Friday Funny: Well if I was a ‘denier’ I guess I’d be on notice by Barack Obama

An actual email from the “Are you now, or have you ever been a member of any anti-science organization?” department and Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Action” front.

Organizing for Action

Friend —

It’s tough out there for climate change deniers.

One by one, literally every argument and excuse they’ve been using for years is being proven false.

They’re still grasping at myths and conspiracy theories, but deniers are on the run.

Let’s keep them there — join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers.

In reality, the debate on the basics is over.

Not only do 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made, but new reports are showing climate and extreme weather impacts are affecting us right now.

Droughts, floods, wildfires, and storms are hitting communities from California to the East Coast, and we’re already spending hundreds of billions on climate-related disaster relief — no one is denying that.

Instead, what you hear from climate change deniers are mostly excuses for not taking action. Some have hidden behind foreign countries, saying America can’t or shouldn’t lead on climate until someone else goes first.

Let’s set aside for a minute that this isn’t actually how we solve global problems. The fact is, President Obama is leading internationally through agreements with China and India to cut carbon pollution and expand the use of clean energy. (So there goes that denier talking point…)

Another thing you might hear from a denier is that we simply can’t get serious about cutting carbon pollution without destroying the economy. That’s just false. For example, the climate and public health benefits from President Obama’s Clean Power Plan outweigh the costs by at least six times.

Maybe deniers doubt we have the will and ingenuity to take such a huge problem on. Well, the American people are proving them wrong: Since 2009, we’ve increased solar power ten-fold and tripled wind power. Hundreds of thousands of Americans work in clean energy today.

The arguments from deniers are getting more and more ludicrous.

We have the facts on our side — and we have to drive that message home. Because as long as deniers and polluters are blocking progress, we’re not doing all we can to combat climate change.

Say you’ll help take them to task — join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers:



Ivan Frishberg

Senior Climate Advisor

Organizing for Action


[h/t to: TheLastDemocrat]

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 20, 2015 1:17 pm


Reply to  Brian Cooper
February 20, 2015 2:04 pm

It’s worse than I thought!

John Silver
Reply to  Roger
February 20, 2015 3:46 pm

OMG, how scared and desperate they are.

Reply to  Roger
February 21, 2015 12:48 am

They are getting really desperate. The Left want Abbott out of power before Paris and they want to replace him with Turnbull, who is what you would call a token right Winger on the outside, green on the inside. They’ve just voted out two right wing (in Australia its the Liberal Party) state governments and are gunning for a third. This will trigger a leadership spill in which they hope to depose Abbott.

Reply to  Roger
February 21, 2015 5:30 am

This is politics, not science.
The only question you have to ask is … who will be the beneficiary of the government largess attached to the programs they envision ?

Reply to  Roger
February 21, 2015 10:21 am

John Silver
February 20, 2015 at 3:46 pm
OMG, how scared and desperate they are.
If by they you mean guys and activists linked and associated with, Ivan Frishberg and with his organization, I really doubt they are desperate, they simply over opportunistic in resolving to reap-off the USA citizens falling for their scheming.
The only problem is that they have gone too far and also have associated the name of the President with it and turn the Presidential power in a symbol, a flag for their scheming camping.
That should make them really scared.
I am not an American, but I can’t fail and imagine, that as we at the moment over this issue, some FBI department is already asking who this guy, Ivan Frishberg, really is.
Is one thing to associate the name of the President with a way of fund-raising, and completely another when you get to the point of greed, cockiness and opportunity and associate the name of the President with some dirty scheme that propagates and imply division and hate through the citizens and the country, simply by thinking that the Presidents hands are and will be “tight” because of his overall position on the issue.
I would not wish to be in the Ivan’s position and his closed associates in this one.
Especially if I had not even the slightest credentials to call my self a climate adviser, let alone a senior climate adviser.
To bad that Ivan has ignored the technical shield of politics, by failing to attache it to his “senior climate adviser ” claim.
It would have been more careful and less cocky if only at least had considered him self officially as a “senior climate political adviser” in whole this mess.
Is a very fine and fiery, the walking line under the Presidential shadow.

Penncyl Puccer
Reply to  Roger
February 21, 2015 12:14 pm

I am not an American, but I can’t fail and imagine, that as we at the moment over this issue, some FBI department is already asking who this guy, Ivan Frishberg, really is.
Nope. The entire apparatus of the federal government is thoroughly corrupt, through and through. They don’t care who he is; he’s spouting the party line and that’s all that matters. “Organizing for Action” is a propaganda organization attached to Obama.

Reply to  Roger
February 21, 2015 1:03 pm

Penncyl Puccer
February 21, 2015 at 12:14 pm .
Yes Penncyl, you totally could be right, but you see, when I see what this guy has done, and the way he has done it, I really think and believe that the system has already flagged him up for a check.
I maybe overestimating here, but the system has and does flag-up for much less, and better this guy is as you say, just a party liner, and hopefully he checks out clear, and we keep saying that he is another zealot at most.
Anyway, is just an opinion. Definitely you know your country much better than me.
But everywhere in this world, in any country, if there is a lot of money involved, made or to be made, lot of money exchanging hands in a possible racketeering outcome, there then will be all kinds of “sharks” circling it .

Reply to  Brian Cooper
February 20, 2015 2:05 pm

And if you don’t answer or reply or donate they’ll know who you are as well. Process of elimination.

Reply to  asybot
February 20, 2015 4:17 pm

I had never heard of Ivan Frishberg and had thought this was a spoof email.. He appears to be an advocate and activist.

Reply to  asybot
February 21, 2015 5:32 am

“No Pressure”

Reply to  Brian Cooper
February 21, 2015 8:52 am

JEEZ!!!…my little, trusty B. S. Detector hasn’t spazzed out , like this, since the last time I got an e-mail from Nigeria!
Typical ham-handed, lefty pitch. I especially note that that Frishberg character can’t even get the “denier” talking-points, right. Moi, for example, I don’t “deny” that the United States could and/or should take the lead in noble endeavors, on behalf of mankind. Indeed, Americans have a long and distinguished history of that sort of thing. You know, like, how the United States led humanity in a noble and heroic crusade that ultimately defeated the mass-murdering scourge of International Communism (but I know the lefties feel left out of that big win–poor babies!).
Rather, my “denier” talking-point is that those most convinced of the carbon-peril, most in the public-eye, and most outspoken in their calls for carbon-reduction NOW!!!, should also be those to “go first” and LEAD FROM THE FRONT AND BY INSPIRING PERSONAL EXAMPLE IN MATTERS OF CARBON REDUCTION!!!should also be those who PRACTICE WHAT THEY PREACH!!!
But what do any of us see, instead? Well, what we see is that those, who are most prominently talkin’ up the demon-carbon scare, are, simultaneously, among the most extravagant, gluttonous, in-your-face carbon-piggies, in both their professional and personal lives, in the whole history of mankind–you know, like Al Gore; “environmentally-conscious” royals; private-jet, jet-set, Hollywood air-heads; bought-and-sold politicos; greenwashed crony-capitalists; tenured, Gruber-wannabe, ivory-tower parasites, jetting about the globe attending their little grab-ass, gas-bag eco-confabs, which could easily be held as carbon-free tele-conferences; and lefty NGO’s, tryin’ to bring back the good ol’ days of the Holodomor, “Great Leap Forward”, and the “Cambodian Killing Fields”, using the cover of Gaia. The end point being, of course, to pick my “little guy” pocket, gut my freedoms, and crush the quality of my life while, at the same time, preserving the CO2-spew good-times and feudal privileges of my pontificating betters undisturbed. Thanks but no thanks.
In other words, if there is really a menace to humanity posed by AGW, then what we most desperately need, at the moment, is not an effort to “call out” the “deniers”, but rather a major effort to “call out” the brazen-hypocrite carbon-oinkers who make up the nomenklatura of the “environmental” movement. And why? Well because those hypocrite, CO2 mega-spewers make the whole carbon-reduction business look like a RIP-OFF!!!SCAM!!!CON-JOB!!!HUSTLE!!! (the reading on my trusty, little B. S. detector (all caps in the original)).
And perhaps the estimable Ivan Frishberg could take the lead–“go first”–in “calling out” his brazen-hypocrite, carbon-piggie betters, even if it puts Ivan at risk of biting the hand that feeds him. I mean, like, I think Ivan is up to it. I mean, like, we can all be sure that Ivan doesn’t put his trough before “the kids” and the “polar-bears”. I mean, like, that’s just not Ivan!–am I right or am I right, Ivan?

Reply to  mike
February 21, 2015 2:37 pm

That “Global Warming” thing is..well..maybe you should change it to “Global Freezing”..they (stupid {Gruber} public) won’t notice the difference..and..damn, man it’s like 8 degrees here in NYC with aboutumteen inches of snow..when can I come out of my apartment? Please advise … thank you … signed, Frostbite Freddy.

Reply to  Brian Cooper
February 22, 2015 9:38 am

All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach. -AH

February 20, 2015 1:18 pm

Here is my cartoon contribution Friday Funny:
A Cloud Over Humanity

Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 1:24 pm

Sorry … “contribution to Friday Funny”

Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 1:50 pm

+ several million

Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 2:05 pm

Excellent, Max!

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 2:13 pm

and it’s a very small one – nice

timothy sorenson
Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 4:03 pm

Good one Max!

Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 4:24 pm

Like! Say,are we allowed to use the picture, to spread the humor?

Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 8:00 pm

Excellent – thank you Max Photon. But beware! Remember … first they came for the cartoonists ….!

February 20, 2015 1:19 pm

Seig Heil!

Ian H
Reply to  Stu
February 21, 2015 1:39 am

? … I think you are in the wrong blog. Try Skeptical Science.

February 20, 2015 1:20 pm
February 20, 2015 1:22 pm

Pure, unadulterated Climate McCarthyism.

Gentle Tramp
Reply to  George
February 20, 2015 2:32 pm

The arrogance and totalitarianism of this people is simply breathtaking…
I wonder, how they will defend their small-minded “denier” witch-hunt” in about 10 – 20 years when the absurd CAGW scare mongering will be “a thing of the past” at last?
By the way: They are still so proud of their faked “97% consensus” which is complete meaningless because of the stupid questions and categories used. But even if this 97% consensus would be real, that would have no scientific value at all, as history reveals again these last days: Did we not have an almost totally consensus in food science that cholesterol in our diet should be really bad for health during the last 40 years? And now this once so powerful consensus is simply gone with the wind:

Reply to  Gentle Tramp
February 20, 2015 4:46 pm

“I wonder, how they will defend their small-minded “denier” witch-hunt” in about 10 – 20 years …”
Assuming the second amendment is still valid then, it might be tough for them to do so..
Stay warm my friend,

Reply to  Gentle Tramp
February 20, 2015 6:00 pm

Well, if past experience from Germany is anything to go by, almost nobody will even remember that they once were climate alarmists, just as there were no more Nazis to be found after 1945 and no more communists after 1990.

