Unmoderated Post on Moderation

I will allow comments through by default for repeat commenters again, first time commenters will still need an initial approval.

I will however now be a more active moderator and delete things that are useless or unnecessarily personal from now on, except on this thread.

This is unavoidably subjective but I will try to err on the side of permissiveness. The goal will be controlling the tone more so than the content. Readers should keep in mind the fact I am in an Australian time zone, so doomed comments may be visible for many hours. I expect this blog will remain pretty quiet for the time being, though I still hope to have more to say in the future. It is in some ways an interesting time in The Climate Wars (really wild weather, new global anomaly records, politics), but also in other ways it is all so much “same as it ever was”.

188 thoughts on “Unmoderated Post on Moderation

  1. Haha! I love it when vacuous leftists attempt to “accuse your opponent of that for which you yourself are guilty”.

    Wow you are a vacuous leftist, wow.

    You are the only voice on this once-respectable blog who still supports the politicians at the UN.

    You have been totally and utterly fooled by their fake graphs and models.

    You have also been thoroughly fooled by the ol’ sciency thing of “correlation does not equal causation”.

    Evidence of climate change is NOT evidence of human-caused climate change.

    Is there anyone reading this who will speak in defence of wow?




  2. So I take it that you do just believe whatever the politicians say when they admit to knowing nothing about the science, then freddy.



    Again with the political insistence, proving your claims are invalid.

    “their fake graphs and models.”

    Nope, they were real graphs and models.

    Oh, and they were also accurate:


    How did your politicians do? Very badly.

    “Evidence of climate change is NOT evidence of human-caused climate change.”

    But evidence of human caused climate change is evidence of human caused climate change. And magical thinking doesn’t replace science. Human causation explains it. Magic (your option) does not.

    But you just believe the politicians when they say they’re not a scientist but that it’s all fake.

    Because you’re a gullible rightwingnutjob.

    “Is there anyone reading this who will speak in defence of wow?”

    Ah, so you admit you have been incapable of proving me wrong and you want an easier target to try.

    So sad.

    And there you sit screaming like an incontinent monkey with sandpaper underpants repeating what your lords and masters in the senate and congress tell you.



  3. And I note you’re also on the conspiracy nut claims of a New World Order plot being hatched at “Jew Central” otherwise known as “The UN”.

    Dun dun duuuuun!

    Pathetic. Anything your rightwingnutjob president and his lackeys push your way you swallow, no matter how insane or unbelievable.


  4. ” “accuse your opponent of that for which you yourself are guilty”.

    Wow you are a vacuous leftist, wow.”

    So you’re saying you’re a vacuous leftist, dumbfuck.


  5. Haha!

    I think your swearing and salivating is hilarious!

    Arguing with you is like arguing with a goat!


    erm…… what do you mean by using the term “Jew Central”?

    Have you got something against Jewish people?


  6. So argue a lot with goats. Explains the badly formed half-thoughts you tried out.

    Oh, right, I forgot, the dogwhistle you white supremacists use is “Globalists” which totally doesn’t mean jews. Except when you do.


  7. Oh, notice how you insult and use foul language? You don’t get to whine about it from others when you do it too. Not without being a hypocrite and negating any value or force behind the accusation.



  8. I also see you agree that you will obey the exhortations of politicians.

    Weak willed you are.

    Go “Baaaaa” for your masters.They need to shear you.


  9. On Facebook, click on the small “gif” button in any text bar; Type in the word “goat”.

    See the second gif that appears?

    The goat with the tongue?



    I’m finding you very entertaining, wowie!

    Keep up the good work!

    I’ve gotta ask you; Are you an Islamic Supremacist?


  10. Aaaaw. So you’re still in junior school, mike.

    And here you are with the grown ups,being all grown-uppy and stuff. How cute. Now go tell daddy how big and brave you’ve been.

    But I guess this proves your crusade against reality has foundered.


  11. Well that was short, meaningless and pointless. Just like you.

    Still, you gotta protect your politicians’ words against reality. Pesky liberal biased reality.


  12. And you think North Korea a democratic republic too.

    Reality is Nazis are rightwingers, hence your love for their politics (Trump won on those policies, progressive and liberal though they were, they were laden with authoritarianism and white nationalism, 100% nazi propaganda. Watch some Goebells sometime and see Trump and Spicer do the same thing), and NK is a dictatorship.


  13. I’d love to talk more about conservatism, leftism, nazis, right-wingers, and all that wow.

    But I don’t think you’d be game.



  14. Bleating again? Time for your masters to shear you again. You love it when they take advantage of you!

    Heh. You draw the lines along politics, proving your denial machine is a scam!


  15. Nah. I knew you would be way too chicken to talk to me about that stuff.

    How about a technical discussion on the efficiencies of various sources of electricity?

    Nup! Too chicken.

