Comments on: Lubchenco says, “This report is a game changer,” Holdren says it’s time to act “after many years of dithering and delay,” plus a new website with full report, summaries, charts, AND a slideshow

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:13:28 +0000

Hey, have you seen this news article?
New details about Michael Jackson’s Death Emerge
I was wondering if you were going to blog about this…

By: Chris Winter

Chris Winter — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 03:11:40 +0000

I just downloaded and paged through the “Climate Impacts” report. It is a visual delight! The use of graphics is truly masterful. Edward Tuffte would be proud.

I have no doubt that it’s equally substantive. I’m printing a copy now, and feeling lucky I have a printer that can do it some justice. After that I’ll read it carefully.

By: Chris Winter

Chris Winter — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 03:07:11 +0000

OK, I figured out that it’s “airvent (dot) com.” Couldn’t get in though; your server must be busy. I’ll try again later.

By: Chris Winter

Chris Winter — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 01:26:29 +0000

Jeff Id wrote (in part):

“What about the science, which the Air Vent is rife with?”

Perhaps you meant “overrife”?

Hot Air Vent, you call it? Well, I’ll probably regret it, but I’ll take a look.

By: Tim L

Tim L — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 03:42:48 +0000

Leland Palmer Says:
June 17th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

believing in what they say is a survival strategy.

If so, maybe we really are too stupid as a species to live.

This is spot on!
thank you for posting!

P.S. I wish I could read Jeff ID response even though it maybe denial tripe.

By: Jef I

Jef I — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:31:48 +0000

It was quite famous for a two month old blog.

By: Paul Middents

Paul Middents — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:13:11 +0000

Prometheus passed on but Pielke Jr. lives:

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/

The CCSP report is under the lens.

Roger’s bottom line remains consistent. Their is no peer reviewed evidence that anything bad will happen. Any policy changes must be vetted through Roger.

By: dhogaza

dhogaza — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:09:31 +0000

Dhog, that is why you are technically illiterate.

One more point, if your “proof” had merit, it would be famous by now, at least in the denialsphere, and if at all technically literate, in the literature.

The reality is that you’re a crank, convinced of your ability to bring down and entire field of science. You’re a perpetual-machine builder, an evolution-violates-SLOT “prover”, etc.

A crank.

(I’m not saying you hold those views, only that you’re a crank, as are those that do).

Science will ignore you. Now that Ryan has teamed up with you, you may get more notice, but that’s only because Ryan works hard to be competently wrong, even if he is wrong.

And is honest about it.

Not you, though.

By: dhogaza

dhogaza — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:00:44 +0000

JR are you going to let the posts through or keep them in limbo. What is the big deal?

Jeff, I pointed out Joe’s policy … you didn’t really need to ask him to clarify that you’re essentially a cut-and-paste troll with minimal sciency skills that inflate your own importance in your own mind …

By: dhogaza

dhogaza — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 03:54:42 +0000

Dhog, that is why you are technically illiterate.

And every fucking person with any notion of how statistical reconstructions work.

Except you, of course.

You’re two orders of magnitude more brilliant than einstein, in your own mind.

Hey, dude, if you’re so convinced that your analysis is right, and a mere dude with a degree in mathematics is wrong (that would be wrong), publish!

Write it up!

Submit it!

You’ll be famous with your FULL FUCKING NAME as being the guy who proved than Mann’s mathematics is so bad that it MUST BE INTENTIONAL, THUS FRAUD!

(taken from your own statements)