Here’s what you get to see at Open Mind
sHx | November 2, 2010 at 9:26 am
You know, Tamino, you shouldn’t be so shy about asking Anthony
Watts to place a permanent link to your blog at WUWT. Real Climate, Stoat and several other pro-AGW blogs are already prominently displayed on WUWT blogroll. So it is better to ask than to throw up occasional tantrums in order to draw his attention this way.
[edit]
[Response: It’s very revealing that when Anthony gets pwned, his supporters call it a “tantrum.” Nice rhetorical trick … but you guys just can’t take the heat.]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
…and here’s the full comment, sans editing, that sHx left in WUWT Tips and Notes tonight:
sHx says:
For what it is worth, here is in full my snipped comment at Tamino’s “Can We Talk?” thread:
You know, Tamino, you shouldn’t be so shy about asking Anthony Watts to place a permanent link to your blog at WUWT. Real Climate, Stoat and several other pro-AGW blogs are already prominently displayed on WUWT blogroll. So it is better to ask than to throw up occasional tantrums in order to draw his attention this way.
WUWT does not fear losing regular readers and commenters to the CAGW camp, you know. Rather, Watts’ blog seems to thrive on the range of opinions and options it offers to its visitors, something pro-CAGW blogs across the board have failed to emulate. In pro-CAGW blogs one gets to see nothing but the established climate dogma. According to Gavin Schmidt of Real Climate, the refusal to reciprocate the courtesy of linking to such skeptical blogs as WUWT, Bishop Hill, Climate Audit, etc , is justified on the grounds that those blogs are “anti-scientific”. What is your excuse, Tamino?
You are aware that Anthony Watts publicly offered you a chance to guest-post on WUWT on several occasions. Unless you are afraid of being pilloried by members of your camp, there is absolutely no valid reason why you should refuse the invitation. You’ll have greater audience figures in WUWT than Real Climate, Stoat, Climate Progress, Deep Climate and your blog combined. All you have to do is ask in a civil fashion.
We can’t talk, it seems.
sHx says:
Ah, the link:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/can-we-talk/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And here’s the result:
That was:
And I won’t even ask for a reciprocal link on his blogroll. That guest post slot is still open to Tamino by the way.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The AGW “Climate Disruption” alarmist blogs do not want their readers to see or even think other opinions.
Dialogue for them is always one way.
Anthony, I hope you aren’t holding your breath.
This is a splendid example of global climate disruption blinders–apparently worn so tight that the blood no longer flows to the decision-making gray matter that’s found between the ears (or behind the eyes). I suggest dialogue isn’t the only thing being disrupted.
Doug in Seattle says: (November 2, 2010 at 7:06 pm) Dialogue for them is always one way.
May even say has to be one way, Doug. Doubt is dangerous to demagoguery.
Just a curious thought, are the careers of John Cook http://www.skepticalscience.com/ and Tamino http://tamino.wordpress.com/ real climate etc etc dependant on Catostrophic Anthropogenic Global Climate Disruption funding?
How many times has John Cooks site reversed attributation to climate forcings?
I know there are new studies in everyday but can the C02 mantra stop?
Well, to have my little petty bit of fun, I went to the post at Tamino’s site, and submitted the following:
re: Response: It’s very revealing that when Anthony gets pwned, his supporters call it a “tantrum.” Nice rhetorical trick … but you guys just can’t take the heat.
Au Contraire, I’d say its pretty clear that skeptics can take the heat, virtually by definition of the debate/issue itself. Its the AGW advocates who believe the heat is bad!
Nice edit job on the original sHx post too (NOT). Even in this instance, it appears its the advocates who couldn’t take the heat. Will be interesting to see if my post is allowed at all.
~~~~~~~
Believers are from Venus, Skeptics are from Mars {VBG}
Why should we care what that small minded asshat thinks, says, or does? I’d sooner spend a day strapped to a spark plug wire than read another word that formed between his ears. He is the most classless citizen to be found on either side of any issue that’s ever made the news and has achieved his ambition of offending the great majority of the open minded people of the climate concerned world.
