320 thoughts on “Open thread

  1. Twenty one posts and still no answer from Biel:

    How much is a ‘thrillion’?

    Where can I find these schoolfirl br5othels accross Europe?

    How much do our5 police make from the seel of a schoolfirl?

    What did Joe Biden do with the body org=fans that he obtained by dissecting 1300 living human beings?

    Are you completely retarded?

    Like

  2. Marco: “1. I accept that he made this statement in 2010,”

    That isn’t what Whiner asked. He asked “Do you agree that Phil Jones said … etc”.

    Jones DIDN’T say that. He said that the warming now passes the statistical significance test.

    It is also true he didn’t say that in 2010 too. He said a much longer piece that means what he said, rather than what denialists want him to have said.

    Like

  3. Post 300, answers to questions:

    1 – No
    2 – No
    3 – No
    4 – Yes
    5 – No
    6 – No

    But whiner doesn’t want answers, he wants accusations.

    Like

  4. 1 – So you accept no significant warming for 15 years. Well done.

    2 – Previously given on a thread you were on.Answer awaited.

    3 – No they weren’t. They were repeatedly specifically refused. Mcintyre found them where Mann had hidden them proving his deliberate fraud.

    4 – Lie. It was said about those who disputed his Himalaya lie.

    5 – Lie. That stratospheric dust ans sulphur would have that effect is experimentally proven by Krakatoa and TYimbora. You might claim to believe there may be side effects you don’t specify for reasons you don’t specify (inded anybody could say that about anything) but you cannot honestly claim that such solutions don’t exist.

    6 – If that is not a lie you would be able to name alarmist “scientists” who denounced Pashy for his “voodoo” cliam or Mann for his fraud or etc etc etc. You do not because you know you cannot name a single alarmist “scientist” who has thus proven himself honest or a real scientist.

    So 2 of the 7 questions, which if not answerable in an honest way supportive of alarmism, answered in a way which proves it is a fraud and for the rest no honest responsive answer at all.

    305 and counting.

    Like

  5. 1. So, then do you finally accept we have now significantly warmed since 1995?
    (I know, I know, the answer is “no”, because you believe Jones only when it suits you)

    2. answer not accepted, I need it here

    3. Liar. He was given the data, and just started complaining when it turned out there was an error in the database

    4. Liar. Pachauri specifically referred to a report that mentioned the Himalaya glaciers were melting but not because of climate change, despite the fact that no attempt at attribution was even made in that report.

    5. As Pintabu has shown, you need to *continuously* throw as much particulate material in the air as these volcanoes. that is, not just over a few months, as Pinatubo did (with associated weather anomalies like enormous rainfall, anomalously cold weather in New Zealand, and strong hurricanes), but continuously as long as CO2 amounts are as high or higher than now. As soon as we stop, the temperature goes up.

    6. Your claim about Pachauri is false. Your claim about Mann is false (how many investigations need to be done that consistently confirm there was not a shred of evidence of fraud? Not even Barton could get it in that direction). You have not denounced yourself. Hence, get lost with your hypocrisy.

    QED, Neil is a fascist.

    Like

  6. 2 – You’ve seen it. You refuse to accept what you know. End of.

    3 – Liar. He was niot “given” it till long after he had found it.

    4 – Liar. Pachy specifically said that those who disputed his report that the Himalays would be melted by 2035 were parcticing “voodoo science”. That clearly represents the very highest standard of honesty to which he aspires and since he remains in place, to whuich the IPCC ever aspires.

    5 – Are you now saying it would work, but you have to keep doing it? This seems to be at variance with your previous assertion that it simply but definitely would not work.

    6 – My statement about Pachy is not false (see 4). Yours is. Again I ask you to name any alarmist scientist who has publicly denounced any of the fraudsters, even Gore, running this scare. Even if they have held back from calling it fraud and merely said it was gross incompetnce proving them and those who assisted them unworthy to be taken seriously? If it were a real science there would be thousands of them

    Like

  7. 2. I’ve not seen it.

    3. You are the liar, he was given the data. The methodology was described, so he should just have made his own algoritms. That’s how science works

    4. And again you lie.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7009081.ece
    “He described the report, which did not mention the 2035 error, as “voodoo science”. ”

    5. Ah, the politician still does not understand some basic reasoning. Your proposal is to attack the symptoms with something that will have its own side-effects and let the root cause continue to rot the system to the core. It also does not do a darn thing to stop ocean acidification.

    6. Yes it is. Even the Times makes that clear, and that isn’t exactly a ‘pro-AGW’ newspaper. People have denounced the gross incompetence of Roy Spencer and Richard Lindzen, so stop the complaints. Have you? Have you already denounced yourself for continuing to lie? No? Then stop being such a hypocrite.

    Like

  8. “1 – So you accept no significant warming for 15 years.”

    Nope.

    The warming was significant: 0.12C per decade is significant.

    “2 – Previously given on a thread you were on.Answer awaited.”

    You never gave an answer and you’ve been answered many times before. The answer is still “No”.

    “3 – No they weren’t. They were repeatedly specifically refused.”

