What to do when your readers are not on message?

NatureNews ran this article regarding the cold snap which descended upon South America during July.
"Scientists who have visited the affected rivers say the event is the biggest ecological disaster Bolivia has known, and, as an example of a sudden climatic change wreaking havoc on wildlife, it is unprecedented in recorded history."

(Apart from 1955, when it was colder!!)

"The blame lies, at least indirectly, with a mass of Antarctic air that settled over the Southern Cone of South America for most of July. The prolonged cold snap has also been linked to the deaths of at least 550 penguins along the coasts of Brazil and thousands of cattle in Paraguay and Brazil, as well as hundreds of people in the region."
Like the 'Oh! and some people died' bit tag on.. glad we've got our priorities sort there.
But for me, the best comment was this definitive guide to the Climate Change jargon.
Climate Change Dictionary

      PEER REVIEW:
The act of banding together a group of like-minded academics with a funding conflict of interest, for the purpose of squeezing out any research voices that threaten the multi-million dollar government grant gravy train.

      SETTLED SCIENCE:
Betrayal of the scientific method for politics or money or both.

      DENIER:
Anyone who suspects the truth.

      CLIMATE CHANGE:
What has been happening for billions of years, but should now be flogged to produce 'panic for profit.'

      NOBEL PEACE PRIZE:
Leftist Nutcase Prize, unrelated to "Peace" in any meaningful way.

      DATA, EVIDENCE:
Unnecessary details. If anyone asks for this, see "DENIER," above.

      CLIMATE SCIENTIST:
A person skilled in spouting obscure, scientific-sounding jargon that has the effect of deflecting requests for "DATA" by "DENIERS." Also skilled at affecting an aura of "Smartest Person in the Room" to buffalo gullible legislators and journalists.

      JUNK SCIENCE:
The use of invalid scientific evidence resulting in findings of causation which simply cannot be justified or understood from the standpoint of the current state of credible scientific or medical knowledge.
        
2010-08-27 08:37:43 PM
Posted by: Jack Black
Taken from NatureNews Cold empties Bolivian rivers of fish

Sphere: Related Content

Mr Ned says...........

This post is actually a copy of a comment placed on Guido Fawkes regarding the attitude of eco-warriors post Climategate...

Greenpeace : “We Know Where You Live”

It was also inspired by listening to the totally biased BBC programme 'Call You and Yours.' 

This is the comment..LOL spot on!

Mr Ned says:
April 5, 2010 at 12:31 pm
“Its the South Pole you want to be focusing on.”



Agreed, the ice in the Antarctic reached a record high ice extent last September, though I do not recall the media paying any attention to that.

They only go down there in our Spring, when the Antarctic ice melt is at it’s height. Then they recycle those pictures of the Wilkin’s ice sheet breaking off (AGAIN) then go on about how it is warming down there faster than the rest of the planet, but forgetting to honestly inform the public that the ONLY way to show any warming is to strictly control the grid of where they are measuring temperature, to homogenise it in one way that includes dodgy data from thermometers that were 50 feet up on masts, that have now been buried in lots of insulating snow (where the batteries heat up the area around the thermometer), that include areas of strong volcanic activity and where the measurements only start on one specific date and end on another specific that will show a slight net warming. ANY other way of measuring shows that the Antarctic has been cooling for 50 years and the massive ice extent is proof of this.


If one looks at the ice recovery in the Arctic, one can see NATURAL variablity that disproves the wild and crazy alarmism of the past few years. The ice is recovering, the polar bears are breeding like mad and the earth is NOT doomed to burn up.


IN fact there is more ice on the earth today (including the arctic and the Antarctic and all the glaciers combined) than there has been for many years.


That is the raw, observable evidence from the real subject in study. The actual, real earth.


Fuck computerised climate models with their bullshit algorithms and bullshit incomplete input data full of bullshit assumptions.


The real thing is not warming anywhere near as fast as the alarmists are desperate for it to. You would think that they would be relieved and happy that their cataclysmic predictions are not happening, but no, they are just ever more shrill and desperate.


Where there IS massive environmental damage, that can be put down to man’s activities, then that is usually down to local factors such as cutting down forests, (removing moisture which rose, turned to snow and fell on Mount Kilimanjaro, now the ice is receding through natural process in response to less snow and wind erosion and evaporation NOT melting as the temperature there has NOT changed)


Or putting in reinforced coasts to protect fish farms which move the coastal waters further round to cause more damage and flooding (Bangladesh where the sea level has NOT risen by more than half an inch)


Yes there are real environmental issues, but when they are examined, what is revealed is that local factors are blamed and it is NOT the industrialised Western nations’ use of carbon fuels that is the cause, but the use of industrial practices in the region of damage that is to blame.


AGW is BULLSHIT! It is a hypothesis that is NOT supported by the observable evidence and yet people still believe in climate science. In science, IF the hypothesis is not supported by the evidence, OR to put it another way, if the observable evidence contradicts the hypothesis, then the hypothesis fails and must be revised to explain the evidence.


In Climate science, when the observable evidence contradicts the hypothesis, the evidence is ignored, or manipulated or hidden or lost, to be replaced by evidence that has been “homogenised” (tampered with). That is NOT science. That is fraud.



"Penguin for Lunch again lads."

Sphere: Related Content

Adopt an animal with WWF

Well I could try and write a diatribe about how to support this is a worthwhile endeavour, that because we are a sentient life form which is able to think outside of it's own existence and consider the plight of other lifeforms and how natural and human activities causes changes in environmental factors, threatening the existence of all life on this planet.

But I won't. Just do what you can.


Adopt an animal with WWF

Sphere: Related Content