Some climate scientists we know sure are notoriously thin skinned, as an illustration of this, today I got blocked by Dr. Katherine Hayhoe on Twitter after making my one and only Twitter comment to her. See below.
Here’s the comment she made yesterday and my reply:
Source: http://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/316645342537990144
I wrote what a lot of people were thinking about that comment of hers, and today when I refreshed the browser window I left open to see if she responded, I’m rewarded with this:
Tom Nelson apparently got the same treatment today:
By their deeds ye shall know them: “Gifted” evangelical climate hoax communicator Katharine Hayhoe blocks me from following her on Twitter
Hey Katharine: You can run, but you can’t hide.
Katharine Hayhoe (KHayhoe) on Twitter
[Message received when I tried to follow Katharine] You have been blocked from following this account at the request of the user.
ClimateBites – “A Climate For Change” Katharine Hayhoe
She’s also a gifted communicator, with a calm clear voice and a knack for stripping things down to the nub and saying it in language everybody can understand.
….
With her husband, a minister, Hayhoe co-authored a book for evangelical Christians. Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith-Based Decisions is a must read for anybody addressing this important community or looking for clear explanations in plain language. Particularly revealing is the beginning, where the authors bridge the cultural divide and address the stereotypes that block communication between evangelicals and the science community.
I guess turning the other cheek doesn’t fit for her: http://smmercury.com/2013/01/17/qa-katharine-hayhoe-on-the-trials-of-being-a-christian-climatologist/
So she believes in two religions.
She’s absolutely correct though. The way too win an argument is to argue with people who already agree with you and bury those who do not. I heard that Stalin never lost a debate.
Communication would be so much easier if the CAGW crowd wouldn’t keep forgetting the ‘/stupid’ tag at the end of their posts and tweets.
I remember seeing her on a BBC propaganda programme, something like “Is our weather getting strange?” She was talking about global weirding due to climate change. She was introduced as a climate expert, but came over as a complete non-scientific numpty. The BBC loved her.
Haywho?
I’ve always loved AGW’s sycophantic meme of, “we’re the 97%”, qualified (but conveniently UNQUANTIFIED) as: 1) CO2 is a GHG (true), 2) Global temps rose in the 20th Century (true), 3) CO2 increased in the 20th Century (true), 4) manmade CO2 emission helped increase atmospheric CO2 concentrations (true) 5) manmade CO2 contributed to GW (true), 6) Climate often changes (true).
So, under such a broad and UNQUANTIFIED criteria, pretty much everyone IS (by this silly definition) a supporter of AGW theory… But, alas, the devil is in the details….
IF this silly definition simply added ONE quantifier, “7) and when CO2 concentrations reach 560ppm, global temperatures will UNEQUIVOCALLY increase between 2.0C and 4.5C, with the most likely increase being 3.0C”, this silly non sequitur would fall flat on its face.
These scoundrels and useful idiots will continue to use faulty logic and bad “science” to keep their hoax going for as long as possible until missing point “(7)” is eventually shown by empirical evidence to be untenable.
We’re into the 17th year of no warming, so this hoax’s is already 2 years past its expiry date and is starting to turn “green” and stink up the place. It won’t be long before it’s finally thrown on the trash heap of failed theories. Hopefully CAGW theory will be tossed in the trash soon before too many more people swallow the putrid mess.
Never mind what people do with science, nature certainly pays to attention. It was -2C here in Milford Haven at 06:00am today on the day before Good Friday. This is NOT normal. Crystal clear sky overhead may have something to do with. ‘Backradiation’ from CO2 seems to be absent. /sarc
She does not represent all evangelical Christians! She should listen to Calvin Beisner at the Cornwall Alliance and http://www.resistingthegreendragon.com/
Being a Chrustian is no measure of which side of the debate you are on. There are many who see the ‘warmist’ pseudo-science for what it is, and those who blindly accept it.
Just interested, who are the 49?
I have heard about the magical 97% and 98% (Depends on who you ask) but 49?
Are those the CAGW disciples spreading the word?
Repent, repent, the world is coming to an end unless you believe in the all powerful CO2.
Cast out the wicked non-believers!
Lions 1 Christians 0
In my opinion, Heyhoe is a nutter; I wouldn’t want worry about it 🙂
O/T but EU is struggling to keep their CAGW money grab alive:
[snip . . OT indeed Pat . . please repost at Tips&Notes witha link to the article rather than a cut and paste, thanks . . mod]
Anthony, You used Ms. instead of Mrs. or Dr. to an evangelical christian who would not take her married or her academic status lightly. Such a gauche error would easily be taken as a studied insult by one who wishes to avoid sinners such as you like the plague.
Shouldn’t she, as the CEO of atmosresearch, simply be able to point to the regional climate change predictions that she skillfully (one hopes) made for the clients of her firm?
Wow, she removed herself from the webpage. Wow, can’t find her on the wikipedia anymore. Fell into a relevance hole in the NPOV, maybe?
There is little to be gained from following someone who is lost.
At least she is famous now!
(Who is this woman?)
She’s bowing before you Mr Watts, requiring 49 proponents of CAGW to even the odds. It’s a back handed compliment if there ever was one.
And Mr Mod, what was deemed so non-PC about the Lions / Christians football score?
Hayhoe bumped me too. Apparently any form of debate is not allowed. But, as the saying goes, “I’ve been thrown out of better places”. Mann, Gleick, Laden, Jason Box, Lewandowsky, Cook.
Note that I am polite, and respecful. Unfortunately, the facts and sources I quote do not respect their position. Of course, rather than admit error, or try to present aternative data, it is much easier to just delete my comments.
Jason Box is the champ, though. When it was obvious that his position was untenable, he deleted the entire post.
I have to admit that Shepherd (AMS) and Gavin Schmidt are much more tolerant, and respect healthy debate.
49 to 1. Hayhoe seems to have given Math the shove-o. That would mean 98% for AGW and 2% not so. BUt I thought it was 97% to 3%. My math says that 32 and 1/3 vs 1. Several questions is Hayhoe trying to pack the panel? Second, is she offering herdelf as the fractional AGWers that we will need? And Tony are you the designated Solomon?
Anthony, you gave her much undeserved publicity.
Did not Nero fiddle while Rome burned,seems many Scientists continue to ignore the real world and are in a state of denial.
Question; why are they so scared to debate! if they are so sure of the science????
Maybe the response should be to set up a piggyback twit-account for hayhoe and repeat all of her misguided rantings there … we can then make our responses however we wish … FB would be a great place to do so as well 😉 Use the Obummer political spamming to our advantage. BTW, Australian socialist politicians sought Obummer guidance on this and are now using it in Australia on the social networks.
Hayhoe may very well have done a disservice to Mr. Watts by banning him for what appears to be a fairly benign tweet. But such a complaint would likely have far more credibility if it weren’t coming from a man whose own mods routinely delete respectful but dissenting commentary. Ya’ know?
Seriously Petit? Do you know this because your comments are being snipped? Dissent isn’t blocked from this blog. Off topic and out of the pale derogatory comments are.
By the way, Hayhoe’s metric is 49 for and 1 against makes her a self-labled polling scientist. All those years of study. Her parents would be so proud.
Awww, poor Ms. Hayhoe can’t take the heat and now only allows fellow sanctimonious, arrogant ideologues to playcomment in or follow her little echo chamber. The lady has over-cooked her cosmic, climate eggs and they’ve all cracked. Now, she has to tune out everyone but her sycophantic followers. It’s ironic and must really tick her off that her beloved Goddess Gaia is now a skeptic too! “No more warming for you, My Pretty!”