of Seinfeld, and you have a bunch of crackpot Kramers auditing your course, and mocking the teacher!!
This is the internet, and it is a bizarre place.
Time for something radical.
None of you are willing to clean house so you are now embarrassed and showing mock indignity as you go lie down on the fainting couch. Spare me.
“So, was Carl (“nuclear winter”) Sagan wrong…”
Wagathon,
I think he was wrong about a lot of things.
Andrew
WHT,
I thought your little list was amusing, until I got to the vicious character assassination part. What were you thinking? That is not mocking. I can’t believe you are that dumb. I suggest you consult an attorney the next time you get the urge to do that to somebody on the internet. I rally have to wonder who raised some of you people.
AGW advocates, look at the following graph for a minute and I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, consider it possible that you may be wrong.
AGW advocates, what changed in the 161 years of annual global mean temperature data?
(cui bono, thanks for the beautiful “I beseech you” phrase)
Now you have the Italian Flag uncertainty issue 
“in the Bowels of Christ?” I don’t think that turn of phrase with have the desired impact on your intended audience
Serge Galam provides a disturbing answer to this question.
His answer depends on the details of his model and its computer implementation. His model hasn’t been demonstrated to be accurate, has it?
Oh no, mike! Josh and I are lightweights here. I know next to nothing of the science, and josh knows nothing. I just pick on him because he is so despicable and he’s a soft target. But I will agree that he can crank out the product prodigiously. As if he is getting paid by the word. I don’t have to work so hard, because I learned to keep it simple. I haven’t taken an English or composition course, that wasn’t required, since High School. My old high school teacher taught us about economy. Stuck with me. Also, I learned something called radio discipline. You keep the discussion to a minimum, when you are calling in air or arty strikes to get the bad guys off your backs.
Eli, you write “In the sense of models, there is no data that is perfectly correct although some is useful. The trick is to understand the limitations of the measurement.”
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. The only limitation to actual measurements that I am aware of, is the error inherent in making any measurement. Why there is a trick to understand error bars, I have no idea. And what models have to do with measurement, I have equally no idea whatsoever.
Don Monfort, I have being going out of my way; to point that ” I’m not a ”pretend Skeptic” not in your camp; therefore, you are an embarrassment to the truth. Millions of people are getting robed for billions of dollars; for you the debate is as music competition, do you know why?
You are comfortable in Joshua’s kindergarten; Josh is very clever person, he is taking good care of his toddlers. It’s my duty to point out to the community at large that: GLOBAL warming is 100% lie; climate can be improved, if people know the truth. Water improves the climate; Warmist cannot admit it, because in the beginning they associated / compared water vapour with CO2. Humanity depends on the weather, rain / climate… toddlers in Joshua’s kindergarten when get wet – is not from rain. Don, because you are in Warmist bed with your bigotry, should the truth be silenced; what do you think?
You are telling me that you like warmer climate, this and that; Don, because of clowns like you, Warmist are flourishing. You are covering up their destructions; because of irresponsible / ignorant attitude. The world is not spinning around you, you are just Warmist’ collateral damage. People like WebHub, Mosher are spooked, because they have brains to understand that I have the real proofs, to say with legitimacy: THE KING IS NAKED. On the other hand, you are their obedient roll of toilet paper. Robert and Joshua love ignorants like you. They must have tried to debunk my formulas – then coiled their tails between their legs. If they can’t prove me wrong with their intelligence, how can you prove anything with your bigotry… Start using your brains Don, and prove me wrong that your brains is not ”clinically dead” I would love to be proven wrong on that one
You are perfect example, why I’m needed. Propaganda cooked many people’s brains like yours. Human Brains is like parachute, only works when is open. What have they done to you Don?!
David, you write “What happens when “data” runs into Orwell’s “1984″ and researchers distort the evidence?”
You cannot stop anyone `cooking`the data. I am afraid it happens all the time. The key is replication. The whole idea behind proper science is that when any measurement is made, then the way the measurements were made is also described. It should then be possible for others to replicate the data. Only when measurements have been made, replicated, and the numbers match within the inevitable error, can we really say that we have proper measurements.
