Tom Nelson reports on some disturbed thinking – From an epic rant by warmist David Appell:
“Are Anthony Watts and Marc Morano and Tom Nelson and Steve Goddard smart enough to be guilty of climate crimes? I think so”
Quark Soup by David Appell: The CharlesH Problem
But CharlesH, this idiot, this — I’m sorry — this fucking idiot who sits home and probably watches America’s [sic] Idol in the evening, who has probably never read a science paper in his life, really, truly, somehow honestly thinks he knows better than all the professional, study-deep-into-the-night, sweat-the-data, devote-their-lives scientists about all this.
What can you possibly say about such a person? This person — CharlesH — now threatens civilization.
Think about that — ignorance from Tea Party types in rural Utah threatens the well-being of the entire human race.
…
I don’t know. Donald Brown, the philosopher at Penn State who has been writing about the ethics of climate change for well over a decade — I interviewed him in the early 2000s — thinks they are perhaps guilty of crimes against humanity.
Are they? 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.
When I profiled Michael Mann for Scientific American, he said he thought it would eventually be illegal to deny climate change. I had doubts about that, but maybe.
…It’s obvious (barely) they’re not smart enough to be so evil…
…
None of them has much of a science background, if any. I mean, please.
And CharlesH, who clearly knows no science either.
But on the shoulders of these idiots, fools, and incoherent minds our future seems to turn, if only just a bit, if only in the blogosphere. And they are probably proud of this, somehow.
…
But them, still, I think: CO2 is a greenhouse gas. 5 molecules per 10,000 trap more heat than 4 per 10,000, or even three.
On that small divide, our future lies. One molecule out of 10,000.
…
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.
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.
There’s also a transcript here
I think the real crime Mr. Appell thinks I’m guilty of is existing, having an opinion, and daring to write about it.
If anyone is a neighbor of David Appell, this might be fun:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Poor man… oh, the agony. His utopian social dream, where the elite call all the shots (and funding), is crumbling before his eyes, despite all his desperate manipulations. How can his destiny be so thwarted by the unwashed and un-sainted. Gaia is truly a bitch, to abandon such a devotee. GK
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…
Patrick says:
September 21, 2012 at 1:26 am
“A.Scott says:
September 20, 2012 at 11:57 pm”
As long as he had some sort of carbon (CO2) capture device fitted as humans typically exhale CO2 at rates of ~40,000ppm/v even at rest.
==========================================================
If you’ve ever considered wearing a gas mask to capture your own CO2 emissions, you might be a Green-neck.
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.
Nietzsche had these guys’ figured out in the 1800s:
“It is not their love of humanity but the impotence of their love of humanity that prevents today’s Christians—from burning us.” – Nietzsche, Aphorism 104, Beyond Good and Evil.
Just replace “today’s Christians” with “today’s climate catastrophists”…
Are climate crimes dealt with in Climate Court? Or rather by a Kangaroo Court?
Not so much as ‘standing on the shoulders of giants’ than ‘wallowing in the holes of fools!’
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.
David Appell is typically inventing a claim that does not exist in order to slate someone with different views. Some people typically only retort to this nonsense when it is obvious he/she knows the argument is being lost. Clearly is implementing a person with no idea what the issues and debates of climate science even are or so incompetent in the topic has the cheek to call others.
“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!
Looks like David is ripe for a computer Hacking !
He doesn’t seem to be able to handle basic WiFi setup or even be smart enough to write down his password. He’s a climate expert ?
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
These guys are panicking as the elections in the US comes closer. They see control slipping away and funding disappearing down the toilet. They’ll start collapsing when (hopefully) the extremists are out of power and more rational minds start looking for other answers to the supposed “crisis”.
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?
To:
davidmhoffer:
Thanks for the link to the interchange between CharlesH and Appell. It is funny.
“Long story short, Appell got spanked. ”
Appell got spanked because he is short on scientific knowledge missed critical thinking class. He jumps from item to item in a vain effort to confuse his opponent, and offers easily refuted evidence. He doesn’t even understand his own position.
“Wow CharlesH! No way could I keep my cool in the face of that much invective and still make one good point about the science after another. I burst out laughing when you called him on the Bangladesh elevation issue. Priceless!”
Here, Appell is going with the “Stupid People” hypothesis. I know some Bangladeshi’s, and they are not so stupid that they would stick around for sea levels to get up to their knees. Plus, the Ganges River washes incredible amounts of silt out of the Himalayas and is constantly building the Ganges River deltas at a prodigious rate. There was an article about that on WUWT.
See article : http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/03/bangladesh-the-poster-child/
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.
Mark in Seattle says:
September 21, 2012 at 8:02 am
“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…”
They don’t trap heat but absorb and re-emit IR photons. So on frequencies where this happens photons can’t directly move from surface to space but will be captured and re-emitted, so half of them will be radiated downwards again.
This dampens cooling somewhat.
When more molecules of these gases are present, the partial pressure of the greenhouse gas rises, and pressure broadening happens: At the margins of the absorption/re-emission bands, where the absorption was somewhere between 0 and 100%, the greenhouse gas fog becomes slightly more opaque; some photons that were able to make it to space before now find themselves absorbed and re-emitted.
That’s why more CO2 leads to a slightly higher greenhouse effect.
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 read like a booze and depression filled rant (he was right about that rant part).
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!
Anthony, you’ve become a high profile enemy who made a solid hit at the heart of their temperature database. Expect further attacks, both direct and of the type made on PBS to intimidate it.
I presume risk of physical attack is low, but instruct your family to be careful. There’s much violent rhetoric about, environmentalists have targetted people in the past.
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.
Didn’t Charlie Manson say essentially the same thing as Appell?