Alek O. Komarnitsky writes:
Anna Rose’s “Madlands – A Journey to Change the Mind of a Climate Sceptic” got featured on Photoshop Disasters. (After looking at the cover, it is easy to see why- Anthony)
At least they don’t have Hurricanes rotating the wrong way – ala Al Gore.
=====================================================
If you can judge a book by its cover, the book itself isn’t likely to be much better.
Australia seems to be quite a hotbed of anti-scepticsim these days. We have Lewandowsky try to paint us all as nutters with shoddy surveys full of fake data, and Anna Rose trying to convert us.
I expect pods in the back of a truck next.
My 12 year old daughter could design a better cover than that. Fear not, we’re up against morons. The funny thing about Photoshop is the fact that it announces itself when someone shallow and devoid of imagination tries to use it.
The polar bear isn’t hungry because he’s already had a fine meal. Yummy! Loins of corn-fed long pig!
Such a journey IMO would be very short. It would only look at AGW contrary data and marvel at the paucity thereof.
I’m beginning to think it’s not malice that the warmists harbor….it’s just that they’re too stupid to learn anything.
A new and improved, upgraded brand of retard.
“…creatures and authors displaced by climate change…”
Just how many authors have been displaced by climate change? I think we should be told.
How do you change the mind of a skeptic anyway? Perhaps some sort of brain injury that erases all knowledge that doesn’t fit the CAGW meme would do it. Other than that, I don’t see it happening. I mean what would it take to change my mind other than not knowing about LIA, 70’s Ice Age Scare, missing hot spot, logarithmic CO2 heat flux, logarithmic relation between heat flux and temperature, negative feedbacks (thermostats), geologic pre-history of the planet’s climate, lack of correlation between CO2 and temperature, recent plateauing of global average temperature, recent peaking of ocean “heat content”, recent hiatus of stratospheric temperature drop, (mis)behavior of “scientists” supporting CAGW, the conflicts of interests of those supporting action on climate change, the lack of behavior reflecting a belief in CAGW from those that support action on CAGW?
So, here’s what it would take to change my mind:
1) The Zohnerism has to stop, showing supportive facts while leaving out non-supporting facts demonstrations an advocacy (bias) as opposed to objective information.
2) The suppression by any means of contrary conclusions must stop.
3) The funding, publishing, and acknowledgment biases must stop.
4) The appearance of the hot spot and a resurgence of stratospheric cooling.
5) Compelling observational or experimentally based evidence that feedbacks enhance warming globally.
6) Compelling observational or experimentally based evidence that warming is net detrimental globally.
7) Compelling observational or experimentally derived evidence that the climate is not either an amalgamation of coupled damped oscillating systems or a chaotic system with two strange attractors.
8) Those advocating I do with less, DO with less themselves FIRST. (Lead by example.)
9) Encourage debate and discussion.
10) Be civil. (Incivility often reveals deception or weak position.)