One of climate denialdom’s most deranged and angry voices kind of hates my new video.
Jame’s Delingpole, seen below, whose motto is “I’m evil and right about everything.”(sorry Jimmy, only half right..) – deals in a very special kind of blissfully clueless, fact free invective that climate deniers love because it requires no thought or knowledge whatever.
In fact, Delingpole brags that he never takes time to look at tedious science. He’s too busy with other things.
Above, James Delingpole is asked a question. Implodes. He later complained he was “intellectually raped”.
But he is on to me, and calls me out for my malevolent practice of seeming “measured and reasonable”.
Ok, Jimmy, you got me.
James Delingpole in Breitbart:
The climate alarmists have come up with a brilliant new excuse to explain why there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years.
Turns out the satellite data is lying.And to prove it they’ve come up with a glossy new video starring such entirely trustworthy and not at all biased climate experts as Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, Kevin “Travesty” Trenberth, and Ben Santer. (All of these paragons of scientific rectitude feature heavily in the Climategate emails)
The video is well produced and cleverly constructed – designed to look measured and reasonable rather than yet another shoddy hit job in the ongoing climate wars.
The problem is that the satellite survey’s controlled by deniers John Christy and Roy Spencer have had a suspiciously consistent ability to manufacture doubt about the presence of warming or warming signals, compared to other satellite surveys out there. To quote John Abraham, writing about a Journal of Climate paper that came out last March: “It is known that there is a problem because there are multiple groups that create satellite temperature records. For instance, NOAA, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), and the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH). The problem is, their results don’t agree with each other…. the UAH team, led by Dr. John Christy and Dr. Roy Spencer… present results that differ quite a bit from the others.”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/mar/25/one-satellite-data-set-is-underestimating-global-warming
To continue Abraham’s quote: “The RSS and NOAA teams apply a drift correction based on the diurnal cycle… UAH does not yet correct the diurnal drift for satellites… The present paper presents a calibration scheme that allowed… [the authors] to obtain a diurnal correction from the satellite measurements themselves… As the authors state in the paper, their new results agree with the two groups that show more warming. They disagree with UAH…. the lowest trend, in degrees Celsius heating per decade are from UAH and they equal 0.029 for the 1979–2012 period for the mid-troposphere region between 20° South and 20° North. The new results are almost 4 times higher at 0.114°C per decade…. As additional support, the NOAA and RSS values are also close to the corrected results. The simple fact is, UAH is an outlier.”
Well said, but may I offer a small semantic correction?
Shouldn’t the last sentence be “The simple fact is, Spencer and Christy at UAH are outright liars”?
Abraham is too polite to say so, but “lying sacks of sh##” is, I believe, the term I used on another blog post. Also, this fits the pattern uncovered with Exxon’s behavior the last few decades, as well. These vermin are not worthy of calling themselves Americans.
But Spencer and Christy are such nice God-fearing Christian men…
Would they lie because they believe their God would never allow mankind to change the earth’s climate and that fossil fuels are their God’s gift to mankind to use?
Hell yes.
“The simple fact is, Spencer and Christy at UAH are outright liars”?
I personally think that they are steeped in their beliefs. Look at their repetition of the same patterns – liars would thrash about and try new tactics. These guys don’t change.
.02
Best,
D
Delingpole is “Lord” Christoper Monckton’s most conspicuous toady, his sycophancy born of a palpable sense of social inferiority. His inability to absorb or understand scientific concepts is so well known that he is no longer taken seriously in the UK even by people of a similar political bent. If Breitbart are that desperate, I met several people down the pub the other day (I think one of them was in leisure) who would be only too happy to pen a thousand words of fact-free drivel if the price was right. Perhaps I should forward their numbers.
It has been repeatedly observed that the denialist crowd will embrace ANY theory, statement, data set, anyone, no matter how crazy, discredited, illogical, or contradictory to their other ‘evidence’, as long as it gives them a talking point to cause less informed citizens to doubt AGW.
They know all too well that telling people what they want to hear is the easiest con in the book.
Reblogged this on A Green Road Daily News.
You would think that mankind would learn. First….the tobacco industry. Then…the asbestos industry. Then….fossil fuels.
Will mankind CONTINUE to allow people to LIE about PUBLIC POLICY issues? Freedom of speech is a great freedom we have. But it comes with two responsibilities as well:
1) The responsibility to NOT LIE when you communicate…ESPECIALLY in a public forum
2) The responsibility to CALL OUT those (like Monckton, Delingpole, Bastardi, Watts, etc…..that do either LIE, MISLEAD, OR IGNORE FACTS/SCIENCE.
And if they would bother to look at record high temperatures in places like the US, Canada, and Russia over the past 90 years…and especially the past 30 years….it is crystal clear that it is warming. That our society ALLOWS them to lie…in the face of facts….is quite startling to me:
http://climatechangegraphs.blogspot.com/2012/08/ratio-of-new-record-high-temps-to-new_36.html
FOX News: “Where truth and journalism are dead.”
Delingpole. An emetic for the rational mind.
I desperately hope your comment has not been trademarked, as I’m going to steal it. 😉
I like to play with words, to say as much with as little as possible.
I believe it’s original, but be my guest!
Playing with words IS fun, and we’re starting to get into some pretty disgusting bodily functions, let’s “go” vulgar all the way.
How about:
Delingpole: Constipation of the rational mind that no laxative known to man can cure.
Or the inverse:
Delingpole: Mandibular and mental diarrhea that no amount of Imodium can stop.
