Thanks to John Cook for boosting the “Our Climate” app

OurClimate for iPhone - click for details

OurClimate - click for details

WUWT readers may recall last week that the “Our Climate” iPhone app was released and announced here. It has quickly become a best seller on the iTunes store.

It has also quickly become a target.

John Cook, a generally reasonable Aussie who runs a blog oddly titled “skepticalscience” (odd, since it isn’t skeptical, but pushes the consensus) also has an iPhone app. Knowing that he wouldn’t get enough traffic on his blog to effectively smack down this new informational threat, he turned to the Guardian, and was immediately offered a guest essay there.

The title? Climate change denial? There’s an app for that.

How sad that Cook and the Guardian had to resort to such a cheap shot.

Problem is, that essay appears to have backfired as “Our Climate” continues to grow. Right after that Guardian piece by Cook, downloads surged. So much in fact, Apple itself is even promoting it on the iTunes (installed Mac and PC application) front page now!

Have a look:

click to enlarge

I hate it when that happens.

There are more than 230,000 Apps in the App store – Only 40 Apps are featured in this front page category at any time, so this is a singular achievement and opportunity for the truly skeptical side of the story to be heard.

Get the app for yourself: http://itunes.apple.com/app/our-climate/id371849150?mt=8

Don’t have an iPhone? Tell a friend who does.

And for the record, I don’t make a dime from this. I have no ownership or revenue sharing in it whatsoever.

As an aside, I wonder if Cook has seen the latest Gallup poll on Global Warming in  Australia?

Advertisements

89 thoughts on “Thanks to John Cook for boosting the “Our Climate” app

  1. Maybe the Guardian readership was so information-starved that they were eager to find out about the skeptical viewpoint via the app.

  2. Fantastic! just goes to show that no matter what propaganda they spin, the truth will be heard.

  3. Climate change denial? There’s an app for that.

    The humor shouldn’t be missed that an app that merely displays climate data would be termed an app for “climate change denial” by Cook. LOL.

  4. Anthony, you don’t get a cut of the app sales? Really? I think you should have negotiated for a share. At least some cut of revenue from downloads that originated from your site. You deserve it.

  5. When given handed a choice between seeing for yourself versus taking someone else’s word for it…
    especially when loud voices have been crying impending doom and demanding ransom money…
    Oh no… I can’t look….NOT.

  6. I concur with the above, would like to see an app for other cell phones for those of us who have no reason to, but just do not like apple.

  7. Dear Anthony, that’s an amusing hypothesis on causation. Do you actually believe that the title page inclusion was a consequence of John Cook’s diatribe in the Guardian blogs? I actually had the same hypothesis but it looked so crazy that I didn’t write it to Paul, especially because it would imply that I take credit for it – it was me who told John Cook about the Our Climate app and he immediately downloaded it. ;-)

    REPLY: It just goes to show that thread theory is superior to string theory. ;-) – Anthony

  8. from that gallup poll link-

    ” The accusation that CRU was manipulating the data to inflate the case for human-caused climate change has since been refuted”

    and that describes the gallup poll.

    in a way it is good that they continue down this path of attempting to manipulate the course of information, because it creates a very strong reaction with people who ordinarily would not care. most people would be aware of the cru issue, and those that did not care about it that much, but now are told that what they did in fact read was in fact ‘nothing to see here’ will definitely see a problem with the so called authoritative view. a whitewash will, in the end, just create more interest in the subject meaning more exposure for sites such as this.

  9. I’d also like to add a request for an android version. It would be handy, to say the least. :)

  10. Anthony

    I know you like us to play nice. But John Cook is an *rse and his site is a crock. Did either he or The Grauniad approach you for your two penn’orth?

    I thought not.

    But there are some really good Australian sites (as you certainly know). One that never seems to get a plug is John Ray’s http://antigreen.blogspot.com/

    Whilst I don’t go there as often as I did (not enough hours in the day) he always has something of interest and at least his site does what is says on the tin.

    Skeptical Science? Hooey.

  11. I see I even get a mention in the comments section of the Guardian article…labeled as a pseudo-Scientist. While not proclaiming to be a scientist I am sure Leif will be happy. :)

  12. Anthony;
    I know that you are extremely busy and I greatly appreciate WUWT. Might it be possible to have the “Our Climate” people program your “Widget”. As I said before, I would happily pay $10.00 for it, especially if you got a cut.

