What'sUpWithThatWatts, et al.: climate sensitive

Monday, November 16, 2015

Part 6 - Debating ClimateDepot fan: AGW religion (epilogue)

Will responded to the final installment of my series back at #1, and considering that he tossed the "AGW is religion" turd at me, I decided Will's comment deserved the spotlight and a closer look. (supporting links at the bottom)

=======================================================================

Will at 3:48 PM November 16, 2015 wrote:

Yours is not a debating site (1) but instead is an AGW religious site (2). I destroyed the AGW conjecture with one of my arguments that you did not disagree with but then decided just to ignore. (3) There is evidence that the climate sensitivity is 0.0 (4) and hence CO2 does not affect climate. (5)

____________________________________________

Will, good to hear from you, sad to hear you didn't learn a thing.
Now let me say this about that:

Yours is not a debating site (1)

If not, it's because AGW contrarians hide from anything that forces them to produce rational responses in writing. They fear it because it exposes their weak underbelly, no substance, just a lot of flimflam.
____________________________________________

but instead is an AGW religious site (2)

Then as if to highlight the hopelessness of attempting to communicate with one of your persuasion you lob that idiotic religion meme at me. Religion is a belief system, our climate understanding is based on a huge body of scientific facts - even if you choose to ignore most of it and misrepresent the rest.

I challenge you, or anyone else, to explain how you arrive at such a conclusion? Heck, can you even explain what it means; what do you think makes AGW a religion?

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Climate Sensitivity less than 3° ??? . . . SO WHAT?

Time for a reality check to remind us of what the real issues are and what the continued disingenuous crazy-making of the like of LaFramboise, Watts, McIntyre is going to cost our children.

A Glimpse at Our Possible Future Climate, Best to Worst Case Scenarios (via Skeptical Science)

Posted on 13 February 2013 by dana1981 Recently there has been widespread discussion that perhaps the Earth's climate is not quite as sensitive to increasing atmospheric CO2 as climate scientists previously believed, which would be good news, because it would give us more time to reduce human greenhouse…

RECOMMENDED WEBSITES

{edited 12/11/2014}

I know there are too many typos, what can I say, eyes aren't what they were, I get rushed, and always did have a thing with transposing…{well, I also hated high school "english" classes... bad call that one.}. Doing the best I can with what I got. Embarrassing though it is, it's better than doing nothing. Besides, it's the issues and reasoning that we should be worrying about.

Though I'm in my own little world here, I'm also constantly learning and evolving and do get occasional feedback and when I reread stuff and find errors or omissions or garbage, I fix it. If it's major I'll acknowledge it with an 'edited' note, minor stuff I don't bother.

~ ~ ~

I hardly keep track of Anthony's latest antics (besides, with Sou on the job why bother - can't beat her insights). It's just me over here and I have more important things to do with my precious hours - still now that Anthony's luster has been wearing thin he's put his energy into discovering and honing new fresh faces to carry on the public show of the Republican/Libertarian strategic attack on science.

He seems to have transitioned into a ring-leader, perhaps mentor/coach would be better, producer? At least that's how Mr. Steele and his antics of the past year has gotten me to think about it. So in that regard this blog remains about WUWT's brand of thinking and logic and my struggle to understand the anatomy of the fraud they've perpetrated against mankind. {December 2014}

_____________________________

ok, now some recommended websites:

This blog was started in April 2013 and is written by an actual scientist so it has a refreshingly serious objective air to it, plus he does a good clear job of explaining complex issues.

And Then There's Physics.
~ ~ ~

Sou has some of the best {readability and detailed} examinations of Watt's antics I've seen - and she does have fun with certain characters.

She continues be the best at keeping up with Mr. Watts' and pals and their many deceptions.

The recent dirty tricks and attacks she is enduring are acknowledgment of how good she is at it.

http://blog.hotwhopper.com

~ ~ ~

Ben has been documenting Anthony's misdeeds longer than the rest of us.

http://wottsupwiththat.com

~ ~ ~

Tamino, an acknowledged statistical/mathematical expert of the highest order, at Open Mind also does an excellent job of holding Anthony’s feet to the fire with clearly explained facts and math. Check it out:
http://tamino.wordpress.com
~ ~ ~

And of course, there is the excellent, most up to date internet depository of climate studies and information for the non-expert public.

http://SkepticalScience.com

~ ~ ~

Then there's RealClimate.org the scientist's commentary site. Run by working climate scientists intended to help the interested public and journalists sort through the complexities of the climatology. They provide "quick response to developing stories and provide the context" that is too often missing from public media's depiction. {But, you better be serious and have some real science education/understanding under your belt if you want to keep up.}

http://realclimate.org

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I remember back in da day, good websites/blogs were few and far between. But over the past years that's been changing to the point that it's impossible to keep up with them all. Here's an incomplete, and long overdue addition to my above list: