|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 17, 2012 18:37:18 GMT
Was reading at WUWT and this quote is priceless.
"Patience with mental illness will often resort to ‘projection’ in order to survive in their own version of reality. Projection is the practice of accusing someone else of an issue that you have, perhaps in an attempt to divert the deserved criticism. I am not saying that warmists suffer from mental illness, but they have used a form of ‘projection’ when labeling CAGW skeptics as climate change deniers. Of course, most skeptics have never denied climate change, only the magnitude of the proposed human impact on the ever-changing climate. But warmists MUST deny all significant climate change before the 20th Century in order to hold their current beliefs. That is a huge denial of climate change; several orders of magnitude greater than the denial of which skeptics are falsely accused."
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 17, 2012 18:44:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 17, 2012 18:57:05 GMT
magellan: Does this revelation surprise you? SS is well known to block bloggers who have posted papers from publications that do not agree with their propaganda. And once the blogger has been blocked.....all sorts of tampering have been done with the posts.
It would not be surprising, with this common practice established, that Mr. Cook deleted the Lewandowsky thread. Even tho the whole survey thing was a fruitless waste of time.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 17, 2012 18:58:44 GMT
A prime example of this syndrome on this board is Thermostat. In my life, I have never observed a person who has been led to the water so often, and is so thirsty that he is breaking out in a hot sweat...........and still refuses to drink.
At least here, posts are not deleted nor tampered with.......refreshing isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 17, 2012 23:31:55 GMT
More thought on the Skeptical Science Syndrome:
Just watched a video from Peter Sinclair, one of SS's darlings. It is really hard to believe that this guy believes what he talks about........
1. He used the projections put out from GCM's like they are a fact. 2. He has absolutely NO understanding of how CO2 and plants interact. 3. He has not read the literature on field based experiments which show up to 33% increased plant growth and 40% increased yield from increased CO2 levels.
Gosh.....durn.........it.........what dreamworld do these folks live in??
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 18, 2012 0:06:59 GMT
More thought on the Skeptical Science Syndrome: Just watched a video from Peter Sinclair, one of SS's darlings. It is really hard to believe that this guy believes what he talks about........ 1. He used the projections put out from GCM's like they are a fact. 2. He has absolutely NO understanding of how CO2 and plants interact. 3. He has not read the literature on field based experiments which show up to 33% increased plant growth and 40% increased yield from increased CO2 levels. Gosh.....durn.........it.........what dreamworld do these folks live in?? It takes a lot of practice to appear to live in that dreamworld dissembling as smoothly as a politician.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 18, 2012 0:20:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 18, 2012 0:22:16 GMT
With evidence like the following.........how can it be denied that warm is good, that higher CO2 is good. Wasn't the mantra 20 years ago that ag production would decline because of all the droughts, wild fires, snow, hail, etc....etc..... www.agbioforum.org/v12n2/v12n2a02-f1-lence.jpg
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 18, 2012 0:23:09 GMT
I just figured it out.
Folks with Skeptical Science Syndrome need to go see a licensed optometrist. There HAS to be something wrong with their eyes.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Dec 18, 2012 0:34:19 GMT
I just figured it out. Folks with Skeptical Science Syndrome need to go see a licensed optometrist. There HAS to be something wrong with their eyes. Sig, I think their eyes are fine.
The problem is they have their head up their _ _ _.(please fill in the blanks with the word of your choice!)
|
|
andor
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 60
|
Post by andor on Dec 18, 2012 15:58:13 GMT
Hahahahahahah It's also for those people believing they were on the moon!!
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 18, 2012 21:10:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 19, 2012 6:08:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 28, 2012 3:32:15 GMT
Sigurdur, you got it 100% right, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/27/university-of-graz-responds-to-parncutts-calls-for-death-to-deniers/UPDATE2: 2:55:PM PST In an email received today from Skeptical Science contributor Dana Nuccitelli, he has flat out refused to distance himself or the SkS website publicly from the Parncutt essay. Readers may recall that Parncutt used SkS as a reference in his essay calling for the death penalty. No word yet on whether John Cook (owner of the website) agrees and no word yet from DeSmog blog. – Anthony
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 28, 2012 6:18:05 GMT
magellan: It is sad to see such a worthless site continue. I notice their traffic keeps falling lower and lower, thankfully.
Wattsupwiththat keeps growing in traffic.
|
|