Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Any predictions on how long before Al Gore and the global warming folks blame this headline on humans’ carbon footprint?
Sun Unleashes Largest Solar Flare in Years
http://goo.gl/Scr6f
Skeptic–so you misuse the word/concept of absolute as well as bullshit and I have to say “full of” as well. Put it all together and every word you use in a sentence has a meaning not found in the dictionary==and yet you think of yourself as literate and communicative?
How absolutely full of Bullshit that notion is.
Words have meaning. Buy, then read, a dictionary. It will do you well.
Bobbo, You would do well to read the dictionary before you give that advice.
Definition of ABSOLUTELY
1: in an absolute manner or condition —often used as an intensive
http://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/absolutely
Intensive: : tending to strengthen or increase; especially : tending to give force or emphasis
http://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intensive
#15 Bobbing and Weaving – Meth addicts, huh? Well, chronic users of crystal meth tend to suffer from outbreaks of acne. And, the wonderful stuff makes your skin itch. Good combo, huh? Scratching at pustules. And the mugshots aren’t sufficient to suggest the smell: they sweat a lot and it smells strongly of cat piss. It;s a lovely life.
As for climate change? Not gonna go there, today. It’s useless to try and be logical about it on this blog and I’m just not fired up enough to argue right now. Tomorrow? Who knows?
Besides, it’s obvious you are absolutely in troll mode today. It ain’t pretty.
I’d like to know why anyone has listened to the “scientific” ramblings of a person whose only higher education was in political science and public policy. he went in to his VP term backed by psuedo-scientific falsified information from tree huggers that weren’t getting their voices heard when the message was just “don’t trash the planet”, so they had to try to invent something on the catastrophic to apocalyptic scale. that’s where “global warming” began. now, having been a Texas for most of my life, I can tell Dallas that he’s absolutely full of crap because it has always been like this here. Right now, we’re in a drought, but we’ve seen droughts before, as well. But, of course, I think Dallas is full of crap on just about everything.
26, Bobbo,
You missed the point he was making. Green laws do not care about economics, pragmatism, lost jobs, etc. They’re mainly designed as “feel good” legislation for liberals.
In the absence of empirical evidence, there may be more green laws concerning CO2 before any REAL science has weighed in to prove causality. And once implemented, stricter CO2 laws will have the same effect as everything else green legislation coerces the masses to do.
But I understand you’re dogmatic about “man-made” global warming stance which is why you only see Rand’s comments as simply a toilet bowl versus a woman’s right to choose.
and the definition of pseudo-scientist is …
one whose arguments you cannot counter, consensus them out.
check out the very recent ‘WOW’ occurance
A Prof Murray Salby has just presented a paper to a Sydney audience, sat on for a while (about to be published, done peer review) regarding the carbon cycle and how the human emissions does not correlate with an examination via 3 decades of satellite coverage (wherein that instrumentation has added a piece of the analysis missing in AR4).
quite a stir
Links to audio and to Judith Curry’s site.
#33–Skeptic==you have schooled me. Thank you. I know that absolutely has become an “intensive” in common parlance–like fingernails on a chalkboard BUT I thought it was lousy culture. Finding its way into the dictionary, my objective touchstone with reality, brings me up short. The language is growing with oxymoronic emphasis. I hate having to change my preferences/attitudes just because I am wrong. Surely we should return to the Constitution of our Founding Fathers?
Going past the word, and accepting the dictionary meaning as I must, do you still think it is accurate and worthy to post that Algore is intensively full of shit about various issues even when you, or any sane person, agrees with him? Thats absolutely insulting to what being full of shit used to mean when I was a kiddie. Has shit changed too? Now a breakfast cereal?
Absolutist thinking as an absolute or as an intensive (I hate that word too!) are to be avoided. I’m sure Funk and Wagners agrees with me.
#34–Animby==more schooling and more thanks. Acne, itchy skin, teeth rotting out and cat piss? That high must be pretty powerful then? “The most addictive drug there is” was the description on a show last night, but what hasn’t been described so?
where do I listen to this speech in full, it is very interesting and insightfull
Economic Turmoil – with no disrespect to victims of sexual assaults… is caused by –
R-A-P-I-S-T-S Rich And Powerful Intent on Serving Them Selves
aka
R-A-P-E Rich And Powerful Elite
#38 Bobbo – Never been much of a drug user, a little grass in college, a little alcohol in the Army so I can’t describe the “high” users feel. Having seen the physical effects – don’t think I care to find out.
Re: your comments to Sceptic #33 – if you need a word to campaign against over- and misuse of, try “actually.”
As for Algore: just about every word he utters is abused.
Gore, like all catastrophic climate change zealots wants to limit the language of discourse. It’s not possibly to defend all aspects of his argument as scientific fact now shows it’s flaws.
So instead, Gore chooses to limit his rhetoric to simple strawman arguments; because controlling the language is the best way to control the message to the general public.
It’s a similar technique to labelling those critical of Israeli foreign policy as anti-semitic.
@strobe
“Science is about making predictable claims and testing those predictions. So far the evidence in support of human influenced climate change far outweighs the counter evidence, and predictions about the consequences are routinely being validated”
– I’m sorry, but this isn’t correct. Even the current bleeding edge simulations are failing the most basic test, in that they cannot reliably predict past climate [source: BBC material world podcast – climate models].
