Climate Craziness of the Week – Bizarre Appellation

Pray for more CO2.
Does that prayer make me a religious terrorist?

That is some serious hate right there, he would be welcomed by the Westboro Baptist Church with open arms.
Keep fighting the good fight Mr.Watts.

You can pretty much put any argument that has been made in the past into his whine and it fits perfectly… Me he sounds like a classic eugenics nutter. End of the world blah blah blah.

Yeah, there’s a reason these guys study deep into the night: they’re trying to figure out how to get something “significant” out of junk, with limited skills to draw from, leading to an inability to understand where it all went wrong. Sigh…
Mark

Another clueless authoritarian a** h*** calls for criminalizing speech. Sadly, we must grant DA the freedom to mouth his offensive idiocy, even though he would deny the same to others.
Although, by condemning, indeed advocating the criminalization, of the free expression of ideas, DA devalues his own ideas to less than zero.

First they’ll make it a crime to deny climate change, next they’ll make it a crime to think it.

I just hope I can get my WiFi to work again. It always seems like a crapshoot, and frankly, I don’t even know if I remember the password.

Not exactly instilling confidence in the average reader that this guy has what it takes to make credulous claims such as he has.
Mark

“When I profiled Michael Mann for Scientific American, he said he thought it would eventually be illegal to deny climate change.”
Oho! So the courts will put all those who doubt the great Mann’s work in jail for him, will they? Again, whether quoted by sceptics or alarmists, Mann comes across as a maniac with a one-track mind – “I’m going to get everyone who’s ever questioned my work. I shall do such things – what they are yet I know not, but they shall be the terrors of the Earth”.
PS: h/t Shakespeare.
PPS: Er, can I say that without being sued? 🙂

co2phobia, no?

‘…I just hope I can get my WiFi to work again. It always seems like a crapshoot, and frankly, I don’t even know if I remember the password.’
Hm. ‘Fucking idiot’ (Mod: quote from above!) doesn’t ‘even know’ if he can remember a password. I think it is fair to call that an ‘Ouch’.

In other news: UK Met Office scientists labelled as (no prize to guess it) WILFUL DENIERS!. Their crime? For once, they have not jumped on the “it’s worse than we thought” bandwagon:

It’s hard to read the MET Office evidence as other than scientists blindly following a poorly-performing model and willfully denying carefully accrued physical observations

Fascinating stuff.
I am pretty sure people like David Appell will in future be the subjects of studies on a whole new definition of insanity.
This is as bad as any religious zealot ever got. Perhaps it is the vision of being saviors of civilization?

I bet Appell burned witches or heretics in a former life. At least then he could say he was doing it for God but who is he praying to now.

Another null rant, empty, zero, nothing, nil, this Appell individual is worthy only of the ignore button.

“When I profiled Michael Mann for Scientific American, he said he thought it would eventually be illegal to deny climate change.”
As someone that has studied history and political science, this statement is abhorrent to me. Not only un-American, the educated mind that truly believes that is a dangerous one and an enemy of all free thinking people of the world. Above, temp called him a “classic eugenics nutter”, and while I agree with that statement, it understates (even trivializes – no offense temp, not meant as a knock on you) the evil thoughts of those who believe it. Thoughts become words, words become belief and belief become actions.
Don’t make the knee-jerk reaction that people like this are just sad – they can be deadly dangerous too if they collect in large enough groups, and it seems that a type of polarization of people is gaining speed in America. It is also an outstanding example of why the Bill of Rights is essential to people remaining free to speak their minds and avoid persecution at the hands of the “mob”.
As my disclaimer, I would like to say that while I do not believe that Mann will lead the anarcho-progressives against us in the streets, I do believe that most things don’t start big – they start very small and snowball until out of control.

If anyone is a neighbor of David Appell, this might be fun:

Want to freak out your neighbors?
Name you Wifi…
“FBI Surveillance Van”

Hehehe, that’s funny right there. 😉

Bless his little heart!

He will keep eating that Quark Soup – he should know that hallucinogenics are bad for your mental status as well as your kidneys.

“You can simply claim that CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas.”
He means “You can’t…”
This is a common goalpost moving, and redefining of opposition. It is a self-defense mechanism on their part. They claim the “deniers” are merely “denying” CO2 is a greenhouse gas, or denying that the climate “changes.” That is what they are arguing. They know they lose on positive feedbacks. They also sound like those old groupies for Stalin show trials.