And since we’re getting into “medical” issues here, maybe we need one of those warnings that flash across the TV screen with the drug ads as our pharmaceutical overlords try to get more of our money? You know, like “If your brain rots or your ass falls off after listening to Delingpole, seek medical help immediately” or helpful advice like “If you have been intellectually raped, ask your doctor if Getanubrain (TM) is right for you”. Or “Do not visit sites like Delingpole’s before going on intelligent and truthful climate change sites like Crock or SKS. Adverse reactions, including suicidal thoughts, have been known to occur if truth and evil lies are mixed”.
(I’m sorry for this outburst, but any viewing of that incredible Delingpole “meltdown” clip gets me very pumped, and mentioning that he said he was “intellectually raped” gets me rolling on the floor—a cruel thing to do to someone my age, since getting up is often difficult).
Delingpole. As thick as two short Plancks.
You don’t get much shorter than a Planck Length; at least not in the old school world.
Well, perhaps we couldn’t do a “shoddy hit-job” because that genre is already taken by your side, James.
Unless he dies prematurely, Delingpole will live long enough to admit that not only was he dead wrong but willfully ignorant and incredibly stupid.
Less likely but so also may Murdoch, Monckton and Watts, et.al. Fox is a certainty.
Dream on! Can you name ONE of them who has done so? And I speak not of Muller who was a denier scientist who followed the science, but of all the science ignorant charlatans who are ideologues rather than scientists
That’s what I was thinking too, and even in the case of Muller, I am not aware that he has ever apologized for accusing Mann et al of being deceptive and manipulating data (in a dishonest way that is). If he has, I would like to see the quote. I think he secretly wants to maintain that there was all this nefarious double dealing in the climate science world, and then he rode in on his (high?) horse and… well confirmed what they were saying all along…but the point is he did it the RIGHT way.
In the future, we’ll have stopped much of the GHG problem, and slowed the warming enough that deniers will then say, ‘See! Nothing happened! The Alarmists’ models were all wrong!!11!!’ They will generate doubt that the rise in temperature decelerated because of our conversion to clean energy, and proclaim it was part of a natural phenomenon.
And the profitability of oil and coal will never be forgotten, even when they’re use has been minimized, similar to how a heroin addict never fully gets over their desire. There will always be instances where a certain lobby or businessman will want to expand fossil exploitation, especially inside the next 100 years, where large scale machines will still be fueled by liquid carbon biofuels.
WHOA!!!! Andrew? You said you live not far from the Porter Ranch gas leak? May I suggest that you may be suffering from methyl mercaptan intoxication and that’s making you a bit light-headed and bright-sided?
Go somewhere where the air is clean and breathe deeply. Or buy some of that canned air that some U.S. entrepreneurs (read con artists) are selling to well-to-do Chinese at $20+ for 7 liters.
I bought some Canadian canned air, but in small print on the bottom it said ‘made in China’.
Now THAT is funny! Tooshaay and LOL
Hopefully one of them won’t sue you for slander.
Best,
D
Not to worry there. The absolute defense against defamation of any kind—slander (spoken), or libel (written)—is truth. If what you say is true, you have not defamed anyone, and calling Delingpole deranged, evil, a sack of shit, and most anything else you can come up with in the way of pejoratives is certainly true. I agree, so sue me too.
A caveat—-should the case be brought in one of those places where right-wing denialist whores like Delingpole are worshiped—-like in Bumfuck, in Ignorance County in Red State, USA—-things might go differently. The Repugnants who dwell there tend to be protective of their brethren who have been “intellectually raped” by people with brains, although not very much any women who actually have been physically raped (especially if by a relative). But any conviction there would be overturned once the case gets out of the benighted place and into the real world, so it’s a moot point.
DOG,
I disagree with “not to worry.” Yes, truth is an affirmative defense. The problem is you have to pay a lawyer to assert it–and if you lose, to appeal. (For Peter’s international readers, under the “American rule,” each party pays its own atty’s fees, win or lose.)
Certain exceptions aside (winning on a motion for sanctions for filing a bad-faith lawsuit, for example), if you get sued, you get screwed no matter the outcome–financially, at least.
“Glossy”? Hey Peter, I think they just accidentally complimented you. Now if they only had a shred of credibility!
Personally I’ve always enjoyed your vids, both for the “glossy” part (great production values… well except that audio on the very early ones) and the sark, but especially for the relentless pursuit of the facts and exposition of the science.
You don’t like sark? What are you doing on a site that discusses climate change denial? Deniers and denialism cannot be properly discussed without lots of sark.
Hmmm… ok… I’ll take the rap for this misunderstanding since I write excessively convoluted sentences.
Let me explain and expound on my comment above, in declarative statements:
First paragraph is about mocking the climate deniers AND their credibility.
The second para says:
-I like Mr. Sinclair’s vids, and have been following them for a long long time. I really enjoy how professionally done they are.
-I also really enjoy Mr. Sinclair’s use of sarcasm, and wit.
-More important that production values and sarcasm, which ARE enjoyable, as mentioned above, is the clear and lucid exposition of facts and science which is, ultimately, more important. (ah dangit!… slipped into complex sentences again… go ahead misinterpret it as you wish… -sigh-)
Another contender for membership in the Order of the Perfumed Sleeve Hanky In The U.S. (OPSHITUS). Such condescension, such arrogance, so many words wasted on self-indulgent ego massage.
Here’s a decidedly non-convoluted and non-complex message for you, Paulie—-GFYS (and the high horse you rode in on as well. (-sigh-)