  13. I don’t trust their poll numbers either.
    It’s a lot easier to jiggle poll numbers, than jiggle temp numbers, and we all know how easily they can do that last one.

    My family is not the brightest bulbs either, and not a one of them believe any of this garbage. Don’t know any friends or other people that do either.

    And them Gallup comes out with some front loaded poll, that doesn’t even give people the “BS” option.

  14. Thus proving there’s no such thing as bad publicity ;). Anyway, congratulations on the app’s success, and I would like to add my vote for an Android.

  15. Astonishing.

    “that sceptics focus on small pieces of the puzzle while neglecting the full body of evidence.”

    When we hear statements like “the warmest year on record,” the record upon which the statement is based is only the surface record going back to 1880. They leave out the DMI high Arctic mean temps, or the Antarctic Sea Ice Extent, etc.

    The writer wrote:
    “10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes.”

    Funny thing is, not all those topics are showing the kind of record warming they talk about.

    And when he ventures into the realm of “many peer-reviewed studies into past climate change,” he predictably omits the big one — the Vostock Ice Core which showed that warming predates CO2 rise by 600-800 years.

    Simply astonishing.

  16. Snowlover123 says:

    Where’s the app for the AGW alarmists? Correction. There is none. :)

    John Cook, author of that article, has an iPhone app based on his skeptical science website in support of AGW (which is free by the way).

    How do get the Our Climate app without an iPhone?

  17. There is quite a discussion in the comments part of the Guardian article linked in the story above regarding the sales ranking. Cook was touting a wonderful UK overall ranking of 584 last week for his app. Unfortunately, the most recent ranking had it “too low to rank.” Meanwhile, Our Climate continues to gain a strong following.

  18. “SkepticalScience” is honesty-challenged from the get-go: the name of Cook’s blog is a lie, isn’t it?

    Every scientist understands that skepticism is at the heart of the Scientific Method, and every honest scientist is a skeptic first, last and always.

    John Cook is merely another climate alarmist spreading his subsidized scare propaganda. Like others on the take, he does not have a skeptical bone in his body. He is selling pseudo-science.

    The great thing about WUWT is the fact that this site reaches millions of people, while Cook mopes in the corner sucking his thumb and wishing more people would buy into his climate alarmist propaganda. On the bright side, at least he isn’t the venomous Soros lap dog Joe Romm, even if they do both get the same funding.

    If blogs like the Guardian, RealClimate, climate progress and others would tolerate different points of view like WUWT does, their traffic numbers would greatly improve. But they can not allow the truth to be told; it would defeat their whole purpose of keeping the $billions flowing into the pockets of those corrupt scientists who have jettisoned the Scientific Method for taxpayer loot, and helping to pass bogus, anti-taxpayer legislation like Cap & Trade. and selling out our sovereignty to the totally corrupt UN, with its scheme for a “World Tax.”

    WUWT’s 50 million hits in only 3 years shows that honesty is more than its own reward. John Cook should try it for a change. [Romm, OTOH, is a hopeless Soros hand puppet. And Michael Mann’s RealClimate? Pf-f-f-f-t]

  19. I see several requests for this app to be ported to Android.

    Just thought I would mention those of us with Blackberries would be interested too.

    Keep up the good work.

  20. Here is one proven theory.

    First they ignore you.
    Then they laugh at you.
    Next they fight you.
    Then you win.

    Congratulations Anthony.

  21. Paul Clark says…

    John Cook, author of that article, has an iPhone app based on his skeptical science website in support of AGW (which is free by the way).

    How do get the Our Climate app without an iPhone?

    Paul, even if they did had an app, it’s probably buried waaay in the back. WUWT’s app is on the front page, as you saw. Is theirs?

    Also, you can go and purchase the app on I-Tunes.

    -Snowlover123

  22. Snigger, no really, Bwahahaha!

    Is it any wonder the thermogedonists dodge any form of debate when a little balance is offered to us cattle we grab it with both hands?

    I prefer HTC for my handset, but it has full internet access and my favourite sites saved so an “app”, revolting term, is not necessary.

    For the righteous, ( you know who you are, Anu, Gates and clan ), can I suggest you teach your representatives are taught point the gun away from their feet. ROTFL

  23. Lubos… I see you are very popular at The Guardian (i.e. two censored posts). Did you blaspheme by pointing out the facts in the debate?