I’m going with
David “Knight of the Temple of Doom” Arpell is envious of the attention Dana “Scooter” Nuccitelli is getting from his rant and has decided to take action.
Personally, I think he’s up against tough competition, but if anyone can pull it off, David can.

Donna makes a good point. A crisis seems to fulfil a void in some lives and what better way to feel good about yourself than “saving the world”?
“In the 21st century, with all our education and all our technology, are we really just children who get a perverse thrill from telling ourselves scary stories around campfires? Are we really so emotionally and spiritually immature that we need to invent one crisis after another in order to imbue our lives with meaning and purpose?” ___Donna Laframboise 9/20/12 No Frakking Consensus

Maybe you need a new category:
“Climate Insaneness of the Week”
Way beyond ever having any type of rational conversation with that guy.

David Appell says: “Are Anthony Watts and Marc Morano and Tom Nelson and Steve Goddard smart enough to be guilty of climate crimes? I think so. You can simply claim that CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas. I think they’re crimes will be obvious in about a decade.”
Anthony Watts says: “Apparently Mr. Appell doesn’t note that I’ve stated that CO2 is a greenhouse gas on national television and said it has an effect.”
============================================================
Anthony, let me tell you something.
If they come to power, they will kill you despite that you said it had an effect, because they will have enough reasons to do that. They will not spare Christopher Monckton either, who also said it had an effect.
So the only way is to do everything possible so that they would not come to power. In this regard under circumstances your saying it has an effect might be, well, not a quite right thing, I mean, in terms of decreasing the probability of them coming to power.

Wow.
They’re worse than we thought!

“I’ll be flying home tomorrow…
I just hope I can get my WiFi to work again. It always seems like a crapshoot, and frankly, I don’t even know if I remember the password…”
Wait a second…I think we’ve been HAD. This is like when in the 1979 Mel Brook’s “The Producers”, someone points to the stage at the hippie playing Hitler and says, “I GET IT! IT’S A SATIRE!”.
Thank you Mr. Apple, you’re a PEACH…IT’S SATIRE!

mortis88 says:
September 20, 2012 at 5:05 pm
“(even trivializes – no offense temp, not meant as a knock on you)”
None taken and in some respects your right it that some comment because I made it so short does trivialize the damages/dangers both then and now. I agree with your post and have posted many times warning that these people are far to similar to eugenics and the many spawned ideologies of eugenics then normal and rational should be comfortable with.

Americans are shocked at the violence perpetrated for our supposed insult to the prophet Mohammed, but it looks like we have the equivalent here for insults to the prophets of CAGW.

Let’s just put this in perspective folks.
David is at the more moderate part of the warmist spectrum.
Some of them are seriously deranged!

ursus augustus says (September 20, 2012 at 5:11 pm): “Appell’s drivel sounded a lot like that stuff that came out of the mouth of the Iraqi propaganda twerp as the American troops entered Baghdad”
“Baghdad Bob”, the patron saint of CAGW alarmists:

Twenty years ago “We had little time.” Now:
I think they’re (sic) crimes will be obvious in about a decade.
When the predictions by these people fail over and over do they admit that they are wrong? No. Like all end-of-days types they just move the goal posts into the future.
No amount of evidence to the contrary will dissuade them from their beliefs. After all it’s their religion. The best thing to do to them is to make them irrelevant so they can be ignored.

“Think about that — ignorance from Tea Party types in rural Utah threatens the well-being of the entire human race.”
I will have such revenges on you ….,
That all the world shall–I will do such things,–
What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be
The terrors of the earth. BWAH-HA-HA-HA
King Lear

“On that small divide, our future lies. One molecule out of 10,000.”
I have that molecule in a sealed Mason jar on the shelf. Don’t cross me.

Have you read any of the comments to Appel’s rant? He gets by no means an easy ride.

Just wanted to send a big shout out to my friend David Appell. How ya doin’ buddy? Life got you down? Human life, I mean. This would be a great planet to live on if it wasn’t for all these people, eh? It must be hard carrying enough hatred for all humanity.

