Guardian writer Alexander White beclowns himself by using a paid PR firm as a factual source for climate

Then too, how can it be that anyone thinks the U.S.Senate and House are any thing but paid PR operations also. Little question by any one with a brain what the current Pres. of the U.S.A. is.

Rattus, the crowd at desmog has never seen a course of climatology in their life… So get lost!

Who reads this crap? That guy is so full of himself, he actually believes that only specific scientists can form an opinion based on a set of data. He himself is a climate change denier as he cannot accept historical evidence that the climate does in fact change and that we currently inside the normal variations of that change. I don’t want to muffle idiots. If I have a personal blog then limiting those that are allowed to post is fine. But a public news paper should always be able to handle posts and opinions od those that have a different opinion. The globe is warming because I say so is an unfounded opinion, not a scientific statement.

No Australian newspaper which I have read has actually published ‘climate change denier’ opinion pieces. I haven’t meant anyone yet who denies that the climate changes. As for trying to censor Australian newspapers one Stephen Conroy tried that when he was Communications Minister in the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd Labor/Green government. Australians suitably and overwhelmingly dispatched that government in September 2013. The Guardian is not worth reading and many Australians are already sick to the teeth that these people are invading our country with their ideological rants …. the Guardian is pure trash …

I have just submitted this…I might just slip through the filter…..
Might.
[Nope. Mod]
It does sort of depend on perspective of course.
P.S. Do you support pre-moderating comments that do not incite and are not abusive?
Thank you for allowing the comment dump Anthony.
[Note: Mods should only snip/delete comments that clearly violate site policy, and then with a short explanation. ~ Sr Mod.]

Ah the Guardian! Without creating its own headlines and controversies it would melt into slime.
More concerning to me are the growing number of “independent ” Science Media Centres which function as warmist/green propaganda units(now in UK,Aus,Japan, USA,) for reporters and media people that are sloppy,lazy or corrupt.The latest Rapid Response Post on the Australian SMC site demonstrates my point.The so-called experts are all warmists cleverly presented as independent.Please read what it presents. It is mind bogglingly distorted science.
http://www.smc.org.au/2014/01/rapid-reaction-hottest-year-on-record-experts-respond/#more-14047

Yeh right, if I am going to click on a Gruniad link.
I have standards…!

Should Australian newspapers publish material counter to CAGW pseudoscience?
Too right they should, mate!

The only thing worth looking at in the Guardian is the Crossword and since the death of its best compiler earlier this year, even that is not as good as it used to be!

So this is how it went.
We do not agree that all Global Warming is Anthropogenic.
They then relabel us by calling us Deniers, Denying Global Warming is really happening when we agree it is warming but not all of it is Anthropogenic.
They then ban anybody who is a Denier from speaking out.
Faultless logic!!!

Good on you – below is my reply to Alex and your comment
realcoldoutcom TomHarrisICSC
05 January 2014 8:02am
That may involve some real journalism Tom, something which Alex seems to be advocating against with his ‘right-to-free-speech-and-opinion’ smear campaign.
Why would the question of refusing ‘deniers’ the right to publish even come up? Surely the ‘overwhelming’ evidence of wamists should shine bright amidst the deniers darkness? If the theories were water tight, then there wouldnt be any place for doubt and confusion to be spread.
Its the very fact that there arent any solid facts backing humans solely being the cause of cimate change that questions and holes can be poked in this flimsy theory.
“The fantastic thing about peer reviewed papers is that when they contain errors or questionable findings, expert peers note them”
Funny that, I dont remember any peers coming forward during the 3 years that followed the unfounded statement of the IPCC’s 2007 report which stated that the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035, until of course a New Scientist journalist exposed this to the world.
“However, surely newspapers should aim for objectivity rather than balance, especially if one “side” is just plain inaccurate.”
Is Alex inferring the Warmist theory is accurate and therefore the ‘denier’s is inaccurate? This is a huge assumption considering the relatively small amount of data the assumption is made on. In my opinion the whole idea of calling those who question this climate change theory a ‘denier’ is absurd. Its like calling those who dont believe in the Loch Ness Monster, Nessy deniers – both are yet to be proved. It is also not yet science if half the scientific community is divided on this – its just a theory.
Until we can address both sides of the theory and work together without prejudice, we are far away from getting this right. Maybe Alex should be taking a leaf out of his own article, being objective, as at present he is smelling of subjective pureism.
Alex – Stop trying to be smug and right, and focus more on doing some journalism.
**More about what I was getting at here – http://realcoldout.com/nature-not-nurture/