And given time, I could balance that narrative by saying something negative about that jerk.
I think Gavin’s opinions are well embraced by others in the pro AGW camps. To them, any kind of debate is a form of defeat since in their view, talking induces a stalemate of inaction.
Once they established “The Precautionary Principle”, they no longer have to debate to justify their views. It’s become a moral question of faith, not one of science.
I guess that means I am “anti-scientific”, although “denier” has a nice ring to it as well.
I made it to WUWT front page ahead of Tamino. I can die happy. 🙂
I am still confused why Tamino edited one of my comments a couple weeks ago:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/go-ice-go-going-going-gone/#comment-44877
Here is my unedited comment mirrored on WUWT:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/15/my-answer-to-taminos-question/#comment-508844
Tamino uses a graph for Arctic ice that is not widely accepted as completely accurate. Other graphs show up and down variation, not a basically straight line from 1880 to 1980. That would be cherry picking.
I think we should be happy to have blogs like Tamino’s as it provides a forum for all to judge how out of step with the average person he and his supporters are.
The more they use words like ‘nutjobs’, ‘deniers’ , idiots’ and ‘wingnuts’ to describe people with alternative opinions to theirs, the more they alienate the person who is undecided or slightly skeptical.
If it makes them feel good to vent or manipulate posts, then go right ahead, because it ultimately benefits the skeptical position.
small minds leads to petty decisions.
dp you are a hoot! I am still laughing! Hope everything is continuing well with you and yours Anthony! In defense of Tamino I will say he had the courtesy and thoughfullness to show concern for Anthonys family problem. Other than that I have not been able to agree with him, although I doubt he loses sleep over that!
From the Tamino article:
You may disagree that global warming is really happening as fast as I think. Or that humankind is the principal cause. Or that the polar bears are endangered. You might think I overestimate the seriousness of the consequences. You may doubt forecasts of sea level rise, you may pooh-pooh any connection with hurricane frequency or intensity. Etc. etc. till the cows come home.
But if you try to tell me that what’s happening to the arctic, and especially to its sea ice, is not damn strong evidence of global warming … then I have to wonder whether it’s possible for us to have a productive dialogue. Because I don’t think you’re a “skeptic.”
************************************
Hmmm. The construction of these paragraphs and the points made here show us how someone with so much hate can never be a level-headed thinker. WUWT consistently acknowledges that there is warming, and that man might even be the cause of some of it. Their problem is that WUWT dares to mention some of the other factors. AGWers would rather attribute 100% to man, and scream “Oh God, we’re all gonna die!”. The fact that AGWers never mention healthy polar bear populations, sea ice flow, low hurricane frequency, etc., shows how disingenuous their whole charade is.
Get the whole story at WUWT! Get half truths and panic-stricken rants at Tamino.
I’ve always thought that deleting comments that are neither abusive or off-topic was a rather shady and intellectually dishonest tactic.
However, the absolute worst is when comments are kept but edited at the blogger’s discretion.
Regardless of where you fall on an issue, those that use such tactics deserve all the scorn and derision that we can muster.
but makes it clear that these factors are not responsible for the long-term decline (of Arctic ice) we’ve witnessed. That’s due to warming….So: things have changed. Warming is the reason
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
There’s two things to point out here:
First: by long term he means 28 years, 1979 to 2007. But that cannot be categorized as long term. Natural variation has caused Arctic ice to vary, up and down, for millions and millions of years. To try to conclude something about Arctic ice from 28 years of satellite data is sorely unscientific. But it is good for global warming “skeptics” that Tamino does this in that it easily exposes how “global warming” operates.