“honestly thinks he knows better than all the professional, study-deep-into-the-night, sweat-the-data, devote-their-lives scientists about all this.”
Would that study include time spent in jail after being arrested at various environmental protests, a la Hansen? Or is that simply considered healthy fun?

Anthony, don’t bend to Mr. Appell’s accusations. It makes him feel big to pick on other people. ‘Papa Zu’ comment at Appell’s blog was right on the spot.
Let’s face it, a psychoanalysis of David’s state of mind, portrayed strictly by his words spoken publically to the world on his blog, would be quite interesting (but I do feel rather sad for this guy, his cheese has definitely slide off his cracker, I think led by this AGW ‘religion’ that we see every day). Isn’t it amazing what ~0.4°C of actual temperature rise over a century can do to a man, it’s almost as if he and his preachers equate co2 to the ring of power in Tolkien’s trilogy.
It anything, most of blame of the crime against David’s mind lies in the laps of IPCC, NOAA, GISS, Hadley CRU for not removing, or clearly stating the need to remove, that ~0.7-1.0°C of the apparent global temperature rise in the last century being clearly an Urban Heat Island trend error, making this seem as a much scarier scenario to humanity than is actually present. Yes, this lies in their laps, not in the laps of the many skeptical scientists who have ended up correct all along. Thanks Papa Zu, the rest of blame, David can bear himself.
CO2 is not the problem, many climate ‘scientists’ and their holy ‘consensus’ are. They may have letters behind their names but many of them are not scientists to me.

The nuts always fly loose
Just before the wheels fall off
Eugene WR Gallun

Climate crime? Robbery using a “heater?”

David Appel says on Quark Soup;
Perhaps we need a decade of true suffering — I mean REAL hardship — to break them of their idiocy. I’m just barely old enough to perhaps die in such a decade, but if that’s what it really takes….
>>>>>>>>>
Well David, most rational people, when confronted with a prophesy of doom, think to themselves “gosh I hope that doesn’t happen”. You however, would wish death and misery to billions rather than be wrong.
What, exactly, is wrong with you?

“On that small divide, our future lies. One molecule out of 10,000.”
I gots me an industrial party time mega fun maximum capacity Cylinder of Co2, and unless the UN gives me a Million Nigerian Pounds, Tenure at Mann U, and a Prius, i’m gonna open up that valve baby – see if I don’t!….
….pssssssssssssssshhhhhhh.
Hear that? Do ya? do ya? That Molecule not so lonely now is it?, is it?…
pssssssssshhhhhhhhhhh….
Mu Ha Ha Ha Ha.
Next on list, ah hem,….
I gots me a cooler bin chock full of honesty and common sense, and unless I get a weekend hanging out with the HOFF, knocking back brewskies, shooting pool, and skeet shooting from a li-loo inna pool, i’m gonna release it at the IPCC – yeah you heard me,….COMMON SENSE BABY!

LOL, there is yet another of those 10 year forecasts of climate doom contained in the email.

“I think they’re crimes will be obvious in about a decade.”

It’s really hard to lend credence to anyone who doesn’t know the difference between “they’re” and “their.”
I had a student once who mixed up those words and managed to use “there” incorrectly in same paper. I gave him a D.

Appell shows exactly why I’m on the skeptic side of this. He apparently doesn’t think the “unwashed masses” should have a voice in the future of the planet. Only the “great” scientific minds, I.e., the ones who think like him. And he’s all in favor of banning free speech. Ya know, even if everything the warmists say about climate change is correct, even if the planet continues to warm at 2 degrees C per century, even if mankind is responsible, even if the results will be catastrophic (none of which I believe by the way, but even if I did, …) I would STILL stand FIRMLY on this side of the debate, just because of the FREEDOMS that “this fucking idiot” and his ilk are willing to take away from humanity in the name of “saving the planet”. As far as I’m concerned, the planet isn’t worth saving if freedom doesn’t ring on some small part of it.

And you created all of that ruckus, with a feather duster attack like that Anthony ?
I think you’ve made your point here Anthony; the people vested in this global warming hullaballoo, are a lot more wedded to their financial interest than they let on.
By the way; the soup strainer looks very nice on you.

How does a ‘climate crime’ work anyways? Is that assault & battery with a deadly weapon every time you exhale? Or is it that disagreeing with the former that’s assault & battery with a deadly weapon since you have to exhale between spoken sentences?