Reply to  Gentle Tramp
February 21, 2015 6:58 am

Gentle, if the world froze over tomorrow, they would still be clinging to their CAGW mantra. Can you imagine the sheer numbers of people who are responsible for this? Can you imagine the backlash if it is ever learned that these people were knowingly lying? Just think about all the money students have paid to universities to be taught this drivel. It’s staggering. Hopefully it becomes a class action lawsuit. How about all the leftist/fascists pushing for their Agenda 21/One World Government? They know they are close with this one.
These people are more than willing to break some eggs to get what they want. They’re too invested to stop now.

Reply to  Gentle Tramp
February 21, 2015 7:36 am

the 2nd Amendment protects the 5 fundamental freedoms found in the 1st Amendment – speech, religion press, assembly to protest, and petition for edress of grievences.

Pat Frank
Reply to  George
February 20, 2015 4:19 pm

Except, of course, for all that McCarthy was a demagogue, there really were Soviet spies placed in the U.S. government. So there was a case to be made. AGW does not have a case.

Reply to  Pat Frank
February 20, 2015 8:34 pm

Pat: It has always amazed me that this piece of historical reality is completely overlooked. McCarthy did harm to the real effort of identifying and exposing actual and active Soviet spies.

Reply to  Pat Frank
February 20, 2015 9:05 pm

M Stanton Evans book “Blacklisted by History,” presents the case that McCarthy had it right, but that his style and the active propaganda campaign against him successfully created the mythology that has become a “truth.” Not too dissimilar from the Climate propaganda of today.

Reply to  Pat Frank
February 20, 2015 10:53 pm

The fact that we have the term McCarthyism demonstrates quite clearly that McCarthy was correct.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
Reply to  Pat Frank
February 21, 2015 6:01 am

DesertYote, are you for real? ‘McCarthyism’ means the act of making an accusation of disloyalty that is unsupported by any evidence. McCarthy wrongly thought that the US had “large” numbers of Soviet spies within government. It did not. There were a few, as there were in other governments around the world. McCarthy wasn’t “right”, he was wrong. He was also an idiot, and anti-homosexual bigot, and an alcoholic.
He was secretly gay himself, spoke to plants, and ate wallpaper. You see, that’s ‘McCarthyism’!

Pat Frank
Reply to  Pat Frank
February 21, 2015 10:24 am

You’re right, Bernie. McCarthy and his histrionics gave anti-communism a bad name.
Big Jim, whatever McCarthy got wrong or however he was an idiot, there were a large number of Soviet spies in the US government. The Venona papers make clear that there’d been an aggressive Soviet campaign of espionage against the US since at least the mid-1930’s. All the while that the Soviet Union was held in friendly regard by the US.
Christina Shelton’s “Alger Hiss, why he chose treason” gives a good account of some of these people.
It doesn’t take much investigation to realize that the whole AGW thing is just one more front of the continuing Progressive war against a free, constitutional, and entrepreneurial US.

Reply to  Pat Frank
February 21, 2015 12:37 pm

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
February 21, 2015 at 6:01 am
“He was secretly gay himself, spoke to plants, and ate wallpaper. You see, that’s ‘McCarthyism’!”
So I googled “Did McCarthy eat wallpaper”
The results are surprising, try it yourself, it’s fun.

Reply to  Pat Frank
February 21, 2015 2:28 pm

Ghost: The term McCarthyism was created by Marxist propagandists in the media. By the time McCarthy tried to do something about the problem, Marxist had already become dominant in Academia, the media, and the Democratic party. Your response is an indication of how successful those Marxist propagandists were at controlling public opinion.

David Larsen
February 20, 2015 1:23 pm

If you think CO2 heats the earth, do us ALL a big favor, QUIT EXHALING!!!!!!!!

Reply to  David Larsen
February 20, 2015 10:24 pm

Well, no ….. if you think CO2 heats Earth[*], burn fossil fuels. Exhaling just recycles and has no net effect. Warming has been demonised, but is actually beneficial in many ways, chiefly perhaps via increased plant growth and food production. It will be particularly beneficial over the next couple of decades if the global cooling occurs that some are now predicting.
[*]I think it does, but unfortunately not by much. 1 deg C per doubled CO2 if you’re lucky.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
February 20, 2015 11:22 pm

Don’t overlook temporary local effects. Multiplied 7 billion times they become significant.

February 20, 2015 1:25 pm

Oh, and kidz, turn in your mom or dad and we’ll give you a brand new Xbox!

Reply to  Andy
February 20, 2015 1:39 pm

… a brand new solar powered Xbox with a cell either made in China in an ecologically unsound factory or a horribly overpriced solar cell made in the USA with massive government kickbacks to donors subsidies in a factory that has now shut down due to bankruptcy.

Richard M
February 20, 2015 1:26 pm

Pep talks are usually given out when you are losing. Pretty much says it all. Nothing but lies they hope the flock will accept.

February 20, 2015 1:26 pm

Click the link under the “join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers” text and you’ll get an opportunity to donate money. The choices are from $15 to $1000, although you can enter other amounts. I wonder if there is any chance of prosecuting under some kind of law against false advertising based on all the lies in the email.

Reply to  Ralph Dave Westfall
February 20, 2015 2:04 pm

I’ll quit tweeting links to actual data / graphs for $50/day.

Janice Moore
Reply to  spetzer86
February 20, 2015 3:30 pm


Bubba Cow
Reply to  Ralph Dave Westfall
February 20, 2015 2:47 pm

I went with the $1000 to get that swell hemp, re-usable grocery bag for when I’ll soon need to ride the horse to the store and . . .

Reply to  Bubba Cow
February 20, 2015 11:24 pm

Rand Paul favors hemp.

Reply to  Ralph Dave Westfall
February 20, 2015 6:02 pm

Have you tried entering a negative amount?

Reply to  Ralph Dave Westfall
February 20, 2015 10:35 pm

You CAN enter any amount, but if you put anything under $3.00 it tells you that’s the minimum.

Reply to  Schitzree
February 22, 2015 8:18 am

There’s a credit card processing fee regardless of the amount, so if they allowed a $1 donation, they’d actually be losing money.
I’d pay a dollar to help them lose–it would be worth it.

Thomas Englert
Reply to  Ralph Dave Westfall
February 21, 2015 4:08 pm

Donate 1 cent with the comment “I wouldn’t give two cents for the quality of your so-called ‘research’.”

Bruce Cobb
February 20, 2015 1:27 pm

Just further proof that the climate campaigners are getting more and more desperate. Their blatant use of lies and strawman arguments just keeps getting more and more laughable.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 20, 2015 1:47 pm


The arguments from deniers are getting more and more ludicrous.

They are clearly accusing thermometers of being deniers. The pause keeps on mocking the climate models.
That Mercury in the tubes must be in league with the CO2 in the atmosphere to kill us all!
They are both chemicals, you see.
Have you seen anyone consorting with chemicals, or with people who use chemicals?
Report them now!

Reply to  MCourtney
February 21, 2015 6:04 pm

More mercury gets to us from burning coal. Lungs direct.

Reply to  MCourtney
February 22, 2015 5:18 pm

No trafamadore, it is so much safer to follow government regulations and bring the mercury directly into your homes via the new light bulbs.

Reply to  MCourtney
February 23, 2015 11:23 am

Actually, mercury is an element – CO2 is not.

February 20, 2015 1:28 pm

“Denier” is such a loaded term. It is discouraging to have the President of the United States’ political committee call people who disagree with them, ‘denier.’ I get his OFA emails and this isn’t about science or even climate. It’s just propaganda attacking BO’s political opponents. ‘Discouraging’ is the politest term I could think of – we have to be respectful of others when we debate. Irving Frishberg has brought a nightstick to the debate and he is swinging it in Obama’s name.

Reply to  willybamboo
February 22, 2015 8:20 am

The President of the United States has seldom been truthful. He’s one big disappointment.

Mumbles McGuirck
February 20, 2015 1:28 pm

It’s as if someone has distilled all the phony arguments, straw men, and misleading interpretations into one fund raising letter and aimed it at low-information voters. It’s a classic.

Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 1:29 pm

STILL the same old recycled junk. STILL pushing Manbearpig.
These guys are like… so NINETIES.
Still mindlessly reproducing
that has-been Al Gore’s stuff.
Al Gore “I’m cereal” (youtube – South Park)

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:09 pm

Thanks for the laugh, Janice!

Janice Moore
Reply to  Roger
February 20, 2015 3:28 pm

My pleasure! #(:)) Thanks for saying so.

Reply to  Roger
February 20, 2015 8:15 pm

Thanks Janice, you just confirmed why (although could laugh at this) I don’t watch this complete idiocy at any time!

Janice Moore
Reply to  Roger
February 20, 2015 8:20 pm

Hi, A Sybot — that’s good! — thanks! And you’re wise not to fill your mind with that stuff.

February 20, 2015 1:30 pm

I don’t find this funny at all.
At best it’s simply one more front where real scientists and useful citizens have to direct their resources, instead of addressing real issues.
At worst it’s a witch hunt that will destroy lives.

Arno Arrak
February 20, 2015 1:30 pm

Stupidity annoys me. And crass stupidity in high places is a crime against humanity. For a leader to undersign such a document is tantamount to a call for impeachment. He should be impeached.

Reply to  Arno Arrak
February 20, 2015 1:58 pm

He’s already impeared.

Reply to  Max Photon
February 20, 2015 3:12 pm

Thanks , I needed a new keyboard anyway !

Reply to  Max Photon
February 22, 2015 8:23 am

Or impaired–yours makes him sound fruity, which could be accurate, too!

February 20, 2015 1:30 pm

Add in “Net Neutrality” push and the FEC wanting to limit political speech do you think a site like this is even going to be allowed?

Reply to  Videodrone
February 20, 2015 1:50 pm

No, it won’t in its current form.
It’ll survive, with access limited. to starve it of influence.
Net Neutrality is too awkward an idea to be ignored by the powerful.

Retired Engineer Jim
Reply to  Videodrone
February 20, 2015 2:31 pm

Especially after the Web is turned over to the WTU on 1 July?

Janice Moore
Reply to  Videodrone
February 20, 2015 3:27 pm

Video Drone! The First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution still IS! Ivan can call us names (God bless him, heh) and we can announce truth boldly.
If “Net neutrality” or a “hate speech” or what-EVER anti-freedom of expression unconstitutional law is passed, IT WILL NOT STAND (for long).
Note: The U.S. Armed Forces do not swear to obey the POTUS, they pledge to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 4:43 pm

Just a bit of clarification. I love your comments, and though I am a bleeding-heart liberal, I am not a Green, nor one of the more unfavorable types we have left of the aisle, any more than most of the posters and commenters here are radical anythings! So keep it up.
However, I can say as a veteran that the armed forces do swear to obey the POTUS, in that part of their defense of the Constitution involves the broad and deep body of military law (now under the Uniform Code of Military Justice) whose structural backbone is the chain of command. In the US, every member of the armed forces can be located in one of several chains of command, with the POTUS at the top of more than one of them, and in swearing their oath, armed forces members find themselves in a binding contract under that military law to obey every single person above them in any chain (except where tactical reasons would preclude it). So the words of the swearing-in oath do not contain all of the corollary oaths to which the new member is subjecting him- or herself.
Interestingly, once in that bind, the member also is not protected (in practice in the US) by the Bill of Rights to the extent that a civilian would hope to be. It is a very imperfect system (just ask all of us draftees during the Vietnam War), but it is a rational model of how to shape American libertarians into a fighting force. It requires the member to suspend his own expectation of American liberties during the tour of duty.
The US military is not the best in the world solely because of expensive weaponry. When they went into Iraq, our men and women were ready (except for the lack of armor on some boondoggle vehicles and other contractor atrocities) when their feet hit the ground; now, after nearly 14 years, the Iraqi Army “may not be ready to take on ISIS”, so the US will be there with air strikes and artillery, etc. The Army is not going to depose the POTUS in our lifetimes, I would expect, because our Army is very well trained to be revolution-averse, as it should be.
We do need to reel in the imperial presidency, but that will require rewriting a lot of laws to prevent Executive Orders that are clearly unconstitutional–but that involves changes in the SCOTUS as well as the POTUS, plus a Congress that is willing to pass rational laws (not sitting around shouting) and back them up with veto-proofing. Maybe a bit of wishful thinking.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 6:01 pm

Hi, Mr. Newkirk,
And I enjoyed YOUR thoughtful comment. You are correct, however, conflict of laws analysis puts POTUS where he or she belongs, second. When what the POTUS “commands” conflicts with the Constitution of the United States of America, the controlling legal authority is the legal document that also creates the office of POTUS, the Constitution.
No one, not Richard Nixon, not Barack Hussein Obama, no one is above the law.
While the members of the Armed Forces have temporarily restricted liberties, to honor their oath, they must not obey any order which illegally restricts the liberties of private citizens.
Thank you, so much, for your kind words to me. You and I (given that you are a “bleeding heart liberal”) disagree on much, but, I think we agree on more. Thank you for your generosity to someone on “the other side of the aisle.”
Re: unconstitutional Exec. Orders, it is often a slow process, but, civil litigation will take them to the SCOTUS where the Constitution will ultimately control. In the meantime, patriotic/liberty minded citizens can find creative ways to do a “slow down” of those anti-liberty orders… . Messages get garbled and sometimes supplies are mistakenly sent 1,000 miles in the opposite direction… and well…. :). We citizens are NOT passive and we will NOT take this (we just need to be careful in how we maneuver at times).
I am, to make myself clear here, NOT calling for the military to remove the current POTUS from office. I do not think this is necessary to preserve and protect our liberties (as bad as things are looking). America will outlive this administration and come back, stronger than ever. Just a matter of time.
Hang in there, everyone who cares about our great nation — good things, MANY good things, are ahead. The best is yet to be! (“… the last {centuries}, for which the first {were} made.” R. Browning.)
Your Ally for Truth in Science and FOR LIBERTY!,

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 7:18 pm

From a time when Giants walk the earth The Newburgh Affair 1783
George Washington
He hesitated for a moment as he looked down at the letter before fumbling to retrieve a pair of spectacles from his pocket. Before reading the letter, Washington, in an almost apologetic tone said, “Gentlemen, you must pardon me. I have grown old in the service of my country and now find that I am growing blind.” The eyes of most of his audience filled with tears. The content of the letter became irrelevant as the assembled officers realized that Washington had given as much or more in the service of the new nation as any of them. Within minutes, the officers voted unanimously to express confidence in Congress and their country.
nuff said

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 7:40 pm

Enlistment Oath – “I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
The orders given by “the President of the United States and orders of the officers appointed over me” have to be lawful under the Constitution or the service person that follows them will be in violation of their oath. And that is, stated as simply as possible, is the bottom line. We who served swore our oath to the PEOPLE as represented by the Constitution and not the Government or the NCA (National Command Authority).
Based on some surveys done of service members this distinction is generally not understood by first term enlisted. But the majority of NCOs of Officers do understand it. The authority of the NCA is not absolute, but that of the Constitution which is in fact the representation of the people, is.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 7:52 pm

Well, hoo-rah, Rah! #(:))
Well put. Thank you for sharing that — and thank you for your service to our country! We owe you. Military life is hard, even if you never saw “action,” (and that you were willing to endure to the utmost for America was wonderful — thank you, thank you).
If you are RAH the truck driver — stay safe. I have a list of “professional drivers” I pray for DAILY. You (or “RAH,” anyway) are on it.
Take care, out there on those snowy roads!

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 9:21 pm

Yes Janice I’m the truck driver. And thank you for your prayers. This winter I’ve needed every edge I could get. Toughest in my 10 years of OTR driving. As for my service? It gave back to me every bit as much as I put into it.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 9:48 pm

You’re so welcome. Take care, rah. Janice

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 10:04 pm

Janice; rah; I’m in ignorance please enlighten me. rah janice can vouch for me.
I study History… military history. also I’m also by trade a machinist. Most of my career I made things that go bump and slaughter in the night To drop a name Sikorsky aircraft. much of the family worked there.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 12:33 am

You know Mike, all one has to do to get a handle on it is to remember that the Government owes it’s existence to, and gets it’s Legal authority from, the same Constitution the military is sworn to protect and defend.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 12:41 am

BTW Mike you and I have a similar interest. I to am an amateur Military Historian concentrating on primarily the wars our own country has fought but also on some others. I would judge my most extensive knowledge is of our Civil War and WW II. Will be returning to Gettysburg for the 6th time this summer. Have spent about a month there in total previously and still have things to learn. Have been to all the Major battlefields of that war and most of them from Germany to Normandy, France and a few in Northern Italy, studying WW II.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 7:38 am

Oh, dear Mike, the dedicated, scholarly, machinist — of COURSE I will vouch for you!
You and rah (thanks for sharing about yourself, O scholarly driver) oughta become pen pals!

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 12:09 pm

“I, _____ , having been appointed an officer in the (Service) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”
One can not both support and defend the constitution and obey the orders of a criminal president, or any commander.
Not sure how one can be veteran or military man and vote into office a fraudulent law breaking, insecure, impotent, masochistic, and psychopath neurotic narcissist who openly “fears” veterans as part of his regimes enemy list. The same person who has militarized his puppet agencies with automatic weapons and hollow point ammunition to be used solely on its citizenry. The same person who has divided rather than joined.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 3:20 pm

Be assured I certainly did not either time. Last presidential election night I went to sleep in my sleeper in the Pilot truck stop in Waco, TX. Woke up early the next morning, heard the results, went in and filled my thermos with coffee and hit the road. Didn’t even unplug my head set from the charger. I was taking no calls. Did not stop until I got to the Flying J in Charleston, MO on I-57. Went in to the Huddle House there to eat and intending to take my next 10 hour break. Ordered a glass of chocolate milk while I decided. The girls working there were so exuberant with the election results I lost my appetite. While paying for my Chocolate milk another trucker paying at the register looked at me with his moist eyes, shook his head, and simply said “unbelievable”. I drove back to my home terminal in Anderson, IN from there without stopping. Yea, I violated the hours of service rules that day. That night when I got home I took the flag down from my 30′ pole in the front yard. The pole remained bare for 6 months until my wife told me: “Honey, that’s just not YOU!” She was right. It went back up but under it then still today flies a ‘Don’t Tread On Me’ flag.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 22, 2015 9:34 am

Rah, rest assured my comment is pointed not at you, but at the bigots who talk patriotism, then vote for the anti-constitutional traitors liken to J Kerry; who single handedly with the help of Jane Fonda followers etc. turned veterans and active military personnel into murderous criminal thugs. Resulting in risking your life when wearing the uniform in public. I remember clearly those moments; not bitter, but cognizant of the wickedness in character of the socialist left. The post like this are another example of the creeps who seek to destroy rather than build. Stay vigilant. Keep those flags flying!

B Kindseth
February 20, 2015 1:32 pm

The debate is between those that have faith in climate models that cannot be validated by empirical data and those that look at the data. The issue is that the climate models do not agree with empirical data.

Reply to  B Kindseth
February 20, 2015 1:53 pm

I wish it was.
In reality it is just a political argument, where facts have gone out the window

February 20, 2015 1:33 pm

How do these people sleep at night?

Reply to  Stephen Rasey
February 20, 2015 1:42 pm

In hydrocarbon fueled, government subsidized, 1st class hypocritical comfort.

Reply to  Stephen Rasey
February 20, 2015 5:55 pm

On a bed of money?

Tom in Florida
February 20, 2015 1:33 pm

If you join do you get a brown shirt and jack boots?

Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 20, 2015 1:50 pm

Green Shirt & hobnailed Birkenstocks.

Janice Moore
Reply to  milodonharlani
February 20, 2015 3:23 pm

heh. And a bamboo billy club.

February 20, 2015 1:34 pm

ISIS affiliate

February 20, 2015 1:34 pm

Since 2009, we’ve increased solar power ten-fold and tripled wind power…

… and, pop quiz time, what fraction do wind and solar combined constitute of US energy use, in spite of spending an enormous amount of money on them compared to fuel-based alternatives?
Oh, wait, is that less than 2%? It is, isn’t it.
Which means what, exactly? If wind and solar were capable of supporting the base load in energy demand that is there at night, in the winter, and at times and places that the wind doesn’t blow even if they DO let companies place giant wind turbines in MBY’s across the country — which they are not — and we we added 2% every five years at the cost of around half a trillion dollars — then in 50 years we would be providing 100% of our energy from these sources, at a cost of 25 trillion dollars, except that if our economy actually grew over this time instead of collapsing as we tried to survive on energy that simply goes away or isn’t available in places where there is no wind or sufficient sunshine we’d still be only halfway there as our energy needs might reasonably double over 50 years otherwise.
Or maybe the intent is to cause the economy to tank in equal measure to the increase in “renewable” energy sources and meet somewhere in the middle, or maybe even back to the early 20th century levels so that only the wealthy can afford to turn on their lights at night.
But I digress. And don’t care. Only — this isn’t very funny, Friday or not…

Reply to  rgbatduke
February 20, 2015 1:45 pm

Don’t you mean 100% of our energy for 7 hours a day if the sun is out and the wind is blowing fast enough (but not too fast) and it never, ever stops?

Janice Moore
Reply to  NielsZoo
February 20, 2015 2:18 pm

lol, yeah, Niel of the Zoo. 🙂
For proof that wind power is a big, fat, permanently negative ROI, l1e,
See Ruth Lea in “Civitas”:
Also see
And see

Janice Moore
Reply to  rgbatduke
February 20, 2015 2:04 pm

Re: The Myth of Solar Energy
Ozzie Zehner video: “Green Illusions” (youtube)

(I do NOT endorse ALL of its content — some is highly accurate, however)
[6:55] — As of 2012, less than ONE TENTH OF 1%, i.e., less than .001% (< .1 Quads), of total energy (114 Quads. for N. America) is supplied by solar. [7:11] — Graphic of N. American total energy v. solar (tiny dot v. big bucket).
Caveat re: Mr. Zehner: He is an irrationally anti-nuclear power, Church of Anti-consumption (albeit good-intentioned) religious zealot, BUT, he knows his stuff about solar power and makes a good point about the gross ineffectiveness and hypocrisy of solar/wind. They will NEVER be cost-effective and they promote not reduce fossil fuels/CO2 = not “green” = hypocrisy.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:11 pm

And excellent expose of the fallacy of windpower/solar power is found in Peter Huber’s book, Hard Green: Saving the Environment from the Environmentalists: A Conservative** Manifesto:
**”Conservative” means “conservationist,” not politically conservative (although, most “conservatives” would likely agree with Mr. Huber).

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 8:30 pm

What always seems to be lost in this whole argument is that “wind mills’ were never ever meant to generate electricity even 6000 years ago people used the for the sole reason to pump water and to grind cereals . Even then those people were logical thinkers,

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 9:54 pm

Good point, A Sybot.
Lol, come to think of it… why didn’t Western Telegraph… or American Telephone & Telegraph… or Thomas Edison & Co….. not hook their equipment up to windmills? Just think where they would be today if they had! 🙂

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 12:16 pm

Because these are high tech windmills. Haven’t you ever heard of Moore’s law?

david smith
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 5:09 pm

I really’re being sarcastic…

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 5:15 pm

Heh, heh, thanks for the laugh, Harold. #(:))
And, just in case someone currently being duped by the Enviroprofiteers takes you seriously (leaving aside the Moore’s law quip, lol), here’s why Boeing’s plants are not EVER going to be powered to any meaningful degree by windmills:
DOOMED to failure.
@ All windmill venture investors: Sell now — while your stock is still worth anything at all.

Bob Diaz
February 20, 2015 1:36 pm

When you don’t have logic, reason, or facts on your side, attack the person.
On the other hand, their list is a group of people we should support.

Reply to  Bob Diaz
February 20, 2015 4:40 pm

Fascists who demonize their opposition are . . . Nazis.

February 20, 2015 1:36 pm

Wow, that “97 percent of climate scientists agree” lie just won’t die.

Janice Moore
Reply to  PaulH
February 20, 2015 1:48 pm

They don’t have anything else.

The ‘97% consensus’ article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country [UK] that the energy minister should cite it.”

– Mike Hulme, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of East Anglia (UEA)”
The 97% l1e has been resoundingly refuted.
Hint to All the Gullibles:
That’s — why — Ivan — is — screaming — so — loudly.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 1:55 pm

97% is useful as it implies those whom you respect think this is true.
But “What is truth?”
Those who don’t know will always seek any answer that’s available.
And they will do anything – without morality – if they grab a convenient answer.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:20 pm

Uh, Mr. Courtney?
So…. their l1e is “useful.”
Your point…?

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:40 pm

Sorry Janice, I thought you would know the reference.
The Lie is Useful. It serves a purpose. Yes, it does; it serves a purpose.
But the purpose is expedient – it helps the liar in the immediate term for obvious reasons.
Yet, it misses the big picture. It doesn’t see whole.
And the example I referenced with “What is truth”?
This, John Chapter 18 Verse 38.
Which was a rather bad crime to commit for good intentions.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:48 pm

And re: Pontius Pilate’s words: “What is truth?” He MEANT that truth is well and good, but politics and mob rule (such as that which he was dealing with at that moment) trump truth when cowardly leaders cave into them.
That quote is often misused to promote nihilism, so I took the opportunity to try to inform, here. Truth is fact. It may not be known (e.g., how many stars are there? why do people have only two eyes at most? what if …. :)), but it is knowable (by God, if by no one else). L1es sometimes win the day… but,
Truth is.
And, in the end, the truth Pilate sacrificed to the shouts of the crowd triumphed in spite of him.
The tomb is empty.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:55 pm

Yes, Mr. Courtney (eye roll with a smile), I knew that reference. I just don’t see how pointing that out does anything to either support or refute the AGWers except to say: They l1e because it is useful.
So be it. 🙂
Truth WILL win!

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 3:51 pm

Truth hardly ever wins. I’m not quite sure why some people keep posting that “Truth will win.”
Perhaps “Truth will win for a season.” But the fight against dogmatic superstition based totalitarianism has been, is now, and always will be a battle. And by ‘truth’, I mean evidence based reasoning. The bible quotes and references are a huge turn-off for those of us non-religious science based people… or at least this one in particular…
‘Truth’ – meaning evidence based reasoning – has lost in almost every civilization during nearly every point in history. This very time moment, there are millions, perhaps billions, of humans being taught that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and that any thought against this ‘fact’ is a Western lie… truth doesn’t win. Guns, money, and violence win. Science and evidence based reasoning may win in times of peace, prosperity, and plenty, but the ‘win’ is usually rather short lived historically speaking. Eventually the hemlock is administered to the ‘truth.’

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 6:26 pm

Dear Not Laughing,
Yes, the War for Truth is perennial. Truth, in the end, DOES win EVERY battle, nevertheless. Are we burning “witches”? Are slaves still being imported from Africa? Are we bleeding people to cure them? Can women vote? Did the Axis powers win WWII? Did their vile Superior Race (whether the Japanese or the German brand) propaganda enslave the world in perpetual hatred? Are we still treating stomach ulcers with a glass of milk? Is the Berlin Wall still standing?
That there are l1es being taught in obscure corners of the world’s battlefield about the Sun or other long-known science does not negate Truth’s triumph on main front.
So, too, with the AGW Gang, they — have — lost. The are fighting a war of desperation on the very fringes of the battlefield of ideas. We must keep up a permanent guard, however. Sites like this will be truth’s valiant outposts to keep the ly1ng rats in their holes.
Re: my passing reference to Jesus’ resurrection, just ignore it and other Bible texts. I manage to ignore a LOT of stuff that is said on this site in the interests of camaraderie and promotion of science facts. I’ll bet you can do it, too.
And try laughing — it helps keep things in perspective. #(:))
Your jolly ally for truth,

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 8:02 pm

I admire your sunny disposition. However, it is far from reality. WWII or its like can and will occur again. The scientific method is not common sense. Evidence based reasoning is not a natural human tendency. In fact, humans, like most animals, are natural statisticians with a high tendency toward false positive response. We naturally see and assign ‘intent’ to disconnected events. This means that all evidence based knowledge is always at risk of falling prey to be discarded and disregarded by human society and civilizations.
In short, superstition is our ‘natural’ state – it is and always will be easier to convince a room full of humans that the burned toast was ‘meant’ to look like Jesus – rather than simply your brain assembling coincidental disparate splotches into a facial impression because that’s what brains do… And this is the heart of the problem of CAGW. Sure, there are ‘bad actor’ scientists and propaganda machines working to exploit the fear, uncertainty, and doubt — but the basic issue is one of a natural human tendency for anthropocentric thought and decision making. The same forces are at work in astrology as well as CAGW as well as in Cargo Cults and all religions. This is why name calling is always hypocritical. And it is always wrong to pigeon-hole individuals. Calling for conservatives to rise up and fight liberals is just as preposterous as the reverse. Not all conservatives are pro-science, not all liberals are CAGW propagandists — not all liberals are evolutions [which is pro-science] and not all conservatives are creationists [which is anti-science] — not all Ivy League college graduates are liberals nor even wealthy nor smart, and not all State-college graduates are poor conservatives nor not-smart.
Say instead – join in the fight against superstition where ever it is found — because as Dawkins writes – superstition is the enemy of reason. And the enemies of reason are enemies of science and ‘progress’ whatever that term might mean.
‘Truth’ is hard won and easily lost. Don’t underestimate the combined power of natural born human superstition, political strength and will, along with the wealth and means to control and deliver the message. And always remember that science and math are hard – it takes time and practice to understand these things – and very few actually wish to spend that time or work hard in practice.

david smith
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 5:24 pm

” I manage to ignore a LOT of stuff that is said on this site in the interests of camaraderie and promotion of science facts. I’ll bet you can do it, too.
And try laughing — it helps keep things in perspective. #(:))”
Thank you Janice. As a commited atheist, I find it good to see someone with different ideas to my own still ready to ignor our differences and work together to fight the evil that is CAGW zealotry.
And have a laugh as well 🙂

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 21, 2015 7:12 pm

Dear David Smith,
Thank YOU. And, oh, boy, I had to ignore a LOT of poor ol’ Not’s comment, as you can see! Thanks for taking the time to smile at me. Much appreciated.
Your Ally for Truth in Science,
P.S. You will consider it a waste of time, but I will (and just did!) be praying you will not only realize God is, but that God loves you and wants to be your Abba, not just your Creator. Okay! I won’t bring THAT up again! …. er… with YOU, I mean… heh. #(:)) Thanks for not spitting. Just got my sweater back from the cleaners… .

Reply to  PaulH
February 20, 2015 2:52 pm

I believe it’a now 103% percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made.

Janice Moore
Reply to  VicV
February 20, 2015 2:56 pm

Of course.

Reply to  VicV
February 21, 2015 12:20 pm

Go for broke. 103% of climate scientists did not have sex with that … windmill.

Reply to  PaulH
February 20, 2015 3:17 pm

Janice, that they lie because it is useful – that is the point.
We don’t lie, despite it being useful to do so, because the truth is important.
They do. They do lie.
And the impact of that call is immeasurably expensive.
It requires talk of the infinite and the eternal to encompass the value of truth.
Truth is real.
It’s worth stating this because the observers who visit here should know our values.
Although we are not in full Communion, I know.

Reply to  MCourtney
February 20, 2015 6:22 pm

It’s hard to know though what fraction truly, if lazily and naively, believes, and what fraction actually lies consciously and intentionally. I personally know quite a few highly educated people who believe every word of it and simply don’t take the time to check the facts, or even think, for themselves.

Owen in GA
Reply to  MCourtney
February 20, 2015 9:02 pm

I know several scientists who mouth this stuff about AGW and when asked they will say “I don’t have time to research it so I have to believe the researchers who do.” It isn’t apathy per se, but rather that they know that they publish only real findings and find it very difficult to believe that another scientist might not put the same care into their methodologies and conclusions that they themselves do in a totally unrelated field. It is a real predicament to convince those who are very busy in another field of science to look at the data and spend the time to think about it. I don’t know what can be done to fix that either because their casual belief is misleading their students who tend to hang on every off-hand remark because that PhD behind the name means they know more…the students have no idea that these folks have never looked into it past the press releases.

david smith
Reply to  MCourtney
February 21, 2015 5:34 pm

“Although we are not in full Communion, I know.”
This sums up WUWT entirely. I know MCourtney has taken a lot of flack from other WUWT commenters for his left-leaning views, but I know we.respect him for standing by his convictions.
However, at SkS he would have been banned for not agreeing with the ‘concensus’…

February 20, 2015 1:39 pm

Grassroots Organizing
Policy Analysis
Speech Writing
Legislative Relations
Project Planning
Community Outreach
Environmental Advocacy
Public Relations
Political Consulting
Political Campaigns
Public Policy
Program Development
Message Development
Strategic Planning
Political Communication
Crisis Communications
Public Speaking
Program Evaluation
Event Planning
Strategic Communications
Higher Education
Environmental Policy
Social Networking
Press Releases
Volunteer Management
Community Organizing
Community Development
Political Science
Energy Policy
Media Relations
International Relations
Grant Writing
Climate Change…
Social Media
Imagine that. The only science I see on our Real School of Government Graduate of Genius is Political Science.

Russ R.
Reply to  Todd
February 20, 2015 3:37 pm

“Say you’ll help take them to task — join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers:”
So, if they are taking us “to task”, and “calling out” our “myths and conspiracy theories”, they should certainly be interesting in a PUBLIC DEBATE, where they can show how morally superior, their scientific methods are. They can expose our ” ludicrous arguments” for all to see.
I won’t hold my breath, because we know, and more importantly, THEY KNOW, how that would turn out.
Only the dead-enders are foolish enough to still be flogging this dead horse. Ivan Frishberg you have be Grubbered!

Reply to  Russ R.
February 21, 2015 6:35 am

Skeptics have been doing the “Calling Out” for some time now. Still no debate.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Todd
February 21, 2015 6:45 am

Todd, a long way to say you have no real skills. It used to be called smoke shoveling. An engineer would probably list 3 or 4.

February 20, 2015 1:41 pm

China has no plans on abating emissions under the agreement at all. They will continue until 2026 when they agreed to hold them at that level. In the meantime China is pushing on with developing new technology in their coal powered generators and further development of nuclear power. In other words Obama sold out a bit more sovereignty to China for nothing in return.
India flatly refused as they want to bring electricity to another 300million people. India have banned Greenpeace and or other climate activists as acting against India’s interests.
Even Canada has listed the worst of climate activists as dangerous.
Far from knocking down sceptical arguments, the warmists have fired all their bullets and are now releasing cartoonish repeats and combinations of failed models. It is like kicking a car that has run out of fuel. Not going to make it go one more inch but will show you up as an idiot.
They repeat the dismally wrong 97% figure. Really shows how desperate they are. Obama has seen his CCX membership decline to zero, so like any door to door encyclopaedia salesman he is knocking on email doors with any old thing he can cobble together.
Sad Sack redefined.

February 20, 2015 1:43 pm

Still don’t get the point, do they? Few deny that climate changes. Many question it’s causes and what it’s actual course has been, and the kneejerk legislation masquerading as assurance of it’s future control. Some pretend to know it’s future course and will work as long as the funding holds out, to try and match current events of weather to the doom-saying that, if moderated, would hold the attention of only a few on the fringes of science.
I saw well chosen rhetoric here, glossing over a hidden agenda, with no actual data presented or cited.

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
February 20, 2015 2:02 pm

Actually Dawtgtomis, I think they know exactly what they are doing and part of that is to keep repeating their ridiculous mantras until the naive, after hearing it so often, will believe it to be true. To my thinking, they have collected and organized their talking points so, like little robots, they are all regurgitating the much same nonsense.
When you attempt to communicate with them, the response is nearly always some version of “Na-Na-Na-Na, I can’t hear you, you denier.”
In short, how could an intelligent person possibly communicate with someone who believes that there are accurate records of global temperatures (to the hundredth of a degree) from the early 1900s (or late 1800s) or even in 2014? That thinking alone tells you all you need to know about the person’s intelligence and reasoning ability.

Reply to  spock2009
February 20, 2015 2:03 pm

Should read, “they are all regurgitating much the same nonsense.”

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  spock2009
February 20, 2015 3:34 pm

Repeating a lie is classic propaganda.

John M
February 20, 2015 1:44 pm

If you like your Global Warming, you can keep your Global Warming…

Bubba Cow
Reply to  John M
February 20, 2015 2:31 pm

thanks, made me laugh

February 20, 2015 1:47 pm

So the President is allowing bigots to invoke his name. Sad.

February 20, 2015 1:49 pm

We can’t call ISIS Islamic, we can hardly can call them terrorists, we certainly can’t make a cartoon of the profit (sic), but we sure can call people who disagree with us “deniers.”

Will Nelson
February 20, 2015 1:52 pm

President of the willing, Mocker of the rest.

February 20, 2015 1:56 pm

I notice that Mr. Frishberg doesn’t provide any links to back up his claims.
I wonder why not.
Unless of course he can’t because there aren’t any.

Reply to  Oldseadog
February 21, 2015 3:09 pm

That w.w.w. stuff is for computer nerds, not Patriots. (Uh-huh, sarc 😉

February 20, 2015 1:56 pm

They know who we are. They know where we live. But we be few and they be many.

Janice Moore
Reply to  kim
February 20, 2015 2:27 pm

Oh, man, Kim, for laughing out loud. DON’T WORRY.
“They” can barely balance their checkbook, much less figure out where “we” are.
And, they really aren’t “many.” Most people do not give one rat’s toothbrush about “climate change.” That’s why Ivan is screaming his lungs out. People keep just brushing past him on the sidewalk, bumping into his plastic chair, and giving him dirty looks for getting in their way. Just laugh and ignore him (and “them”).

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 2:35 pm

plus 800,000 bad returns in first charge out of the health care chute – it’s a rodeo

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 4:09 pm

Trouble is, everybody needs to pay attention to the UN and climate resolutions. Nip the madness in the bud.

Reply to  kim
February 21, 2015 9:50 pm

I thought that Kim was just taking the mickey! It made me laugh as it turned that silly threat around.

Harry Passfield
February 20, 2015 1:57 pm

Having seen Ivan’s website I reckon he is guilty of hate speech. But in the land of the free it seems he is free to be a bigot.

February 20, 2015 2:00 pm

Does someone need to start making a list of climate fraudsters, for when the world wakes up to this scam?
Obama et al would have to be near the top.

February 20, 2015 2:00 pm

Oh no! “new reports are showing climate and extreme weather impacts are affecting us right now!”
As opposed to my youth when there were no climate or extreme weather impacts;) Not actionable lies, just idiot fodder.
Note my use of an emoticon. I saw another new report which proved that those who use emoticons have more sex and I figured it couldn’t hurt, much;)

Reply to  Sciguy54
February 20, 2015 11:09 pm

Ah, yes. Those sacrine flavored days of my youth, when the sun was shining and the weather was sweet. And never a cloud darkened my day. How I’ve missed them so. Can’t we all spare a dime (or 30, minimum) for our dear Brother Ivan, So he can bring back those perfect days.
Also, 🙂 🙂 😀 :o) :] :3 :c) :> =] 8) =) :} :^) :っ) 😀 8-D 8D x-D xD X-D XD =-D =D =-3 =3 B^D 😉 🙁 :p x_x >^_^_<

Janice Moore
Reply to  schitzree
February 21, 2015 11:27 am


February 20, 2015 2:00 pm

Unfortunately, it’s only a matter of time before people will begin to be arrested for sedition and/or incitement to riot for posting actual data showing the stability of the global climate or for supporting the view that CAGW is not factual.

Reply to  not_laughing
February 21, 2015 6:39 am

That’s when the second American Revolution starts.

February 20, 2015 2:01 pm

I am a “denier” because I read the real peer reviewed science, the ones that give their sources and references, Wonder how he derived the 97% and what was the actual question that they were asked.

February 20, 2015 2:02 pm

Glad I do not deny that climate has changed, is changing and will change…

February 20, 2015 2:07 pm

It’s so characteristic of the totalitarian, Orwellian US administration to out right lie to the public.
By facts on their side do they refer to the 17 year plateau? Or perhaps do they refer to the IPCC themselves distancing themselves from the CO2 extreme weather link which they push in this piece of effluent.
They must still be using the debunked 97% consensus figure just to piss off the skeptics.

February 20, 2015 2:13 pm

I see his climate policy is as clever as his Middle Eastern policy.
Often times bad policy doesn’t blow up around your ears before you even get out of office, unless it’s especially stupid.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  Will Nitschke
February 20, 2015 3:40 pm

But his technique for persecuting opponents is clever, if malevolent.

February 20, 2015 2:14 pm

Hundreds of thousands of Americans work in clean energy today.

…vs. how many jobs lost in the fossil fuels sector and green tech. related job exports? Not to mention government programs cut in order to fund climate research.
…does this include the carbon credit brokers as well?

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
February 21, 2015 8:36 am

I got a survey about green jobs. It includes trash collection and dealing with regulations as “green”–not exactly productive work, eh?

February 20, 2015 2:15 pm

Regressing back to medieval times. Guess we skeptics should all be hunted down and burned at the stake. (Climate denial witches! Climate denial witches!) Sounds as though they’re getting to that stage.

Reply to  CD153
February 20, 2015 8:59 pm

They already are, as in prosecuting people using frivolous lawsuits. ( like Steyn is and others are on that list as well)

February 20, 2015 2:17 pm

Obama’s one good initiative. Sock it to ’em!

John M
Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 2:39 pm

Have to admit that when he’s getting rolled by China and India on climate negotiations he’s doing less harm than when his getting rolled on really important foreign policy decisions.

David A
Reply to  John M
February 20, 2015 5:28 pm

If the US was bound to follow his agreements it would be economic disaster. Fortunately we are not so bound, and will not follow them.

Ursus Augustus
February 20, 2015 2:22 pm

From:- Gaia Gestapo HQ
To:- All Earthian eco apparatchiks
By the order of the Earth Fuehrer Collective, the eco- einzatsgruppen are ready for action mein kameraden!

Harry Passfield
February 20, 2015 2:23 pm

My reply to Ivan:

Ivan – ‘Friend’, thank you for your recent communication, the contents of which have been noted.
Please don’t be upset if I have to turn down your kind offer “to join your team”. You see, I have always been very careful about following my Mom’s advice: “don’t play with Nazis”. She also thought that people like you have very small winkles (my Mom was very old-fashioned) and that’s why you tend to over-compensate.
Furthermore, it was always thought that men (I use the term advisably) like you, who hide behind a leader’s honourable name (note: no matter what we think of Obama, POTUS is an honourable estate) are lower than the stuff I stepped in the other day.
One of life’s 3percenters.

Bodge it an Scarpa
Reply to  Harry Passfield
February 21, 2015 9:12 pm

Just a lurker here and my comment is not very relevant to the conversation. Although i have always used “winkle” to describe a male’s lower appendage, I haven’t heard or read anyone else use it for over 50 years. .

Bryan A
February 20, 2015 2:24 pm

The green economy is really like the earth being held up by four Elephants standing up on the back of a Turtle being supported by lies. And it’s Lies all the way down from there

February 20, 2015 2:26 pm

We have facts on our side. Our facts refuse to be paraded in public. Instead of exposing them, we would rather expose our opponents – and anybody who is not 100% with us is our opponent.

Reply to  Curious George
February 21, 2015 6:45 am

Fellow Americans, hunt down
fellow denier Americans.
Divide and conquer.

Janice Moore
Reply to  RobRoy
February 21, 2015 7:19 pm

And, fortunately, the response of the “average American” will be:
“Yo — Ivan. Keep it down over there, we’re tryin’ to watch the game.”
Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaaa!

Ralph Kramden
February 20, 2015 2:27 pm

This is just alarmist desperation. They saw the results of the 2014 election and they know what is coming in 2016.

February 20, 2015 2:29 pm

If they didn’t seem to be enjoying their exalted status so much, I might feel sorry for them.
Instead I despise them.
I’ll have to bite my tongue now, seeing as this a family-oriented blog.

Janice Moore
Reply to  u.k.(us)
February 20, 2015 3:11 pm

I get what you’re saying, u.k.(us), however…. take a step back and think about it.
They, in the grand scheme of things, are dust. And their “glory” is fading as we speak.
You CAN do the one thing they hate most in the world:
They LOVE to be screamed at — they feed off your anger. Attention, per se, feeds their bloated egos.
I-G-N-O-R-E T-H-E-M.
Like you do the cow pie in the field across the road.
Yes, yes, they can reform and once again join the human race and we will welcome them back — until then, they are making dung piles of themselves and should be treated accordingly.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 20, 2015 3:51 pm

Hi Janice, it’s been awhile…
Ummm, you say ignore them, and also they like to be screamed at.
I say give them no quarter and grind them into the dust, problem solved.
The only thing that gives me pause, is my motivations.

Gunga Din
February 20, 2015 2:31 pm

The letter sounds like a desperate attempt to keep the dopes duped.
(or should that be “the duped dopes”? 😎

Janice Moore
Reply to  Gunga Din
February 20, 2015 3:12 pm

BOTH! Clever!

February 20, 2015 2:34 pm

Now Obama’s siding with scientists. Something evil is surely afoot.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 3:44 pm

He’s siding with his well-paid scientists employed by his government.

Bill H
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
February 20, 2015 7:32 pm

And forced to toe the party line of be thrown under the bus by Executive Order to remain silent about any conflicting science… EPA administrator once told staff that should they not believe in CAGW they were in her sights to be fired and to get out… She is such the benevolent dictator under Obama..

David A
Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 5:31 pm

warren the ignorant, be so kind as to provide me with the study saying 97% of scientist agree that mankind’s CO2 contributions to the atmosphere will result in catastrophic global disaster.

Reply to  David A
February 20, 2015 7:05 pm

David the Offensive: Can you falsify this much simpler metric?
ALL the National Science Academies of the world, plus NASA and NOAA, conclude ‘Earth is Warming, Man is the Cause, and the net effects are likely to be strongly negative’ or similar.
The world awaits your yes/no answer to this simplest of questions.

Janice Moore
Reply to  David A
February 20, 2015 7:46 pm

Oh, Warren Pound…,
Leaving aside the fact that your reply to David A. was rudely non-responsive ….
Let’s cut to the chase, to the underlying fact issue (which is not what ANY organization “concludes” about human CO2 emissions),
the issue is: is there any proof making AGW likely?
Thus, you skipped a step.
First, YOU, the proposer, need to prove:
1. The earth is warming.
2. The warming earth was caused by human CO2 emissions.
3. A warming earth is likely to be “strongly negative or similar.”
Until then, I would not expect David A. nor anyone else to waste their time responding.
@ David A. — in case you read this…
you may find this comment refuting the 97% l1e of interest:

David A
Reply to  David A
February 20, 2015 8:41 pm

warren, still waiting for your reply…

Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 5:53 am

@David A.
You say “Still awaiting your reply….”.
Sorry, I never said anything about 97% of Scientists. I cited a FACT about 100% of the Science Academies.
Can you falsify that FACT?
If not, that Truth stands.

CD 153
Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 8:01 am

Warren needs to learn and understand that we live in a world today where science and scientific, academic and government institutions are all willingly and easily corrupted by politics, massive amounts of money and activist (secular religious) agendas. Warren is sadly one of those who is foolish, naive and gullible enough to think that such a thing is not possible or likely.
Warren, human nature is at play here were lots of people can and do willingly become corrupted in the presence of massive amounts of money (billions) as well as the political power to advance there cause(s). If you can show us Warren where the same amount of money is is flowing in to the skeptic camp (and from where), I would like to see it. Please cite your evidence.
It is frustrating to see so many people like Warren in the world who are waaaay to trusting of the wrong people.

Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 10:44 am

You say “It is frustrating to see so many people like Warren in the world who are waaaay to trusting of the wrong people.”.
I’m sorry you’re so frustrated. I’m not. I know what to trust – science from Scientists and B**S from amateurs that think all the world’s scientific institutions are in a conspiracy against them. Reminds me of Chemtrails, 9-11 Truthers, and those that believe LBJ killed JFK.

Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 11:11 am

Just about every comment you make is an appeal to authority.
You want authorities? These authorities are more honest than the entire IPCC combined:

Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 12:11 pm

Astronauts as authorities on AGW? How about the Marines as authorities on Astronomy? Or, how’s that amateur hip replacement working for you?

Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 12:52 pm

Every astronaut is required to have a degree in the hard sciences. That makes them AUTHORITIES, whether you like it or not.
But of course, someone as pathetically ignorant as you would not know that. So you wrongly assume that astronauts are not authorities.
You don’t know much, do you, warrenlb? Not much at all. That’s why you always fall back on your appeal to your own corrupted authorities.
And how about the consensus here? If you look, you will see that you don’t have (m)any supporters here at the internet’s Best Science site. Why do you think that is, warrenlb? I’ll tell you why:
You come from a True Believer background, not a SCIENCE background. Catastrophic AGW is your RELIGION, whether you will admit it or not. You exactly fit Dr. Michael Crichton’s example of a religious lemming. Everything you write has the taint of your religious cult. Your religion causes you to get it wrong.
I don’t know of a single person you have convinced here. You are wasting your time, and you are wasting the time of everyone else here. Your arguments are a bunch of carp — they are almost entirely based on your appeals to corrupted authorities. The only true Authority is Planet Earth — and the planet has been busy debunking everything you believe in for the past 18+ years.
You are not fooling anyone, warrenlb. You are not convincing anyone, either. You are a major time sink here, constantly trolling with your logical fallacies.
Really, what good are you?

CD 153
Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 12:55 pm

Warren says:
“I’m sorry you’re so frustrated. I’m not. I know what to trust – science from Scientists and B**S from amateurs that think all the world’s scientific institutions are in a conspiracy against them. Reminds me of Chemtrails, 9-11 Truthers, and those that believe LBJ killed JFK.”
Oh my, Warren. How easily you twist my words. I said nothing about a conspiracy against anyone. I talked about corruption and why it is happening. I have to laugh if you are naive enough to believe that government and its agencies are totally honest (i.e. NOAA and NASA) and never lie to us about anything—including climate change. NOAA and NASA have no choice but to toe whatever political party line on the subject of climate that the White House tells them to. Their funding and their jobs depend on it.
Believe it or not, money DOES talk Warren–whether you like it or not. When billions of $$ are pouring into academia, science and its institutions from government, those scientists and their institutions listen, and they will toe whatever party line the money tells them to. If you expect me to believe that the health of their bank accounts are not vitally important to them and doesn’t affect their behavior, well…think again. This easily explains why this website and many of its commenters can poke enough holes in climate alarmism to make it look like a block of Swiss cheese. That is why this website is so popular. The job has to be done somewhere.
As for calling me an amateur, it is patently obvious to me that there are considerable emotions at play here on your part. Probably hate and mistrust mainly. Emotions often prevent us from objectively looking at things and believing what is true when we choose not to. If you left your emotions out of this and understood and respected science properly and how it operates, what you are saying here would be very different.
Again, I’m talking corruption here for the purpose of driving agendas, not conspiracies against people. And no, I don’t believe in chemtrail B.S., nor the 9-11Truthers or that LBJ killed Kennedy.

Reply to  David A
February 21, 2015 4:00 pm

@CD 153.
Those that reject the findings of ALL the Academies often claim a universal conspiracy to deceive, either explicitly or implicitly. Furthermore, those same individuals who reject peer-reviewed science do not submit their own work (if they have any) to peer-review for publication, and many claim fraud or conspiracy and impugn those that do the heavy lifting. Perhaps you do not. But it’s not an admirable performance by those that do.

Reply to  David A
February 22, 2015 2:51 am

warrenlb says:
… the findings of ALL the Academies…
warrenlb is a parody of himself, constantly arguing with the only tool in his shed: the Appeal to Authority FALLACY.
It didn’t work with Albert Einstein, and it doesn’t work here.
warrenlb has no credible facts, so he uses fallacies. No wonder he’s lost the debate.

masInt branch 4 C3I in is
February 20, 2015 2:34 pm

The Climate Jihadists will surely begin … The Inquisition. Ha Ha Queue Mel and the orchestra.

February 20, 2015 2:35 pm

Time to be heard by representatives in congress.

February 20, 2015 2:35 pm

It’s a cult. A pseudo religion with a distinctly material emphasis, where ostensibly rational and reasonable men and women defer their dignity to mortal gods. For a material return, of course. Their cause is helped by modern “scientists” common departure from the scientific domain. With politicians, educators, and scientists indulging in principles of uniformity and independence, and unqualified use of inference, it’s not surprising that many people do not understand the limits of the scientific domain, and the scientific method’s design and purpose to separate science, philosophy, and faith.
That said, deny rational, deny reasonable, deny science… deny thy mother and father. Send money. Submit.

February 20, 2015 2:37 pm

“…and we’re already spending hundreds of billions on climate-related disaster relief — no one is denying that.”
The Administration

The Federal spending is a system of slush funds, set up to induce states to adopt Climate Change policies in the near future – sight unseen.
It is really shameless that this spending is used as evidence of changes in earth’s climate.
ref: “NEW HAVEN >> There’s a slice of $1 billion awaiting those with the best prepared states and communities when it comes to climate change and severe weather.
It’s the National Disaster Resilience Competition, and there was a chance Wednesday at Yale University’s Kroon Hall for the public to see the ideas and talk up the best practices that will go into Connecticut’s entry.
“This is a competition that the federal government is having to figure out better ways to build that are more resilient in the face of rising sea levels and increasing storms,” said Kathleen Dorgan of Dorgan Architecture and Planning, one of the participants in Wednesday’s public hearing.”

Reply to  Zeke
February 20, 2015 2:39 pm

Darn Universities. Always interfering with our belief systems.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 4:30 pm

Pardon my ignorance, but what is a “belief system”?

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
February 20, 2015 4:43 pm


Pardon my ignorance, but what is a “belief system”?