Second: he says Arctic ice decrease in the years 1979 to 2007 was due to warming. He wants the reader to infer two things (that I can see) by saying that. One: he wants the reader to infer it’s “manmade” global warming, not just warming. Two: He wants the reader to infer that “skeptics” “deny” that warming caused it. But most everyone agrees warming caused the ice loss from 1979 to 2007. Who would say that is hasn’t? The loss in the Arctic was due, in large part, to a natural variation in the earth called the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation). PDO was in positive (warm) phase from 1976 to 1999. This oscillation caused ENSO to be El Nino dominant. The heat from these El Ninos caused the natural decline. The reason the PDO shift happened in 1999 but the Arctic continued to lose ice until 2007 is because of a natural lag in the system—the Queen Mary can’t be turned around on a dime. But now the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is in negative (cool) phase. This is causing ENSO to be La Nina dominant. So Arctic ice mass is increasing since 2007.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Tamino uses word games to make Anthony Watts look bad. But his word games are easily detected. Anyone who takes some time to look at how Tamino words things can see he fights dirty and hits below the belt. He reveals who he is by that. Global warming believers continue to shoot themselves in the foot. Oh that they would talk more and more so that all the world would see their game.
They should have stayed quiet and insisted “it’s beyond debate”. Because now that ClimateGate and all the other -gates have forced them out of the closet their gig is up.
Nobody over the age of 20 uses the term “pwned” (except wannabe 1337 h@x0r5) ((translated “elite hacker”)) internet neckbeard superhero basement dwellers.
[d]
r3Ply: $P3@K f0r y0ur53lf Y0U 7W0 fing3r 7ypInG N0o8. ~ c7M
Things have changed. Warming is the reason. Stark and fundamental.
Yes Mr. Tamino, it’s warming. Simmer down. No one denies that.
You have this propensity for using the word “denier”. You in the consensus are getting desperate. I suppose what’s happening in the elections today isn’t making that any better.
sHx says:
November 2, 2010 at 7:55 pm
I made it to WUWT front page ahead of Tamino. I can die happy. 🙂
Well sHx, openness does reward!
Well, at least so far my post to Tamino’s hasn’t shown up…. I’m not holding my breath (see my earlier comment here: Rational Debate says: November 2, 2010 at 7:34 pm)
Just posted this in Tamino’s blog. Not holding my breath.
“In comments in this blog from the peanut gallery there is a lot of “nutjobs” and “wingnuts”. How long has passed since the last time you looked in the mirror?
BTW, Tamino, there has been a lo-o-o-o-ng time sicne you wrote something about the all time record levels of Antarctica marine ice and decreasing temperatures. Perhaps the Arctic is the only place where you can claim “warming”.”
Tamino Artic ice loss is due to so many factors besides warming, It plays asmall part, like so many other factors such as ice breakers, shipping leaves behind soot , Wind , theSUN, the PDO. The earth is not in a perfect circle orbit much like a spinning top. Who is the one that came up with the idea that the climate is static and is not suppose to change history has taught us it has change rapidly and slowlywith more CO2 and with less. I still wonder why people have got it in thier heads that it must stay were its at, An old saying comes to mind”The more things change the more they stay the same”. artic sea ice will fluxuate up and down thru ntime weather we like it or not. Pun Intended.
Re-posted here, in case the “open minded” Tamino doesn’t like the message:
From Ray Ladbury | November 2, 2010 at 2:32 pm
“sHx,
MicroWatts serves a very useful function as an asylum for the nutjobs. Pray, why would we want them over here where the adults are trying to have intelligent conversation?”
my reply…
…and you wonder why people don’t come over here very often.
Do you think that Dr. Myers, Dr Curry, Joseph D’Aleo, Dr Spencer, Dr. Roger Pielke Jr, et al would like being referred to as “nutjobs”?
And yet, Tamino, name unknown, is allowed free reign here.
How many scientists use their real name here?
Unbelievable.
speaking of NSIDC…..
their graph is the only one that shows 2010 below 2007 now:
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/7145/nsidconly.png
image enlarged from this graph:
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/1900/nsicdnov110.png