Love this Title:
Snow falling. In Australia. In summer. That is all
http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/snow-falling-in-australia-in-summer-that-is-all/story-e6frflp0-1226775945701
er, this is just an anomaly cobbers, pay no attention to this, tis is not unusual at all, we all know it routinely snows over multiple Australian States during Summer … move along now … don’t make me post a heat wave.

I see the Tom Harris comment to the Guardian piece (shown above) is not there now. In fact there is a big time gap in the comments between 1.13 am and 4.00 am on 5th Jan.

Alex has plenty of qualities to pick up the coveted ‘CLIMATE PRAT of the YEAR’ award so dearly deserved and cherished by the current holder, Dana Nuccitelli, and he knows what company to keep.
Has only performed well in inferior company thus far, but responds well to training.
The Guardian hasn’t produced a winner before and they’ll be keen to give him plenty of work.
Could be worth a fiver at 20/1 if you can get it.

@ Christopher Hanley
That excellent quote needs to be added to the Gruaniad* comments.
* So named for their attrocious spelling.

BTW scroll below comments to see the astonishing amount of brainwashing. 21 CAGW articles in a 3 day period, most on a single day! No wonder leftist readers of articles by innumerate journos don’t have any idea what the truth is.

Personally I wouldn’t care too much if fairfax did alienate 5 of their remaining 10 readers by refusing to publish their letters. That would only speed up the eventual demise of Fairfax and it could be raided and it’s individual media assets sold off to new and varied owners that might treat their readers a little better than mushrooms.

FairFax in the 60’s up were know as the Spencer Street Soviet. Heavily pro left.
Even now they are so pro AGW you will never see a rebuttal to some Voodoo science wackery that they give big, bold, headlines too.
The world is stuffed.

I often see mention of a ‘theory’ of anthropogenic global warming. For a SWAG* to actually be a theory doesn’t it need to have a stated premise, a stated expected outcome, a null hypothesis and some means of being falsified?
It seems that current “consensus” Climate Science operates under the assumption that no matter the outcome, there can be only one cause; humanity, and no amount of data nor any observed outcome whatever is capable of falsifying the consensus SWAG.
*(Scientific Wild Assed Guess)

This call for censorship was already done in my newspaper in 2009 shortly before Climategate. The argument of the author was:
1.The science is settled.
2.In science we do not have democracy.
3.Newspaper comments by amateurs seed doubt among the uninformed.
4.It is not good to have doubts about settled science.
5.Newspaper comments by amateurs should be censored.
Therefore, he did educate the uninformed about the settled science, the last time by showing that the IPCC summary for policy makers was a triumph of that science and everything he wrote since 2009.

Oh, and sometimes I wonder if they write this crap in order to pilfer pageviews from sceptic blogs to tout to advertisers.