    The national academy of science in the USA among others refuted McI’s statement. In fact, M&M’s paper is far more full of incorrect analysis than the 1998 paper.

    The answer to that is still “No”.

    “4 – Liar.”

    False. If you knew you were right, you could supply one link to a primary source.

    The answer to that is “no” as well.

    “5 – Are you now saying it would work”

    Nope, because you would have to INCREASE your work each year and ALSO clean up the mess you’re making each year.

    Although shooting yourself in the head will stop your toothache, nobody (except an idiot like you) would say “It’s a working toothache cure”.

    The answer is “no” here too.

    “6 – My statement about Pachy is not false (see 4)”

    We looked at 4. You just asserted again that it was said. No proof to your claim.

    It would be easy to supply and its nonexistence shows you’re lying.

    Like

  9. 2 – None so blind as those who will not see. Liar.

    3 – Have you some evidence that theirvword sgould ever, under any circumstances, be taken as more trustworthy than either McIntyre’s statements or the facts.

    4 – From the report you cite as evidence “However, a prominent science journalist said that he had asked Dr Pachauri about the 2035 error last November.” So both Pachy and you demonstrate the very pinnacle of honesty to which the thieving parasites calling themsel=ves climate “scientists” ever aspire.

    5 – I asked “Are you now saying it would work, but you have to keep doing it?2 – your answer, though deliberately obfuscating, seems to be “Yes”. If so that is 3 out of 1 needed acknowleding that the fraud is a fraud. If you aren’t please explain what you are saying. Note that your obfuscation obout “ocean acidification” (which is no such thing, could not be done honestly if you knew anything about the subject.

    6 – Again “Again I ask you to name any alarmist scientist who has publicly denounced any of the fraudsters, even Gore, running this scare.” If nun write none.

    And Wow before I read your nonsense please provide evidence that any part of it is more honest of indeed cene than the normal highest level of integrity of which you are capable.

    Like

  10. I think our “friend” Beil must have a show running at this years fringe in his favourite city.

    2 – None so blind as those who will not see.

    Pure comedy gold.

    Like

  11. Answers again:

    1) The warming was significant: 0.12C per decade is significant.

    2) No. NB: You still haven’t shown your “answer”. If it’s so obvious, it should be even easier for YOU to show what YOU said. None so dumb as will not say.

    3) The national academy of science in the USA among others refuted McI’s statement. In fact, M&M’s paper is far more full of incorrect analysis than the 1998 paper.

    4) The typo was not in WG1, about the science basis, it was about the consequences. And they TYPO was found by the IPCC Scientists supporting the IPCC claims, NOT your lovely denialists.

    5) The answer is “no”. In just the same way as shooting yourself in the head is NOT an answer to the problem of toothache.

    6) The only alarmist scientists are the denialists screaming about how it’s all a scheme to bilk the USA of money and create a Communist New World Order. However, YOU seem to support them.

    7) Your statement is still false. You have no clue what was said, you can only parrot what you’ve been programmed to say by your alarmist “scientist” friends.

    Like

  12. Also note this blithering idiot’s claim:

    “305 and counting.”

    Withing THE VERY SAME POST he acknowledges answers given before that post!

    This blithering buffoon blows chunks.

    Like

  13. “None so blind as those who will not see.”

    From the well known comedian Jeremiah.

    There was a book – I don’t know if you’ve heard of it.
    Jeremiah Chapter 5: verse 21

    313 and counting

    Like

  14. Yup, he even admits that he’s been answered, then goes on to pretend he hasn’t had answers (when the problem is he hasn’t had answers HE LIKES). Then to top it all (why, oh why, doesn’t this twunt top himself instead?), AFTER having this pointed out, doubles down in the most idiotic redneck way that has become popularly seen on reichtwingnut telly.

    Answers yet again:

    1 – No
    2 – No
    3 – No
    4 – Yes
    5 – No
    6 – No

    300 posts after the answers were given, whiner here still pretends he hasn’t had any.

    Like

  15. Those “answers” clearly don’t answer anything. If you could factually answer why you claim to believe these you would do so.

    QED

    315 and counting

    Like

  16. Answers yet again:

    1 – No
    2 – No
    3 – No
    4 – Yes
    5 – No
    6 – No

    They answer YOUR questions.

    You don’t like answers? Well, that doesn’t make them not-answers. It just means you don’t like the answers.

    They are answers to your questions.

    QID (Quod Idiot Demonstrandum): The idiot has proven himself an idiot.

    Like

  17. 317 and counting.

    Wow’s repeated repasting of his “answers” that answer nothing merely proves that neither he nor any other alarmist can truly answer them.

    QED Alarmism is a quite deliberate fraud.

    Like

  18. So answers prove there are no answers . . .

    QED Beil is an epic idiot.

    This is always fun:

    Hey Beil:

    Want to try to document your nonexistent King Antarctica quote?

    LOL.

    Now watch the dodge . . .

    Like

  19. So answers prove there are no answers…

    Everyone knows Real Answers™ are done through interpretive dance. Words are nothing but words.

    Beil, show us how it’s done!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s