His religion. His ideas are based on what he believes to be true, on what he wants things to be true, not on what the evidence and data show to be true. Thus, to some, the Bible is literally and completely true – not a series of literatures of poetry, songs, stories and parables, histories and – in the middle of these – the Revealed Truth. In warrenlb’s faith-based indoctrination inside Big Government and Big Science and Big Finance (well, his religion), he actually believes that “science” is Written Wholly Formed in the Per Review Literature and – only then, after it appears in words on paper – is the Truth Revealed.
further, he believes that All Science is unbiased and unafraid to confront anomalies and controversies in political goals.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 4:32 pm

…and what interference are you referring to?
Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 4:58 pm

Isn’t YOUR religion based on the beliefs of free markets, limited government, individualism, and patriotic militarism ?
I guess that your belief system is no different than warrenlb’s belief system.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 5:41 pm

Sorry if i missed some dry humor, but as a retired university staff member it raised my curiosity. although i do see the statement in a delightfully sarcastic manor, when I look again.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 6:37 pm

Socrates says:
I guess that your belief system is no different than warrenlb’s belief system.
Another wrong guess from the peanut gallery…
…but thanx for playing, and Vanna has some lovely parting gifts for you on your way out.

Janice Moore
Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 6:52 pm

Wrong again, ROFLOL! #(:))
Even I have read enough WUWT comments to know D.B. and R.A. have some shared beliefs but most certainly do NOT share a “religion.”
ha, ha, haaaaaaaaaaa!
OBTW: Free market economic theories have been proven by experiment to create the most wealth for the most people. Socialist experiments have proven that they inevitably shrink economies and end up a “dictatorship of the elite” — every time. And there are a LOT of atheists who are: 1. Free market proponents; and 2. For a strong military/peace through strength and very patriotic.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 6:57 pm

rodmol says:
Oh…and if I am not mistaken, you and RACook both subscribe to the same religion.
As a matter of fact, yes rodney, you are sadly mistaken — as usual:

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism.
Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it’s a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.
There’s an initial Eden; a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature. There’s a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion; that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs imbibe.
Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday — these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs
And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren’t necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It’s about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them.


The antithesis of a religious belief is the Scientific Method — something completely rejected by the alarmist cult. Thus, the beliefs of the enviro-cult are ipso facto a religion, while the position of scientific skeptics is science, which is the Un-Religion.
I don’t expect Socrates to understand that difference. He is simply incapable of seeing the forest for the trees. Logical thought is beyond him. But for skeptics — the large majority of those who are posting here, and the large majority of lurkers reading these articles and threads — their rational analysis leads them to the inescapable conclusion that the religious alarmist cult has never proven it’s case. Not even close.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 7:18 pm

Socrates says:
Still bird dogging me?
Shall I post the original thread, where you came out of nowhere, and started attacking me?
That proves two things beyond any doubt:
First, that you are fixated on my comments. You can’t help yourself. I can also link to both comments showing where I first pointed out that you have been bird-dogging my posts. Would you like for me to do that?
You’re just an impotent little chihuahua trying to nip at my heels, but you can never seem to come up with any credible facts. So you just copy my own comments. Sad and pathetic, no?
Can you come up with an original comment? Ever? Or are you so completely unimaginitive that you are incapable of doing anything but being a copycat? Plagiarizing the comments of others is just one more reprehensible problem you have.
And second: I have easily thrashed you like a rented mule every time you’ve tried to debate me. You don’t have either the necessary facts, or the ability to hold your own. If I didn’t enjoy playing Whack-A-Mole, I would just disregard your juvenile nonsense. But I do enjoy playing Whack-A-Mole, and I get pleasure out of knocking you around every chance I get. As you can see.
Trot along now back to Hotwhopper, or wherever you get your usual misinformation from. You’re still a long way from wearing your bigboy pants, and you are way out of your depth here.
Your religion is a case in point. As Dr. Crichton makes clear, you are a religious acolyte. That is 180º away from being a scientific skeptic like RACook, me, and many others here. We are skeptics — the only honest kind of scientists. But you are just a religious lemming; an enviro-cult member who wouldn’t know the Scientific Method if it bit you on the a… nkle.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 7:39 pm

Rodney says:
Go bother Gates and leave me alone.
You wish. Until you start answering questions, I will take pleasure in pointing out your sad inadequacies.
I’ve repeatedly answered your questions. But so far, you have never answered any of mine. Not a single one. The reason is clear: you are not capable of answering. All you are capable of doing is emitting nonsense. As long as you tuck tail and run away from answering questions, you will never get to wear your bigboy pants. Maybe you don’t want to be mature. Your juvenile comments make that pretty clear.
Now, isn’t it about time for you to run to momma moderator again, and cry about being picked on? Answer some questions, and the big dogs might leave you alone.
OK, since I’ve answered all your questions, here are two questions from me, for starters:
1. Can you produce any measurements of AGW? Even one? And…
2. What are your credentials? What’s your CV? Do you even have a CV? Others have asked you that question, now it’s my turn. What qualifies you to be anything more than a member of the peanut gallery?
It’s your turn, “Socrates”. I’ve answered, but you have just hidden out. Time to put up…
Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 7:44 pm

” you are not capable of answering.”
Please stop bird dogging me..

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 7:49 pm

Answer some questions, jamoke. And do try, at least, to come up with something original, instead of copying my ‘bird-dog’ comment. IF you can.
But if you can’t, I’ll take pleasure in pointing out that all you’re doing is copying what I originally told you. Twice.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. So keep imitating me, I enjoy seeing it.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 7:58 pm

Sure. Just answer the questions, jamoke.
[FYI: a jamoke is someone who sits around in a coffee shop all day, solving the world’s problems instead of working at a productive job. He has no credibility — and everyone knows it.]
If you think that’s calling you names, that’s about as mild as they come. It is far milder than “contrarian”, or “denialist”. And you never seeme concerned that one of your alarmist pals constantly labels me “dishonest” and “stupid” — both of those names are far worse than ‘jamoke’. Isn’t that so, you delicate little flower?
Answer my questions, Socrates. Then I won’t call you a jamoke.☺

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 8:08 pm

Calling someone names is disrespectful.
Then earn some respect. Answer the questions.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 8:11 pm

rodney me boi, I have been called much worse names by better than you.
You are still deflecting. Answer the questions.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 8:59 pm

“rodmol” sez:
I am truly sorry Mr Dbstealey.
No, you’re not. And you deserve no respect — sockpuppet.
Do you think people here are stupid?? You’re not sorry in the least. I think you’re a lowlife sockpuppet who goes by the screen names of ‘beckleybud’, and ‘David Socrates’, and ‘Edward Richardson’, and lots of others. Your M.O. is just too easy to spot. I can smoke you out no matter what sockpuppet name you use. It only takes a few of your comments. You’re not too smart, are you?
You are here only to run interference, trying to cause trouble at the internet’s Best Science site.
Well, you fail as always. Get a life. Quit acting like such a loser, “Socrates”.
[If I am mistaken, my sincere apologies. I could be wrong; I’m human, after all].
But I’m not mistaken, am I, “Gordon Ford”? No, your style is too easy to spot. From the first time you first posted [incorrectly] attacking my grammar under your current sockpuppet name, I suspected you were just another sockpuppet. I’m right, am I not?
Yes, Mr. Jamoke, I am right. You’re just a site pest. No bigboy pants for you, dummy! ☺

Reply to  warrenlb
February 20, 2015 9:14 pm

Janice Moore
” Socialist experiments have proven that they inevitably shrink economies” (replying to Janice Moore)

How are the “socialist” Interstate highways doing for you?

Not too bad. By the way, they were paid off a long time ago, but the ever-higher highway “maintenance” gas taxes? Got diverted to pay for other things Big Government wanted. Still not paying for the maintenance. Western dams and canals and highways? Getting torn up now by eastern socialists.

How are the “socialist” public schools doing for you?

Failing. The students don’t know anything, but the socialist bureaucrats outnumber the teachers.

How is the “socialist” Social Security System doing for you?

Going bankrupt. Even faster now with additional withdrawals to pay for extra claimants as disabled, youngsters added to the roles, etc. It will fail. Is failing.

How is the “socialist” Federal Reserve doing for you?

Propping up central banks, and looking for 30 trillion in carbon trading futures, 150 trillion in futures trading in other commodities, and causing inflation. As usual.

How is the “socialist” unemployment compensation doing for you?

About 1/2 the workforce is sitting at home in Obola’s economy. And not minding it at all.

How is the “socialist” Medicaid doing for you?

Going bankrupt even faster than Social Security. What? About 5 years now to crumble, since Obola’s ObomaCare is taking money from Medicare to reduce the first 10 years funding needed for ObamaCare.

Reply to  warrenlb
February 21, 2015 3:27 am

rodmol/socks says:
If that is all you can do……good luck.
Socrates, at least I use my real name. But you post under lots of sockpuppet names. You are a site pest who always tries to interfere here. You never really discuss science, you just keep posting about how wrong everyone is, and about your tender feelings.
How about posting under your real name for once? That would start you on the road to honesty. You have a long road ahead of you. You can start by taking that first step…

Reply to  warrenlb
February 21, 2015 6:09 am

All you really need to know about rodmol is his sick answers to RACook’s response about the socialized US.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  Zeke
February 20, 2015 3:04 pm

The Australian fishing vessel Antarctic Chieftain was rescued Tuesday (Feb 17) when the US Coast Guard icebreaker Polar Star broke through 150 miles (240 km) of ice and towed the damaged vessel free.
The Reuters story here correctly notes the Polar Star (WAGB-10 — commissioned 1976) is almost 40 years old and the only US heavy icebreaker suitable for this job. Her sister ship Polar Sea (WAGB-11 — commissioned 1977) has been out of service since 2010 due to complete failure of 5 of her 6 diesel engines. A report submitted in 2013 claimed it was possible to refit and reactivate her, but to my knowledge has not been acted on.
You want a climate change plan? How about: build more icebreakers, preferably nuclear powered.

Reply to  Zeke
February 20, 2015 3:05 pm

I have an idea for the rising seas. Everyone living within 2 miles of the coast gets a canoe, a bottle of water, and 2 cans of beans. Don’t know of my idea for increasing storms is worth it since storms aren’t increasing. But if they insist, everyone gets a free umbrella and galoshes.
Where do I pick up my check?

DD More
Reply to  Alx
February 20, 2015 3:23 pm

I liked the suggestion of an Australian guy on rising sea levels. “Every 50 years take one step back away from the sea.”

Janice Moore
Reply to  Alx
February 20, 2015 3:35 pm

Alx and DD — lololololololo

Grey Lensman
Reply to  Alx
February 21, 2015 3:12 am


Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Zeke
February 20, 2015 8:47 pm February 20, 2015 at 7:16 pm
PS Janice Moore
With regard to your ““dictatorship of the elite”

The USA is a plutocracy……
rodmol Oh do please ..define “plutocracy”, I wish to make sure you and I have the same understanding of the word…
p.s. so so many throw out these type of words with out understanding them and instead have a problem with them fact that a majority of the population simply does not buy their point of view or sees it as a non issue.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
February 20, 2015 10:00 pm

Hi, Mike — #(:)). (and R.A., too) — Thanks for the back up. I got tired of punching a pillow pretty quick.