One of the most interesting attitudes of the alarmists / rabid greens / ecoloons / warmists / catastrophists and all the other assorted leftist do gooders such as the rabid Green renewable energy proponents who continually advocate the suppression and censorship of opinions that do not coincide with their own beliefs and ideology, is their apparent inability to even contemplate that they also will be just as severely affected and suffer just as severely along with everybody else if their own censorious policies are ever implemented.
These latent left wing totalitarian promoting goose steppers seemingly live in some sort of a completely parallel universe where the policies, actions and consequences they so vehemently demand should be applied to all others who fail to or refuse to fall into line with their particular brand of a totalitarian ideology, will just simply pass them and they seemingly continue to assume that they themselves will continue to enjoy the quite lavish life style they currently demand and expect as their own inalienable right..
What goes around, comes around as the old saying goes.
So often throughout history influential individuals and groups have arisen usually created in debate over some contentious cause and who first just want to right the percieved wrongs and promote the “cause” as the solution to all those past wrongs or those wrong beliefs as they see it.
When others come out and oppose the “cause” the advocates and believers in the “cause” resort to ever harsher and increasingly severe retribution agaist those who oppose the advocates of the particular Cause.
From there the progress in historical terms is a fast moving trend to an all out totalitarianism and often a full blown Tyranny with ever harsher measures against those who only appear to oppose or even just question the now tyrannical new regime.
In their unbridled hubris, arrogance and complete ignorance and in the unshakeable belief that they and they only are the blessed ones who know the real TRUTH, the climate catastrophe believing totalitarian advocates and warmista advocates of the suppression of free speech just seem to completely fail to recognise that throughout history the pitiless and ruthless policies that many totalitarian regimes and tyrants have moved to inflict on all those who oppose them has more often than not been applied to the very same advocates of those measures when the great tides of fortune, time, history and politics once again reverse course as they always have.
They also in their ignorance and the shallowness of their intellect totally fail to realise that in advocating censorship of those who do not agree with their own ideology of catastrophic warming of the planet, they themselves might one day be on the receiving end of that very same censorship.
And if history is any guide then when censorship is first used it soon degenerates into ever harsher and into an ever more despotic regime which eventually has no qualms or inhibitions in physically eliminating anybody or anything that opposes or questions it..
To the advocates of the censoring of skeptics or worse, much worse as has been recorded. ;
1 / Be very careful indeed as to what you might wish for; You might just get it.
2 / There is also an old saying; “A revolution devours it’s children”.
Perhaps that is what we skeptics are seeing today as happening to the global warming ideology and it’s rabid advocates as they demand ever more and ever harsher measures against those who dare to question their ideology and quasi cult like beliefs.
To cap off. Why would anybody in their right mind have any sort of belief in anything that the . Desmogblog promotes and publishes.
“Alexa” as usual tells the real tale and it provides a good indication that if the Guardian writers cannot find a warmista site that gives an honest and realistic appraisal of the global warming / catastrophe belief situation that has more credibility in the eyes of the web reading public then Desmogblog then the warmists are in very deep, deep s**t indeed .
The world Alexa web ratings as of today;[ smaller numbers are higher in the global rankings ]
WUWT = 10,348
GWPF= 79,835
JoNova = 82,735
Climate etc = 85380
Bishop Hill = 87,142
SKEPTICAL SCIENCE = 101,746
NoTricksZone =115,842
DESMOGBLOG = 147,511

Mark Stoval –
“And they never tell you why! The just say “violation of community standards”!”
– That’s if you’re lucky. If you watch the moderation over an extended period you will see they also have a ‘nuke’ option where all trace of the comment is removed and so not even a placeholder to indicate it was ever there or give viewers a grasp of just how much censorship is taking place.
– I just noticed one comment that had received the ‘nuke’ treatment. The poster dared to point out that the use of “de*ier* was in fact a thoroughly nasty ad hom. There’s now no record of his/her comment ever having been there. I really fail to understand how this fits the Guardian’s “moderation” policy.

Do check out the ever active sceptic Fernando Leanme on the Guardian. He is a persistent pain in their neck, he survives banning by being very polite. I cannot do this.

Patrick Hrushowy says:
January 4, 2014 at 10:36 pm
“… I am reminded of the Blorg of Star Trek fame…”
It was the Borg.
Very appropriate when dealing with the BBC, Guardian, Independent, etc… “Resistance is futile.”

Sasha says:
January 5, 2014 at 5:22 am
Patrick Hrushowy says:
January 4, 2014 at 10:36 pm
“… I am reminded of the Blorg of Star Trek fame…”
It was the Borg.
Very appropriate when dealing with the BBC, Guardian, Independent, etc… “Resistance is futile.”
——–
Actually Patrick may have just coined a great new word. “The Blorg” = bloggers with no original thought, who mindlessly repeat talking points to infect/assimilate more bloggers, who mindlessly repeat talking points, etc., etc.