“I’ll be flying home tomorrow…”
Ya mean goin’ by sailboat don’t ya Dave? Or are you okay with destroying the planet? Or don’t you believe it?

Joseph Bastardi says:
September 20, 2012 at 7:45 pm
Nice.

Appell:

“When I profiled Michael Mann for Scientific American, he said he thought it would eventually be illegal to deny climate change.”

Ban Ki-Moon:

“Freedoms of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected, when they are used for common justice, common purpose,” Ban told a news conference.
“When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others’ values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way.” —–U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

David Appell just aligns himself with the rest of the leftist movement.

The Inquisition …
… or just one another runaway from the asylum …?

One doesn’t need to violate “Godwin’s Law” to understand what these anti-freedom bozos are all about…. just read “The Gulag Archipelago” (a little light reading about what people who want to outlaw “thought crime” can do).

i must say these are some interesting people. I followed Donald Brown to see what he has written. Honestly I tired of it a bit after reading an entry on a group blog…and the entry was from yet another philosophy professor having been submitted by Prof Brown:
sorry for the long post, and long excerpt…but here you go:
http://rockblogs.psu.edu/rockethics/
Disinformation, Social Stability and Moral Outrage
We must bring to light the corrupting influences. We must compel the media to make clear that there is only as much debate about the science behind climate change as there is debate about the science behind the existence of the dinosaurs (for while in both cases we may doubt the details, there is little doubt about the overall picture). We must compel our political agents to make clear, in the starkest moral terms, why they are making, or failing to make, the decisions they make. This should motivate a movement at least as ferocious as the Occupy Wallstreet movement. The Occupy Wallstreet movement was focused on the very real and morally potent concern that our economy is shifting us toward a society not in line with the basic moral principles on which our nation was founded and on which our hopes and expectations are based. To some extent that economy is reversible. The concern that motivates moral outrage at inaction and obstruction regarding climate change should be focused on the very conditions that make possible a stable society for us, and for our children. Our influence on these background conditions is not so reversible, at least on time scales that matter to our children. For the sake of our children, and for the sake of our own moral decency, this disinformation campaign should inspire moral outrage.

Anthony,
I just wanted to thank you again for everything you’re doing for us.
Michael.

Who is David Appell? Is he just another blogger or journalist? Apparently, in an excited burst of word-smithing, the poor fool said, ” he knows better than all the professional, study-deep-into-the-night, sweat-the-data, devote-their-lives scientists about all this.”
The problem with experts and professionals is that studies have shown expert opinion to be unreliable, and a professional is simply someone who makes money at a job, not necessarily being good at that profession. Money is the key, here. Nothing more.

bikermailman says:
I know the usual thing about Godwin’s Law, and I’m not going to say anything overt.
“Godwin’s law” is assinine. It is a logical fallacy. Worse, it denies the need to balance the refusal to trivialize against admonition to never forget. When people start talking about criminalizing dissenting opinion, that spade needs to be identified as such. The next totalitarian political movement, whatever that may be, does not deserve a free pass from people trained to reflexively deny that anything could ever be that bad again.

Anthony, Be encouraged and KNOW… “they” actually listen to you! Understanding, however, may take some patience, which remains a steadfast virtue.

Drama queen.

Come between true believers and their mission to save the planet from humanity and humanity from themselves and rage filled hatred is what you get. Its quite a normal reaction from a person who has been infected by the age old illness that has dogged us from the first mud huts to today. Believe and trust and obey and we will take you to the promised land/save you from yourselves/guide you to heaven on earth/lead you into the desert of hardships to find the promised land/etc etc.
He truly believes he can save the world, he has the answers to save humanity if only we would all listen to the holy scriptures, put aside any scepticism and just believe. In his mind the stakes are high and the aim is noble, he truly believes he can save us if only we would put aside doubts and obey the sacred theology.
Saving the planet is a very important mission, nothing and no one can be allowed to stand in the way, those who do are effectively destroying humanity and murdering the planet in the mind of the believer at least. As the fabricated cover of science is stripped away we start to see the real face of the CAGW cult beneath, its nothing new folks. There have been such cults of belief and they have been very busy over the millennia.
If only others would believe and listen and obey and put aside such things as doubts and scepticism and independent rational thought, the group does not like individuals, the group cannot tolerate those who cast doubt on the theology, the group consensus must not be polluted with facts and evidence that contradicts that consensus, the stakes are far too high to introduce doubt, this causes hesitation and hesitation is the brake on immediate action. For thousands of years the war against sceptics and doubters and unbelievers has raged, different theology same methods.