The concept that there is an accurate, global, climate modelling tool is a myth. Sorry. We have predictive tool sets for hypothesis testing and general laws applied to them. But feedback mechanisms are crudely simulated within them and the data set operated upon is deliberately, for technical reasons, kept limited.
My main beef about Al Gore’s speech is that he said that he compared the scientists who are challenging the science behind AGM, to the shill doctors who the tobacco companies hired to back them up on the safety of smoking.
Hey Al, you’ve got a little poop on the corner of your mouth. Use a napkin.
Scientists Trace Heat Wave To Massive Star At Center Of Solar System
http://tinyurl.com/3fxr79o
Has Al Gore lowered his carbon footprint? JCDvorak posted about his huge disorganized office with so many flat screens.
Has Al Gore stopped the zinc mining on his land?
Has he stopped the offshore and Indian land drilling done by his family’s oil company, provided to his dad by the Communist industrialist Armand Hammer?
Al Gore is getting desperate as his investments are losing value. The Chicago Carbon Exchange market was shut down after price crashed. Canada, Japan, and Russia have said they will not agree to new carbon limits after Kyoto expires next year. Subsidies are being cut for various alternative energy projects.
The science seems to come one after another of casting more doubt on the consensus, to where even Andy Revkin at the New York Times is saying he’s not worried about an Arctic death spiral of losing all ice. This was despite being threatened by climate scientists if he didn’t toe the line.
“The vibe that I am getting from here, there and everywhere,” wrote Schlessinger to Revkin, “is that your reportage is very worrisome to most climate scientists.”
“Of course, your blog is your blog,” Schlessinger continued, “But, I sense that you are about to experience the ‘Big Cutoff’ from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.”
Don’t worry Al, RealClimate still got your back!
They assure us that the latest paper saying climate models overstate the amount of warming when compared to observations should be ignored. Indeed, it should not have been published!
http://realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/07/misdiagnosis-of-surface-temperature-feedback/
http://drroyspencer.com/2011/07/rise-of-the-1st-law-deniers/
For those who think Al Gore is boring, you are looking at it all wrong. He is an alien, that’s why he always seems uncomfortable like he’s wearing a costume, and is talking so wooden. So really you should be excited to hear what extraterrestrial beings have to say. For those of you that think I am joking, note that he was born 9 months after Roswell. And yes, his speech is still better than Mulder, who makes you support the cigarette smoking man.
#17 – Only if it doesn’t cost more.
Poor Al, must not be getting his happy realeases from hotel massage therapists anymore. Ball pressure makes a fat, smelly ex-VP cranky evidently.
MikeN thanks for the links in your post #49. Like Al Gore and his Nobel prize, the author of that rebuttal is Kevin Trenberth who shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize that went to the IPCC.
Think how it would feel if you received a Nobel prize for something proved wrong a few years later. Roy Spencer has no such prize to protect. As Roy said, “Their objections verge on the bizarre, and so I have to wonder whether any of them actually read our paper. I eagerly await their published papers which show any errors in our analysis.”
So the challenge is there Kevin. Let’s see what you do with it… coward or hero.
Editor
why have you destroyed that audio link in #37?
“Algore says we need to move off carbon based energy. Is he wrong about that?”
this assumes carbon energy is (a) finite and (b)it is not possible to cleanly burn it.
good old humans and their assumptions.
I assume peak oil theory is bullshit in order to drive prices up, ther eis plenty of shale oil that is not hugely more expensive to mine. i also believe that we could burn fossil fuels more cleanly if we tried..
BUT i also believe that the oil cartels or energy cartels JP morgan et al, have suppressed clean energy tech based on Tesla’s work involving radiant/etheric energy.
if this was done for our own good as its too dangerous, then fair enough but still not good enough ot hide it from us, but if done for power and money of the elites, then ithere is little difference to this modern day carbon tax and grab scam.
im all for cleaning the earth and reducing pollutants, but the blatant lies behind this scam should force any one with a scrap of self dignity to call out bullshit.
we can still call out the bullshit AND act on reducing pollution/corruption, they are not mutually exclusive.
The day of clean renewable energy has been and passed due to corporate greed. every cent wasted on wind and solar should be getting invested in researching electrogravitic technologies involving magnets and torsional spin.
then again i may be deluded and we truly may have burnt up 4.5 billion years worth of oil in 200 years. but i doubt it.
When the IPCC says the sun has no effect on climate, i must laugh. laughter is the best medicine, i find myself doing it more and more as i spot more and more bullshit being propagated as truth on a daily basis.
At least i will be healthy, if not broke.
# 52 Skeptic said, “Think how it would feel if you received a Nobel prize for something proved wrong a few years later.”
Doesn’t seem to be bothering our president.
#53: Fixed.
bullshit is what i think of when someone mentions Gore
Q: What’s the difference between an enormous sack of shit and Algore?
A: The bag.
#55, Animby, …ha ha, or it could explain why his hair has turned gray since taking office. 🙂
#21, Guyver,
Your link is to a fully rebutted scientist that keeps publishing the same data. Since no reputable publisher will publish him anymore, so he is forced to pay to publish in an on-line journal.
Too funny that the deniers have to resort to such garbage ass their evidence.
OOoopps, my bad. I forgot the link for Guyver.
http://realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/04/review-of-spencers-great-global-warming-blunder/