    I notice that we’re STILL waiting for someone to join in the conversation in support of you, wow.

    I remember the good ol’ days here, in 2009.

    I was a rare “denier” back then.

    You had lots and lots of friends.

    How funny to think that you STILL think it’s real.


  16. So you’re still a lapdog of the rightwing politicians. Sad.

    And envious of people who are clearly smarter than you. Sick.


  17. ” “accuse your opponent of that for which you yourself are guilty”.

    ” Are you an Islamic Supremacist?”



    But do you have the chutzpah to go through the science instead of your go-to childish tantrums about your political naivete and religious indoctrination?


  18. So, first page, first line of the summary for policy makers.

    Liza V Alexander. Associate professor. University of New South Wales.

    Politician or not politician? You make the claim they’re all politiicans. Does this stand up to the first line of the first page of the WG1 report?



    Never read what you whine about did you, dumbass.


  19. You’re right wow.

    The IPCC is like the Holy See.

    The holy priests/politicians would never lie to you.

    You just continue to believe everything the IPCC tells you, mate. Good onya.

    Nothing will change your mind.

    Your science is settled.

    Sadly though, you seem to be the only one holding onto your faith.

    No-one here at AFTIC is coming to help you battle the heretics like me.

    Surely, with such solid holy science from the Vatican… erm… the IPCC, there would be someone to back you up?

    Hold onto your faith, wow.

    It shows your strength of character!


  20. “You’re right wow.”

    Good. We both agree that you were 100% wrong about the IPCC before the first sentence of the IPCC report finished.

    Not seeing any discussion about the science, though.

    Not capable of it, are you.


  21. Ok then wow.

    Here are two simple questions for you regarding science.

    Do you consider Geology to be science?

    Do you consider Geology to be concomitant to study of climate?

    (I have more questions, of course)

    I’d love to talk about the science of climate if you’ll acknowledge that climate science existed before the IPCC.

    I do not trust the IPCC.

    I do not hold any credibility for them at all.

    The IPCC is a political organisation.


  22. None of that is in any of the IPCC report, dumbfucknuckle. Sorry you have been hallucinating. Stay off the heroin and go read the IPCC report for the first time in your meaningless existence. And when you get back to junior school ask teacher to teach you your letters again, you appear to have lost them since infants.


  23. So the IPCC isn’t written by politicians. You don’t know what is in it. You don’t WANT to know what’s in it. You can’t comprehend what is in it. You refuse to even try.

    That about the shape of it?

    What about mulish incompetence and ignorance is in your special-needs definition of science? Because that’s the only “science” you have displayed so far.

    When you’ve read the IPCC, then ask questions. If the answers to them is in the IPCC report, I’ll just tell you to read it.


  24. Nobody cares if you trust the IPCC. Such distrust is based on ignorance and assertion that is flat out fabrication.

    Your assertion about it being written by politicians is wrong before the first sentence is finished when you read the IPCC report.

    So you don’t trust a figment you made up.

    Nobody cares. Distrust your imagination all you like.


  25. Suggestion for Michael:

    Read what the IPCC publishes:


    None of it is opinion. It is all published science from all over the world that is then collated by groups of people who all have to agree on which bits to include and which bits to leave out.

    This committee style approach is the reason why the IPCC assessments have unerringly proven themselves to be very conservative in nature, as well as being grounded in solid and uncontroversial facts.


  26. Here are answers to two simple questions.

    Decimalisation happened in 1971


    Yes, they’re answers to different questions, but then again you asked different questions to the ones invited. So precedent is set.


  27. Hello Craig,

    It’s nice to see that at least one person is here in support of wow.

    Sorry, but I simply do not trust the IPCC to release correct, real, and proper information, that doesn’t serve the political agenda of the UN.

    I’ve read a lot about the corruption of peer-review and everyone is aware of the money involved in Big Climate.

    Also, ALL of the ‘evidence’ for alarmism comes from computer model data.

    I simply do not agree that the science of AGW is “settled”.

    I remain sceptical.

    You’re obviously convinced though, aren’tcha?

    I politely ask you to outline, in a few sentences of your own words; what evidence has convinced you so thoroughly that CO2 is the only/main cause of climate change?

    (please do not post a link. I want to hear it from you, personally)



  28. “Sorry, but I simply do not trust the IPCC”

    Sorry, nobody cares.

    Your fear is clearly a product of your delusion. Or faked.


    Your claim is also a product of your delusion. Or faked.

    “I simply do not agree ”

    Your disagreement is also a product of your delusion. Or faked.

    “I remain sceptical.”

    Except you have already made up your mind, hence are not skeptical. You could be deluded, though. Or faking.

    “I politely ask you to outline”

    Read the IPCC.


  29. Although I was addressing my comment and question to Craig, and not you, wow, it still seems you are incapable of summing it up in your own words.