Recently I bought the Stargate SG-1 box, as I got tired of episodes being showed in the wrong order on Swedish television.
A very interesting SciFi TV series based on different religions and social systems. Initially and primarily covering the Egyptian and further on many other well-known including Maya, Norse, Greek, Roman, Zen and Buddism. It also covers the more modern “ideologies” like National Socialism, Communism and even in some episodes they make use of the AGW religion …
Recommended viewing!

this sounds like fun!!!
21 Sept: SMH: Peter Spinks: Climate change: the inside story
To discuss these and related matters, the Royal Society of Victoria is hosting a climate change symposium that opened last night in Melbourne with a free public lecture entitled “Addressing the myths of climate change”…
“The symposium aims to provide a forum where experts can engage with the community about issues without the need for overly technical language or political hype,” says co-organiser Associate Professor Gleadow…
NASA satellite measurements show that coastal regions of the East Antarctic ice sheet, including long stretches of the Australian Antarctic Territory, have been losing about 57 billion tonnes of ice each year for the past three years. The complete loss of the sheet, the world’s biggest expanse of frozen water, would raise sea levels by roughly 50 metres, polar scientists believe.
The West Antarctic ice sheet, in particular, is losing about 132 billion tonnes of ice a year. Global ice losses now contribute an estimated 1.8 millimetres a year to rises in sea level.
Such calculations have given rise to reports suggesting that more than 250,000 homes in Australia could be damaged or lost due to storm surge and sea level rise in coming decades.
Claims that up to 45,000 homes in Victoria alone – worth more than $10 billion – would be threatened by rising sea levels by 2100, were followed by two CSIRO reports that suggest sea levels during storms are likely to be about 15 centimetres higher in 2030 than today.
Another report will consider four sea-level scenarios by 2100, including two based on rises of 80 centimetres, one of 110 centimetres and one of 140 centimetres. Victorian planning regulations currently forecast a rise in sea level of 80centimetres by the end of the century…
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/climate-change-the-inside-story-20120921-26ahf.html

[snip . . OT . . mod]

That man needs a hug 🙂

Perhaps if David was so concerned about the planet he should have walked.
😉

[snip . . ad homs are frowned upon here, even when they are funny and accurate . . mod]
If you ever need security advice Anthony I’d be more than happy to do a little pro bono work.

If only we had listened to the experts. Here is a comment from David Appell’s Quark Soup which should make people tread very carefully before accusing people of crimes against humanity.

Papa Zu said…
I’m sure Paul Ehrlich felt the same way when he was so much more knowledgeable than everyone else on population matters. Paul knew disaster was eminent and tens of millions would die prior to the year 2000. We should have put everyone that disagreed with Paul Ehrlich in prison because they were too stupid to understand the consequences that the expert Paul Ehrlich warned about.
http://davidappell.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-charlesh-problem.html?showComment=1347976245398#c6190801271081039115

A crime might well have happened in the past had governments acted in the face of ‘evidence’ of an impending ice age. The key is to resist the panickers.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/01/time-magazine-and-global-warming/#comment-563520

charlesH is amazing! Well done sir and you should come round here soon.
http://davidappell.blogspot.ca/2012/09/an-idea-unique-to-climate-change.html

Sounds like this is what the likes of Mann & Appell would like!
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Communist_use_of_psychiatric_hospitals_as_political_repression

[snip] If not for the eloquence of his outbursts I may have been more perplexed by the statements! Alas, another [snip] escapes the Asylum. Well provoked AW, please keep it up.
Col Kirk

View from Europe:
David Appell , if the attributed comments are correct, is a nutjob who doesn’t even begin to understand the level of intelligence and absence of fanaticism required to carry out effective scientific work. He exposes his own ignorance, bias stupidity and aggression. Such people are danger to all around them. and contribute nothing.
.