Reply to  Mike the Morlock
February 20, 2015 10:12 pm

rodmol/beckleybud sez:
The USA is a plutocracy……
Face it Mr Cook, we live in a socialist system.
First off, there is nothing wrong with a plutocracy, so long as opportunities exist for anyone becoming plutocrats. In the U.S. that happens all the time. It’s called ‘churn’, and it allows everyone the opportunity to get rich.
Next: to the extent the U.S. has become socialist, it has denied opportunities to individuals, and it has reduced our national wealth. It’s like the old joke: “Looks good, but feels bad”.
Socialism is for losers, not for winners. No wonder rodmol/Socrates likes it.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
February 20, 2015 10:23 pm

Hi janice he seems to have called it a night. is he Socrates under a new name?
oh and look up the newburgh affair 1783. if you have head of it The continental army war was bordering on mutiny.The war was won but now the peace was at risk. Anyone can write laws but it is traditions that carve them into stone
It seemed appropriate to what you were discussing.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
February 21, 2015 8:23 am

Dear Mike,
How did you know I was wondering why… . 🙂 I vaguely remembered reading about the Newburgh Affair … . Well! I just looked it up and, yes, I think I finally see your fine point: the heart is the seat of wisdom and the key to true valor. The American soldier (or sailor or marine or airperson) can be counted on to do the right thing. Just as the Constitution supercedes all conflicting mandates of a president, so, too, when selfish (pardonably) interest (whether to protect their retirement benefits or another interest or to get paid as Washington’s troops wanted) says to obey what the letter of the law demands, they will follow a Higher Law and instead of serving self, serve Love (of country/of others). There are many modern examples that show this noble spirit is alive and well in the U. S. Armed Forces (that Capt. Mark Philips is alive bears witness to one of them).
The Revolutionary troops’ brains’ icy, just, conclusion (“You owe me.”) melted away before love’s tears. Love is the highest wisdom. True love is never in conflict with the facts; it simply places them in their proper light. Love makes us do the right thing with what we know.
Thank you for sharing some of your excellent scholarship and for persevering in getting me to understand.

February 20, 2015 2:41 pm
Ivan Frishberg has 20 years of organizing and advocacy experience, including public interest, environmental and electoral campaigns. He is the national Political Director for Environment America, and works to develop the organization’s political and campaign strategies. His prior experience includes working on legislative programs and strategies for the State PIRGs, federal advocacy on higher education policy and consulting for a wide range of campaigns and organizations including Rock the Vote, John Edwards for President, the Center for American Progress and the Democratic National Committee.
On the same page. . . .
Find out more about this exciting 1Sky/ merger and how you can stay involved with the climate movement at

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Jan
February 20, 2015 2:58 pm

that “John Edwards for President” deal didn’t go so well and
the exciting climate movement merger was orchestrated by Rockefeller Brothers Fund

February 20, 2015 2:45 pm

The political left has succeeded in bullying and intimidating people into silence. What they have failed to do is to persuade people to their position. And, by blurring the lines between science and politics, Climate Science, as an institution, has rendered itself un-trustworthy. I don’t think that climate science can ever recover from the damage they have done to themselves.

Reply to  mpaul
February 20, 2015 2:59 pm

They can recover, but requires politics first losing interest in them and their science and then climate scientists getting a passing grade in a remedial course in Science Principles 101.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  mpaul
February 20, 2015 3:47 pm

The political left has succeeded in bullying and intimidating people into silence. What they have failed to do is to persuade people to their position.
That’s not necessary. Someone bullied into silence can be ignored.

William Astley
February 20, 2015 2:46 pm

We are definitely moving into the twilight zone. If facts and analysis supports your theory pound the facts, if the facts do not support your theory, try name calling and repeating your rhetoric.
Reality check for warmist scientists. After no warming for 18 years, there is now suddenly record sea ice in the Antarctic for all months of the year and a recover of sea ice (including multiyear sea ice) in the Arctic. What caused the past warming and cooling cycles in the paleo record? Did you guys notice the sun was at its highest activity level in 8000 years during the global warming period?
Could a warmist scientist explain why there has been almost no tropical warming?
Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  William Astley
February 20, 2015 3:48 pm

Facts are not important. This is a political agenda.

dan easterling
February 20, 2015 2:47 pm


February 20, 2015 2:49 pm

Moron. Trying intimidation because nothing else is working.,

February 20, 2015 2:54 pm

Unfortunately Obama is incredibly divisive. It is ironic because his platform was about “uniting” the country. Anyone who looked at his political career in Chicago would know politically he was a back-stabbing SOB. In order to wrest the nomination from Hillary, the Obama campaign had to turn Bill Clinton into a racist. That took some doing, but he managed it. He needed 90% of the black vote to win and he got it.
This letter is not unusual, it is typical Obama. Slanderous, dishonest, ugly and of course divisive. He has no scruples when it comes to making political points. This is a guy who publicly communicated his grandma was a racist. He is just another creepy politician, have no idea why so few do not see through the facade.
Also do not understand why they haven’t dropped the Obama logo. It looks like a label for bottled water. Probably designed by the same outfit that does Poland Springs.

Jim Francisco
Reply to  Alx
February 20, 2015 4:26 pm

Well he is keeping his promise to “fundamentally change America”. The MSM did not bother to ask what those changes would be. Hope we don’t get fooled again.

Reply to  Alx
February 20, 2015 9:37 pm

Obama is the “front” man. it is the people like Ayers, Jarret, Dorn and others that drive the agenda. Fritshberg is just another mouthpiece. Very similar people of his ilk are now driving Clinton’s campaign. This is really, really ugly and going to get worse. Just see how they are attacking people that are center right and it is not only happening in the US MSM, it is becoming a worldwide campaign. They are scared and are now using the lowest vile attacks. It seems we are always on the defensive ( as the DB/rolmod ” debate” shows) and thanks DB and as usual it ended with nothing from the guy that made any sense, if he had a point to make I am still looking for it.

Reply to  Alx
February 20, 2015 10:06 pm

I think you’re right. They’re scared.
Sockpuppets like beckleybud/Socrates/rodmol are running interference.
“Rodmol” is a perennial site pest here, banned repeatedly for his despicable sockpuppetry. After only a few comments, I can spot him now.
He is the type that runs interference since M. Mann and the rest of the alarmist crowd now decline to debate. Since Mann and the rest of his ilk have lost every debate with skeptical scientists, now they hide out in their Twitter accounts, and issue press releases — anything except man up and debate.
They leave that for their lemmings, like the rodmol/Socrates jamoke. There isn’t a stand-up guy among them.

Jaakko Kateenkorva
Reply to  dbstealey
February 21, 2015 2:08 am

Thank you dbstealey. The whack a mole session demonstrated your point so effectively that it’s doubtful warmists volunteer you another opportunity very soon. Either way there is now one more reason to read the discussions here in full. Great work.

Reply to  dbstealey
February 21, 2015 3:04 am

Thank you, Jaakko. I appreciate your support. It is tedious fighting trolls like ‘rodmol’. But the misinformation they post cannot be allowed to go uncorrected.

Reply to  dbstealey
February 22, 2015 8:51 am

For every valid point there is a mountain of misinformation. Just look at the comments on economics, social security, etc., where RACook runs circles around him.

Lowell Wickman
February 20, 2015 3:00 pm

I would say 99% of climate change is Natural. Extreme weather events have natural causes. However if you asked me if Carbon Dioxide was a significant factor in global warming over the last century I would agree with the 97%. Having a technical background the word significant means “contributing factor”. Most people that misquote the 97% number are not bright enough to realize that it only pertains to a subset of the global warming of the last 100 years. The 97% number includes people that believe CO2 is a minor part of the problem or do not believe the problem requires any action. In other words the 97% consensus INCLUDES DENIERS.

February 20, 2015 3:00 pm

WTF. Sorry. Is this for real? Can it be?
It’s a Friday Funny. Where is the sarc tag.
Odd. I’ve been getting these calls from Ohio …

February 20, 2015 3:03 pm

It’s been depressing me for a long time. Since this blog started and was a ray of hope. I changed my views in the 90s when my understanding of biology just didn’t add up to the claims made back then by global warming. I realised this would be a generational time scale. Like eugenics. I listen to people talk about becoming lawyers to sort out the science. I listen to people that have less of an idea about science than I do spout off about what they don’t know. it’s depressing to see science subverted, distorted and driven by consensus. I want to swear. I hardly bother anymore. Just listen and read in silent disbelief. I visit here as a reassuring comfort that some people are still fight. Still, it’s sad sad sad how ignorant and mythical it becomes. I still think of the weather bloke from Oregon that last his position over a decade ago. Because, of #insert swear word of choice# politics! One screamer there. Very restrained of me!!!!!

Robert of Ottawa
February 20, 2015 3:09 pm

join the team that’s calling out climate change deniers.
Hunt them down, persecute them, re-educate them.
I am reminded of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

Robert of Ottawa
February 20, 2015 3:11 pm

Some have hidden behind foreign countries
Denounce the spies!

February 20, 2015 3:11 pm

Heh … Three times pitiful or even ten times pitiful is still pitiful.

Proud Skeptic
February 20, 2015 3:13 pm

Actually, I find this reassuring. Nice to know that they are scraping the bottom of the barrel with their “arguments”. It looks like they are down to stupid, anecdotal “evidence”. Only a moron would believe this stuff and they are going to believe it no matter what.
Not worried by this.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Proud Skeptic
February 20, 2015 3:16 pm


Robert of Ottawa
February 20, 2015 3:15 pm

This is the most loathsome thing I’ve seen. Why not just have Holder round all the deniers up put in in a re-education camp.

February 20, 2015 3:17 pm


February 20, 2015 3:25 pm

Has anyone petitioned NASA to take down that “97% Consensus” tripe?
Their cited sources don’t even support that consensus. Dr. Anderegg found less than 90%, for example, though I have an e-mail from him saying that I read his study incorrectly..

Rud Istvan
Reply to  udcme
February 21, 2015 8:29 am

Yes. And they responded that that Cook’s paper was legitimate since not retracted.

Hot under the collar
February 20, 2015 3:29 pm

Same old, same old, if you can’t have a sensible science debate just talk about the ‘enemy’ in derogatory terms and try to radicalise more impressionable people.
ISIS would be proud.
In fact, if ISIS supported their ridiculous ‘team’ they would probably be stupid enough to put a link to their site and say “Sponsored by ISIS”. After all, don’t these idiots think “climate change is a bigger threat to humanity”?

Robert of Ottawa
February 20, 2015 3:29 pm

The US state common core will also lend a propagandist hand:

February 20, 2015 3:31 pm

Please help me out here. This is a joke, isn’t it? As english isn’t my native language, I just have to ask.
A simple No / Yes answer will do.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Andre
February 20, 2015 3:38 pm

No. (Ivan is serious)
And yes! #(:)) (it is a BIG JOKE as you can see from the above comments)

Reply to  Andre
February 20, 2015 3:45 pm

The email appears to be real and it appears to be from Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Action” front. That means it is a joke to independent thinkers who are scientifically critical of the claims of the climate change cause’s observationally challenged theory of significant warming by CO2 from burning fossil fuels. Real life does sometimes imitate comedy. I am LMAO.

Reply to  John Whitman
February 21, 2015 2:20 pm

Thks Janice and John.
One somewhat hoped that kind of insanity ended after the 1930s.