ANH says: @ January 5, 2014 at 12:43 am
I see the Tom Harris comment to the Guardian piece (shown above) is not there now. In fact there is a big time gap in the comments between 1.13 am and 4.00 am on 5th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sounds like the Guardian Censor did not get in until the morning shift and just deleted the whole block of comments. It looks funny if you leave in the Warmist responses to a Den!ers comment now doesn’t it? Can’t make the censorship too blatant or you might wake up a few of the useful idiots.

The Guardian’s circulation continues down the toilet.

Their comment section was painful to parse through.
The cacophony of zealots claiming that of “deniers” as being Big Oil, Republican, or 6,000 year flat-earthers, reminds me a lot about the claim of Somalia being a Libertarian utopia — or how humans are incapable of laying down asphalt and flattening it without the government’s benevolence (and your money).
I really appreciate the work being done here. Life has progressively been getting much too expensive and these people are asking forcing everybody to sacrifice for their benefit. Too see the poor, who are the most affected, try to afford heat, fuel, and food with these carbon tax and trading schemes is disturbing, to say the least — and let’s not get started on the disastrous economics going on.

Curious George says:
January 5, 2014 at 8:27 am

…
Back to Middle Ages! At Galileo’s time the consensus was that everything revolves around the Earth. The Guardian takes the position of the Great Inquisitor.

Yet their real function was “Great Imposter”.
Like now.

Maybe they get mad when you spoof them with stuff like this ;>)
lorne50
Red Deer Alberta Canada
January 5, 2014
Yes I really don’t know what is up with deniers they don’t believe in the loc ness monster or the moon landings or that 9-11 happened and don’t get me started on GMO’s or vaccine’s and really why would anyone be a denier of big foot ?

I skimmed through the comment section at the guardian post.
There is so much STUPID there that it actually hurts. Like kool-aid drinker “Rosemary A”, who thinks deniers should have their own little books and blogs and stuff but shouldn’t be allowed to participate in the political process.
Yeah, because they actually believe that you have to search far and wide to find “a scientist” that doesn’t follow the party line.
Too much stupid. Can’t have a battle of intellect when your opponent is unarmed.

Max Hugoson says: @ January 5, 2014 at 12:25 pm
I new I saw a video showing the effort of arguing with the “True Believers” of AWG….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have never seen my vet laugh so hard as when we used ‘Captain Spaulding’ a deep sea fishing net to catch pigglets. Darn things are FAST!

Rattus Norvegicus says:
January 4, 2014 at 9:32 pm
Hate to point this out, but you post stuff from the GWPF all the time. Pot, kettle, black.
—–
A feeble attempt. Overcoming your reluctance to point it out is laudable, though.
There are certain relevant dissimilarities in the situations which might not be apparent to you. The host of this site does not purport to be a journalist. Nor can I see where he uses one blog to discredit another in this fashion. The fact that it seems that no attempt was made to get an opposing opinion makes it worse. As far as I recall The Guardian is supposed to be impartial and to provide a fair overview of the facts under dispute. Your view of their function and ethics might differ of course 🙂
Want to try again?

PS:If the writer is representing an organization the editors should insist on disclosure of funding sources.

Australian newspapers are waking up to the scam, except Fairfax. Fairfax backed the wrong end of the argument and is desperate for sales. They even give their papers away free to boost circulation figures.
The electorate spoke and the left side of politics was handed a once in a hundred year defeat. People look at their outrageous power bills and realize they are being taxed for no result. On their own figures, it is 0.0034C difference in temperature. But since thermometers can’t measure that accurately, then the difference is effectively zero.
People have woken up.
Then we have Lewandowsky being caught out making up data and having to withdraw his paper and iother warmists doing the same. CSIRO has been caught out fudging data recreations.
The point of this abysmal attempt to deny sceptics a voice is that it takes some expert to make a prediction and then it is magnified. It is a standard tactic in scaring populations into a stampede in the direction the scaremongers want. It has failed utterly here because our Prime Minister has openly said that warmists are environmentalists that have perverted environmentalism for their own socialist purposes. He has sacked the Climate CHange Department and is stopping the carbon tax. He is doing something called Direct Action, which is about getting more organic matter into soils but he says carbon to assuage the warmists.