From a discussion I had with him over at Steve Goddard’s blog, I’ve gotten the impression that Appell lacks the most basic math skills. Now I know very smart people who have similar problems with math, but they’re at least smart enough to stay away from subjects that require a minimum of math…

The rant about stay at home American Idol watching Utah tea party types daring to challenge real scientists being guilty of climate crimes doesn’t sound particularly scientific. In fact it is somewhat less convincing than data supporting the theorem and accurate predictions based on that theorem.

Sounds like he’s on the second stage of grief. Cheer up, David! Only three more to go.

Please don’t give these idiots any more publicity. To claim that climate change is not happening flies in the face of everything science and common sense is telling us. However, repeating his words just makes it twice as hard to convince people because some people will read it, go check him out, and then have doubts about what the real truth is.

The question I have is who here has denied the climate is changing? A show of hands, anyone?
To Mr. Appell, please find one quote on this blog from any poster that says they don’t think the climate is changing!
We do however question as to why and what is causing it.
Please, do yourself and all of us a favor and watch Anthony’s PBS interview, but this time, do it sober!!

I enjoyed some of the comments over there and felt compelled to join in with this (posted here in case it’s snipped from there).
“David, would you be able to clarify what you mean by “the nearly unprecedented rate of change…”?
Seems to fall under the same broad category as ‘nearly pregnant’. The rate of change either in unprecedented, or, as appears to be the case, is not unprecedented.
Thanks in advance.”

I think this letter well illustrates how misinformed some members of the warmist camp are about what the sceptics are really saying or questioning in the area of global warming. The sceptics have never denied that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas , only that it is not a pollutant . It is ssential for life to exist on our planet. It was the same case with Muller as well when he claimed that he now believes in global warming . The issue was not that sceptics denied the existence of global warming but what is the prime cause of the warming , what impact if did humans have on climate and how the temperatures were being measured . If it is a crime to speak up about obvious errors in climate science as this letter writer wrongly suggests , then it can be argued by his logic that is also a crime to present false ,unreliable and misleading science and climate predictions to the public especially when using public money.. Since supposedly 97% of climate scientists support global warming claiming man to be the prime or exclusive cause and since temperatures have not risen the last 15 years as predicted by them and many other science predictions that never materialized, it could be a very large and well suported class action case on behalf of the people of this globe against bad climate science .

It’s a beat up. Both sides are throwing out accusations and casting aspersions on the other.
For example, Joanne Nova published an epic rant at http://joannenova.com.au/2011/07/david-archibald-global-warming-is-a-litmus-test-for-our-politicians/. Excerpts include:
Dante said that the darkest recesses of hell are reserved for those who remain neutral at a time of great moral crisis. That time is now, and most of our major companies have condemned themselves to the darkest recesses by their inaction and silence. Then there are those who do worse than that, and actively connive against the Australian people.
“On the 24th of March, the Prime Minister herself provided us with a list of the names of these companies. These are companies who, instead of contributing to greater wealth for all, would rather feed on the shrunken carcass of an enfeebled Australian economy. I will now read the Prime Minister’s list of conniving companies.”
“These are the companies that wish ill on you and your children. They would sell the Australian people into the slavery and oppression of the carbon tax so that they can get their own snouts deeper into the trough. It is your patriotic duty to avoid these companies as much as you can. Withhold the blessing of your custom. If you need petrol, and it is a choice between Shell and some other brand, for Australia’s sake, for your children’s sake, for God’s sake, choose the other brand.
If any of these companies don’t actually support a carbon-constrained economy, they have yet to make the effort to correct that misperception. By their silence, they are complicit. Make no mistake, the carbon tax they wish upon us will devastate the Australian economy. A couple of months ago, a minister of the Federal Government visited the steelworks in Port Kembla and cheerfully, tearlessly considered its closure.
This government is quite happy to sacrifice our greatest industrial enterprise on the altar of this bizarre cult of carbon. These people are remorseless killers of whole industries, and whole communities. Once industries like steel and cement are gone from our shores, no amount of wishing or hoping or endless tears will bring them back again. Skills that have been passed down generations will be lost forever. And in a few short years, Sydney will start having blackouts because nobody will build a new power station while the carbon tax stalks the land.”
So we have the realist side talking about:
Remorseless killers
Complicit…will devastate
darkest recess of hell
connive against people
feed on the shrunken carcass
darkest recess of hell
Both sides should stop publishing this tripe. By rebroadcasting it, WUWT is giving it air. Joanne Nova never should have published that other diatribe, but she is a notorious David Archibald, bootlicker.