  24. I like how the Gallup poll includes the qualification that it was “Asked of Australian adults who are aware of climate change“. Fair enough. So why does the poll show that 2 percent of the adults polled (in 2010) responded that they “have not heard of climate change“? How can someone be aware of something they’ve never heard of?

  25. Dear Lubos Motl, what have you written in the comments? Most of them are censured by the guardian :-)
    This iPhone App has some flaws, mainly related with the organization of the contents, but it’s a great effort to contradict the alarmist indoctrination. The guardian article is a one more poor attempt to discredit climate realists. I don’t know what was the idea of the journalist but certainly gave a nice promotion to the app.
    The ingenuity and ignorance of the journalist (sorry for the harsh words), are resumed in this his own phrase “The cherrypicking nature of climate skepticism leads to an interesting phenomenon – sceptic arguments frequently contradict each other. One week, we’re told El Nino is the cause. Next week, it’s cosmic rays. No wait, we’re cooling… Hold on, it’s warming again, but this time, it’s because of CFCs. Could anyone compile the many sceptic arguments into a single app without a mess of contradictions?”
    It’s clear to me that this guy does not know many of the skeptical arguments or does not have any idea of what he is talking about.

  26. “It just goes to show that thread theory is superior to string theory. ;-) – Anthony”

    Well, Anthony, if *it* has these implications, then *it* must be wrong, whatever *it* is! ;-)

  27. Thank you all for your interest in the App. We’re really touched and it has been a great week!

    Based on your feedback over the past week, we are now looking at how to port the software to the Android and Blackberry platforms.

    All the best

    Paul

  28. Sorry guys.I downloaded the app from Skeptial Science and it just repeats all the stuff that WUWT has been refuting for the last three years.

  29. I don’t own an Iphone, but I hope this app makes a ton of $$$$.

    Yes, all publicity is good.

    Now if there can just be a wardrobe malfunction by Spears or Lohan, and an Iphone pops out with “Our Climate” running………..

  30. Beware though – it may be just a matter of time before the Climate Bullies turn on iTunes and Apple for promoting it. They would turn from promoter to denigrator in the blink of an eye if they thought their interests were threatened.

    Still, as we have seen, denigration can have the opposite-to-the-desired affect, so what am I worrying about!

  31. It’s odd that the paper took little regard of UK’s election campaign. When the Libdems started doing OK, the right wing press ran a story implying the Libdem leader was a nazi. Far from destroying his appeal, the public were outraged.

    Moral: if you trash something, be sure you’re on sure ground.

  32. I would love to download this app but until my check from Big Oil arrives, I can’t afford an iPhone.

  33. I don’t like John Cook. Like Anthony says, his site is supposed to be ‘skeptical’ but is anything but that. He has a habit of erasing your comments if it does not fit his ideas.

  34. Maybe they can create an app for GISTemp…ummm…but that would mean that some poor app programmer would have to be able to decipher what it really does…ehhh, scratch that idea…

  35. If the Earth were to be going through Climate Change caused by man, the Earth would respond by sterilizing the imperfection.
    Releasing a few gigatons of C02 that already exists won’t do that.
    There isn’t enough of it.
    It would take deliberate action directed at forcing the weather to get at the climate.
    Like Oppenheimer said, the atomic bomb formula wasn’t the secret, the secrect was that it works.
    So too are operations to ‘enhance’ the weather. It works too. Climate operations (bombs) are possible.
    Both suffer from unintended consequences that bode ill for civilization.
    Both operate under chain-reactions. Both have no undo button.
    Nuclear Winter, Climate Operation Winter.
    DO NOT OPEN. Lid in non-replaceable.
    Isn’t 1 Pandorra’s Box enough?

  36. It’s an outrage! I am being discriminated against!

    I am a minority with a Blackberry and there is no app for my ilk.

    That PROVES it! You are against us because we have BLACKberries!

    (Hey-it’s a JOKE! Lighten up!)

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack (Jon Jewett’s evil twin)

  37. Over at http://www.huffingtonpost.com, I am actually being butchered for speaking the truth. My moniker at Huff’N’Puff is “Mogamboguru” – (No secrets to keep here).

    When I posted:

    “ICE BREAKER”
    “Giant Ice Island Breaks Off Greenland.. Largest Chunk Since 1962″ (Citing the title of the article I am commenting on) So it happened back in 1962, already – when Carl Sagan was running about, propagating the next ice age was coming soon.