    Anyway, AGAIN!

    I challenge you, wow.

    You, personally.

    Please go ahead and sum up in your own words, the evidence that has convinced you so thoroughly of how exactly, mankind’s emissions of CO2 is causing warming of the earth.

    Have a go at replying without being abusive, or ridiculing, or obfuscating.

    You purport to being an expert on AGW, so you must be able to explain it pretty easily, hey?

    Craig, I’d still like to hear from you, as wow’s only supporter so far.



  30. I did sum it up in my own words. It also reads as an instruction:

    Read the IPCC report.

    NOBODY cares who yo don’t trust. Your distrust is either faked or the result of delusion.

    Until you read the IPCC report, nobody cares what you claim about it because it’s a claim based on pure and willful ignorance.

    Read the IPCC report.


  31. And refrain from any unfounded accusation based on your paranoia, delusion or political ideology defences.

    Because every time you do that you prove AGW is right and terrifies the rightwinger and libertarian ideologues.


  32. It is however very clear that you were whining about how I had no support (need none, that is a logical fallacy to claim it as indicative of anything at all) not to actually make the claim that there is nobody else accepting reality against your denial, but only so that you can find a new toy to play with that will not refuse your idiotic demands for the pointless denier runaround you want to engage in.

    Read the IPCC.

    You have never read it because you were told first that it was all a huge UN conspiracy. For something or other.


  33. I’m sick of you, wow.

    You’re intellectually lazy and have zero credibility.

    I’d rather wait for Craig to reply.

    Craig, I’m hoping you can sum up your belief in AGW better than wow can.

    Don’t be lazy like wow and just say “read the IPCC”.

    I want your own words to sum up why you believe in AGW caused by human-kind’s release of CO2.

    It won’t take long, since you seem to be pretty convinced, and you must have a solid understanding of it all.

    I’m hoping for such statements as:

    ‘I believe CO2 is the only cause of the current warming, because of numerous lines of evidence, such as the tropospheric hotspot, and ice-core data, and lessons from history’…. etc, etc…

    You know what I mean?


    Wow, I know you’ll produce another few “stream-of-consciousness” comments, that don’t say anything of value, so, to be honest, I’d prefer to hear back from Craig.



  34. “I’m sick of you, wow.”

    If you look on a map for “Oceanea” you;ll find where the people who care live.

    “I’d rather wait for Craig to reply.”

    Yes, you want someone to play with who will play your game, your rules and hunt the goalposts for oyu.

    The proclamation I have no credibility really doesn’t work since you have made claims about the IPCC reports that are absolutely factually false and found to be so in the first sentence of the WG1 report. Moreover you have proclaimed you will NEVER read it because you don’t trust it. Proving that you have made a decision proudly ignorant. There is no credibility there.

    “I’m hoping for such statements as:”

    Well go ahead then, answer your own question. Feel free. Saves bandwidth and time if you do it in notepad on your own computer.

    Just a bit of helpful advice “mike”.

    Me? I looked at the IPCC reports. Read them. Checked them.

    If there’s anything in those you dispute, then come up with it.


  35. “Wow, I know you’ll produce another few “stream-of-consciousness” comments,”

    As opposed to your stream of unconsciousness comments.

    Sorry, cupcake, you don’t get to order me around. Make your own blog. Make demands there.

    Nobody cares what you want here.


  36. “I’d prefer to hear back from Craig.”

    Yes, you already said that.

    Are you in the habit of repeating things so often? There’s a minor mental affliction that causes that. I don’t think you can ask for medication to treat it, though, they’ll just take you to a specialist.


  37. “It won’t take long,”

    It doesn’t from this end.

    Read the IPCC.

    The weeks long delay seems to be happening on your end of the internet. Just beyond the keyboard.


  38. Again, nobody cares what your paranoia tells you, it tells us that you are making claims out of a carefully inculcated ignorance that you are adamant at keeping.

    And if you don’t trust, them then reading their words doesn’t make you trust them by hypnosis, so your terrified refusals indicate even more strange, unhinged crazy talk from you.

    Read the IPCC.

    Ask about it.


  39. And how can your ridiculous claims about the IPCC report be in any way, shape or form, based on knowledge when you don’t even know what the IPCC report is?

    Like I said, unhinged.


  40. My god you are draining to deal with wow.

    I’ve explained my position time and time again, to you.

    You will never, ever understand.

    As someone who arrogantly purports to be such an expert, you STILL haven’t mentioned any detail of why you are SO convinced by the IPCC.

    You are nothing more than a weak-as-piss leftist who seems easily led by corrupt politicians.

    You pretend to be knowledgeable, but you really are not.

    I’m also still waiting for Craig or anyone else, to support you.

    Why is everyone so quiet here at AFTIC?


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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s