The Australian treasurer has said that the greatest danger to world prosperity is elements of the Republican party in the US.
REPLY: And many people in the United States think that that the greatest danger to world prosperity is academics that don’t have a clue how the world works (or have done work) outside the University, telling us how to live – Anthony

This is what’s great about freedom of speech! We get to hear rants like this from the self anointed experts who claim to walk a higher moral plane, thus crushing their own credibility.
(Oh, and my WiFi SSD names come from “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy”)

Owen sez:
“I think those who try to medicalize or criminalize dissent ae dangerous, and should be kept away from power or sharp objects. If they are in the United States, they need a good course on the first amendment, because as much as they try to deny it, we are free to think what we want, but when they try to impose their “beliefs” on the rest of us by extra-constitutional means, that is what the second amendment to the US Constitution was for! Threats to life and liberty should be taken seriously by all.”
Having been involved in democratic party politics for decades, I know these people. That is why I recognize that they have gone off the rails.
Harvard professor Cass Sunstein recently concluded his stint as Regulatory Czar. He published a paper in 2008 on “Conspiracy Theories.” You can go look this up. In this paper, he considers various avenues the govt might take to combat “conspiracy theories,” such as there is no AGW.
People, we need to realize that this is total “1984:” the govt decides what is OK for you to think.
And speaking of the Constitution, Sunstein has also written a book called “The Partial Consitution.” Go order a used copy – they are cheap.
In this, he argues that the Constitution needs to be significantly re-written.
You think I am kidding.
He is not the only one with this idea. The elitist totalitarians are really worried that it is a problem to allow people to think for themselves.
Here is a prominent, undisguised website, based on book of same name, where their concerns over the Constitution are aired:
http://constitution2020.org/
Here is another:
http://www.acslaw.org/publications/books/keeping-faith-with-the-constitution
Liu is on California’s Supreme Court, and may be short-list for U.S. Supreme Court, depending on whether we decide to vote for these tyrants or not.
Here is their rhetoric: they somehow discern what the original authors of the Constitution believed; they note that times have changed; they note that the Constitution fits the old days but not the current day; they decide that a group of lawyers from elitist liberal law school need to get together to rewrite the Constitution to get it back to what the Founding Fathers believed, according to their interpretation.
They note that since society has changed, the Constitution has ended up favoring extreme right wing people who want to cling to their guns and religion.
Yes, the enemy is everyday people.
In the U.S., how many people hold a believe in a recognized, organized religion? A lot.
How many people own guns?
A lot.
In the rarified world, those people are the enemy.
This is the mythological BAD GUY against whom Appel rants.
The apocalyptic cult needs a good/evil bad guy.
Wha? the bad guy is my neighbor? My whole neighborhood? The tea Party?
Coulda fooled me.
I am not a Tea Partier, but my vision of America can accomodate them, I am not ready for the jackboots to lock them up.
My America can handle marxists and those who want to rewrite the Constitution.
Let’s just be up-front about it.
If you are unaware that there is a major political movement to rewrite the Constitution, go check out these noted sources.

You can tell a lot about someone from the friends they keep. You can sometimes tell even more from the enemies they make. I hope to have enemies like Appel some day.

thecomfortablynumb says:
September 21, 2012 at 4:45 am:
“To claim that climate change is not happening flies in the face of everything science and common sense is telling us.”
========================================================
Thecomfortablynumb, maybe your common sense needs some enhancement. Because not everything scientists say is science. It is, probably, in most cases, but there have been some exceptions throughout the history, and “climate science” is one of them.

Can someone explain how exactly 5 CO2 molecules in 10,000 (other molecules in air) “traps” more heat than 4 in 10,000. What is the physics in this statement??
I would appreciate knowing…

I don’t regard this as funny.
It is a serious allegation for which Appell is trying to get traction.
To speak against the Global Warming Money Redistribution Scheme WILL be a crime in some locals and Watts is in their sites without any question.

Are climate crimes dealt with in Climate Court? Or rather by a Kangaroo Court?