    Did it happen? Nope.

    What has changed since then? Nothing.

    So everything still is, like it was back in 1962: From time to time, glaciers shed icebergs.

    Wow. Big deal.”

    – on the thread ” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/07/petermann-glacier-giant-i_n_674326.html

    – I received the following answers:

    a. “”What has changed since then? Nothing.”
    Actually technology, which informs our view of such matters, has grown by leaps and bounds since 1962.”

    and

    b. “”What has changed since then?” Millions of tons of carbon from burning fossil fuels.”

    and

    c. “When did you become a right wing anti-intellectual?
    It’s rather unbecoming.”

    Well – educating people seems to be MUCH, MUCH more difficult than indoctrinating them, doesn’t it? Way to go, WUWT, way to go. Keep up the facts and keep up the fight!

  38. David, UK says:
    August 7, 2010 at 11:01 am
    Beware though – it may be just a matter of time before the Climate Bullies turn on iTunes and Apple for promoting it. They would turn from promoter to denigrator in the blink of an eye if they thought their interests were threatened. . .

    Steve Jobs and company are died-in-the-wool establishment liberals (the Goracle is on their board), so it surprises me that they have not already heeded the alarms of The Consensus and put the kibosh on “Our Climate.”

    And yes, Anthony, you should get a cut in return for promoting it. Nothing wrong with a little capitalism.

    /Mr Lynn

  39. “The accusation that CRU was manipulating the data to inflate the case for human-caused climate change has since been refuted.”
    LOL! Now the word “refute” can also mean “to whitewash”.
    Looking at the recent surveys, the three little whitewashes did nothing to restore the public confidence. But everyone knew that this was going to be a long, painful death for the AGW religion.

    Tomorrow I have something on German attitudes. A bit anecdotal, but I think it sends a message.

  40. I’ll get the app when I buy an iPad later this year. I’m waiting for the next upgrade… :)

  41. Paul at Aeris Systems

    I see no contact point on your web page.

    John Cook has set up an app to promote his Skeptical Science rebuttals (“What the Science Says”) of “skeptic arguments”.

    I would like to offer a first attempt at answering all of Skeptical Science’s faux rebuttals, to add to your app. I know I can do it in outline at least. Email me if you are interested. Click my name to get the feel of what I’ve already done, and to get my email contact point.

    If my friend Rich Ritter can play ball, it occurs to me we might be able to set up a wiki-format skeptics’ “consensus” of replies to each of these faux rebuttals, open to all real skeptics to improve.

    In the case of this happening, we would need an extra page explaining why we were choosing to go down the same route of excluding one’s challengers, as RC have done: special circumstances, only necessitated by the current stance of the official science bodies, RC, and Wikipedia.

  42. I’ve always maintained that the true warmistas are the skeptics best friend. Give them free rein, I say old chap!

  43. If Climate Change is so bad, why isn’t there a Climate Change Test Ban Treaty?
    There are agenices that practice “enhancement”, and the experiments get bigger all the time.
    The US is not the only country doing this.
    Why aren’t the Climate Change activists challenging them?

  44. John Cook is a dimwit. Does he not realise the number of Warmists who will end up visiting WUWT and having their eyes opened for the first time? Backfire!!

    REPLY: I don’t think he’s a ‘dimwit’ by any means, and it’s really not a label you should be using. He’s just not very good at understanding mass media and communications, like most scientists. – Anthony

  45. orkneygal says:
    August 7, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    I not even allowed to sign in at Cook’s site anymore.

    I’ve very proud of that :~)
    ——————————————————————

    You’ve got every reason to be proud of yourself, orkneygal.

    Congrats! ;-)

  46. Jimbo says:
    August 7, 2010 at 3:41 pm

    John Cook is a dimwit. Does he not realise the number of Warmists who will end up visiting WUWT and having their eyes opened for the first time? Backfire!!

    REPLY: I don’t think he’s a ‘dimwit’ by any means, and it’s really not a label you should be using. He’s just not very good at understanding mass media and communications, like most scientists. – Anthony
    —-
    Sorry. I just lost my rag. It happens from time to time due to frustration and anger. :o(

  47. The iphone is a junk device that does not support flash, java or rather just about anything to make the internet actually useful. You are stuck with crappy AT&T for service and the battery on the original phone had to be soldered in, replaceable batteries are so 1990s I guess. Who buys this crap?

  48. Henry Pool says “I don’t like John Cook. ”

    Whether you like John Cook or not is pretty irrelevant, this is not a popularity contest. I have to say if this is representative of the level of your posts then it’s hardly surprising you get deleted.

    Skepticalscience.com is fine. Alot like WUWT, in between the polemical stuff there’s pointers to some of the new science aswell as dissections and critiques, all worth reading expect for the most close-minded.

    My experience in two years of posting questioning/denier stuff on that website has been very few deletions, mostly when I quoted from the climategate e-mails or went OT. Stick to the science and avoid personnal insults and you’ll be fine no matter what’s your viewpoint. John himself is always level headed in his replies.

  49. I think that one of the visitors with more disposable income offer to set up a link that gives the app away for free to first time visitors (that Register) to WUWT. Sure they have to have an iphone, but just think about the exposure.
    Just re-read this and laughed. Exposure! It’s only the weather.

  50. SkepticalScience.com is an excellent resource and probably has the best layout of any climate change site. His explanation for the site’s name is actually quite persuasive – many self-described skeptics on this website and others are far too willing to accept any viewpoint which confirms their beliefs, valid or not.

  51. For the record I think the “our climate” app is a great idea as many consumers own an iphone, even if I never would but if I did this is one of the apps I would buy.

  52. It was a properly annotated and cross referenced comment of peer-reviewed literature concerning the fact the the MWP was global, synchronous and much warmer than today that got me knobbed at Cook’s site, I think.

    My comments on that topic never saw the light of day and other comments that I had made were “disappeared”.

  53. That is so funny, and just so right IMO!

    The gallup poll results have an interesting twist. The 21% who said “both” human activities and natural causes are to blame for the recent warming were ‘voluntary’ responses. This means when asked ‘does A or B cause C’ they replied ‘both’ without prompting. This is heartening as it implies people are really forming their own opinions rather than being media led.

  54. Congratulations again to all those involved with promoting this app.

    If possible, please work on an Android and Blackberry app for all those of us who prefer a better technology alternative to Apple. I will buy the app when it is available for Android devices.

  55. Cook the skeptic says: “the temperature adjustments only applied to temperatures in 48 U.S. states. As the USA comprises only 2% of the globe, this has had INFINITESIMAL effect on global trends.” (http://www.skepticalscience.com/1934-hottest-year-on-record.htm)

    Wikipedia disagrees: “In common speech, an infinitesimal object is an object which is smaller than any feasible measurement, hence not zero size, but so small that it cannot be distinguished from zero by any available means.”

    Cook can’t distinguish Two Hundredths from Zero. How irrational of him. He’s simply a hyperbolic doom-monger.

    I, for one, will always remain rationally skeptical, and look at all the evidence.

  56. I’m going to assume that Mr. Cook is a well-intentioned person.

    He says he’s motivated for the sake of his young daughter. Great — all the more reason he should want to get it right.

    I was fascinated by his site’s list of 119 reasons given by “skeptics,” as well as his rather cursory dismissal of each. For instance his answer to the consensus matter is that “95% of climatologists support AGW”. No where do I see any discussion that addresses the fact that science is not decided by consensus.

    In that same vein (in my opinion as a physicist) his list of 119 reasons does NOT include the number one concern about AGW! How can it be that in such an extensive list that the most important concern is not identified?

    Maybe it’s partly our fault. In response to the AGW claims it seems that good sites like this tend to respond with a shotgun approach, vs a rifle. Look at the recent articles in WUWT. They cover an exceptionally diverse list of topics.

    That’s good in some ways, but it’s bad if it leads any of us from losing our focus.

    So what is the number one concern about AGW?

    The answer lies in what science is all about.

    Science is NOT a collection of data. Science is a PROCESS.

    When an answer (e.g. AGW) is proposed to a technical problem it is entirely up to the proponents to subject it to the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

    This has NOT been done — and is the number one deficiency of the AGW hypothesis.

    What is happening is that AGW proponents are actually undermining real science in that they are asserting that “consensus” trumps the Scientific Method, that computer models are superior to empirical evidence, that the precautionary principle justifies specious extrapolation, that “Post Normal Science” is a better way of resolving technical issues, etc., etc.

    In a word: this is bunk.

    The Scientific Method is at the core of real science. Until AGW (and other illegitimate offspring — e.g. wind energy) are truly subjected to the Scientific Method they remain firmly in the category of being unproven hypotheses.

    We simply must keep this is mind as the most fundamental of all issues here.

  57. Despite my previous request for an iPad version I just discovered that when I plugged in my new iPad and registered it via iTunes that it downloaded the Climate app to it automatically even though I got it for my phone five days ago. (OK, I’m a bit slow… but I mean well).
    So, Richard deSousa (August 7, 2010 1:20 pm) get the iPad. If you’re like me, with aging eyes and reading glasses strewn around the house, this device makes it much easier to read online content than the iPhone. The more I use it, the more I am impressed.
    The only changes I would like to see made to the app is to have it rotate to a landscape format instead of the static portrait position, and include a Sea Ice subsection in Climate 101.

  58. Sean Peake: I believe you should be able to install the App on as many as five devices around the home. We do actually have a sea-ice extent section in the Data section of the Climate 101 tutorials (5th choice on main table). If you drill down into “The Ocean” you will find some coverage there.

    We don’t (yet) do the real-time updates – we are working on that right now..

  59. Our Climate is now the Number 1 Weather App in Four iTunes App Stores:

    1. India
    1. Hong Kong
    1. Brazil
    1. Malaysia

    Also number 2 in:

    2. Canada
    2. Turkey
    2. Singapore

    Number 3 in:

    3. UK
    3. Panama
    3. Pakistan

    And:

    4. USA

  60. If the Obama regime gets its way, not only won’t there be Android and Blackberry versions of the “Our Climate” app, the iPhone version will be banned because it discriminates against the blind.

  61. Publish an Android app, please.

    In a related note I don’t think it is possible to understate the level of polarisation around AGW is in Australia. It is arguably part of why the prime minister got replaced and definitely why the leader of the opposition was deposed.

    It’s the sort of situation where you have alot of people who will financially demanding irrefutable evidence that there is a man made problem on one side and alot of people who are scared demanding irrefutable evidence that there isn’t a man made problem on the other.

    To be honest it has more to do with the two speed economy and resources management than anything else but as no one wants to just come out and say that they focus on AGW..

  62. Marketing Support Request:

    If any of you have purchased the App on the US iTunes store, it would be great if you refresh your review and/or rating of the App on the App Store.

    Since we pushed out the recent minor content update, some of your great comments have fallen into the “All Versions” bucket and are now not immediately visible to new prospective users.

    It also appears we have annoyed the AGW crowd somewhat, as they have started to post some unreasonable (and in my view, unfair) negative comments.

    Therefore, if you have something positive to say about the App, it would be great if you could do a quick review of the App directly on the iTunes App Store.

    Every little bit of positive feedback helps persuade another doubter to get the App. Any help here you provide here would be great!

  63. Will there be apps for different platforms. I use Windows Mobile 6.5 What about BB, Android etc.

  64. Paul@Aeris
    Another request: can you improve the screen resolution on docs that are enlarged using the 2x button? They are too fuzzy for these old eyes. Thanks

  65. John droz, jr. says:
    August 8, 2010 at 5:21 am
    “I was fascinated by his site’s list of 119 reasons given by “skeptics,” as well as his rather cursory dismissal of each. ”

    Did you actually look behind the ‘cursory dismissal’s? To see the reams of evidence and publications backing John’s work up? You are free to disagree, but don’t dismiss without checking your facts.

    “When an answer (e.g. AGW) is proposed to a technical problem it is entirely up to the proponents to subject it to the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.
    This has NOT been done — and is the number one deficiency of the AGW hypothesis.”

    That’s just nonsense. But if you really believe that’s the #1 deficiency, then advantage Mr. Cook.

    What is often amazing here is the overarching theme that seems to triumph as these posts and comments develop: all data is wrong if it suggests something other than what we already believe. Is that proper scientific method? Or is it better to look at evidence, put chains of logic together and emerge at a consistent explanation?

    So maybe the #1 deficiency of anti-AGW is this: if there is any truth at all to rising temperatures, ice melt, drought, wildfires, habitat loss, sea level rise, etc … ie, the mounds of evidence compiled at Cook’s website … AND it is not anthropogenic, what’s causing it? And, as you stipulate, your answer had best follow scientific methodology.

  66. The truth is that oil is running out. And this fairy-tale of global warming is to keep us in the illusion we live in because there is going to be alot of changes going around.

Comments are closed.