Doug S says:
September 20, 2012 at 5:36 pm
…..Statements like “global warming alarmism is a big business and should be looked at with a skeptical lens but I believe in gay marriage.”
————————————-
I believe in ‘free choice’ and I chose to believe it’s normal for climate to change.

“I think the real crime Mr. Appell thinks I’m guilty of is existing, having an opinion, and daring to write about it.”
———————————
I think you’re right sir – it’s basically a thought crime. Having an opinion about certain things is becoming increasingly dangerous these days – skepticism of any official story is not encouraged by the establishment, let’s say.
Freedom of speech on the internet and social media is under threat, IMO, and the front line is moving closer to you. Watch out for smears, dirty tricks and all the rest. They simply don’t like the idea of ordinary citizens getting clued up on a few simple facts which blow away the official story – for exampled the Stern report – because, well, there’s an awful lot of money involved in the ‘greening of econnomies’ BS. It’s a business to these people and they are not going to let anybody intefere with their business or their business plans. Period (as you Americans say).
Existing as well – there’s a lot of propaganda out there just now (in the last several years) telling us how overpopulated the world is. So yeah, you’re guilty on all counts Mr. Watts – you exist, you have an opinion and you write about it on the internet. You’re a real bad guy!

This is not craziness as in silliness. It is the dogmatic craziness of somebody whose insecure beliefs depend on caricaturing opponents as intellectual inferiors. David Appell has made no effort to understand the ideas of those he disagrees with, nor their moral values, nor their beliefs about the philosophy of science.
At present Prof Stephen Lewandowsky is in a hole and he keeps on digging. He is similarly unable to attribute anything in what others say. So when he proclaims he superiority in statistical analysis over the excel pivot table “analysts” he uses a misleading graph cooked up by his best mate.
http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewandowskySEM.html

Please pardon my intemperate comment earlier of not knowing about David Appell. I committed the unpardonable crime of not Googling objects and subjects. Well, let me rectify that right now.
From David Appell’s personal web site in his very own words.
“ I’m a freelance writer living in Salem, Oregon, specializing in the physical sciences, technology, and the environment. My work has appeared in Scientific American, Physics World, Audubon, New Scientist, Wired, Salon, Popular Science, Nature, Discover, The Boston Globe, The San Francisco Chronicle, Physical Review Focus, Discovery Channel Online, Science, and many other publications, and on the syndicated radio program The Weather Notebook .
I have a B.S. in mathematics and physics from the University of New Mexico, and an M.A. and Ph.D. in physics from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. I’ve also done graduate work in the creative writing department at Arizona State University. ”
Please accept my apology for not knowing that Mr Appell is a little known scientist masquerading as a writer. It appears he doesn’t know what he is. Is he a scientist? Given a PhD, certainly he has a career in physics, or should have. What happened on the road to his scientific perdition?
Is he a writer? Isaac Asimov he is not.
He kind of looks like Chum-Lee on the television series “Pawn Stars”. Maybe he is a Hollywood star?

Gunga Din says: September 21, 2012 at 8:03 am
If you’ve ever considered wearing a gas mask to capture your own CO2 emissions, you might be a Green-neck.
And if you’ve ever considered putting a plastic bag over your head to capture your own CO2 emissions, you might be a Green-neck MENSA member.

From a comment by JohnB to Appell’s rant:
‘David also suggests considering the effect of an extra 1 part in 10,000 of CO2. Yes, it must make a difference. But also David, the tropic are contracting at about 1 mile per year, Cancer is moving South and Capricorn is moving north, thus concentrating the Suns rays on a smaller and smaller part of the Earths surface each year.
Now the tropics are only 1,600 odd miles from the Equator so this intensification is 1 part in 1,600, almost an order of magnitude larger. Obviously since the angle of incidence is getting smaller then more energy is reaching the surface each year and must also cause warming. ‘
Don’t fully grasp this, but sounds potentially quite interesting. Can anyone here simplify this, make the concept more easily understandable? Don’t recall this being considered as a source of warming……..

Appell, and people like him, are the reason that there is a Tea Party. My father thought that I would never amount to anything, how proud he would be to learn that I had managed to become a threat to the entire human race!

Not only is CO2 not a climate driver, through the GHG theory, the GHG theory is complete rubbish and not required to cause the extra heat calculated to be needed for out ”normal” temperature.