Blocked Again – Real Climate
Posted by Jeff Condon on January 31, 2009
There will be no dissent. There will be no discussion of potential dissent and no independent consideration which may result in the potential for dissent.
These guys are going to turn me into a denier, it’s like they want me to be a denier, maybe I’m too dangerous to their plans. It will be their fault, they like Tamino are the ones who can’t have a reasonable discussion, or maybe my questions are too hard.
Check out this burner that I sent to them regarding the warming antarctic paper they are circularly celebrating.
I wonder if you know when the data and code for this will be released. If it has, where can I find it?
It doesn’t matter to me if the antarctic is warming or not, but I would like to know the details of this study. I’ve read the paper and SI and it isn’t exactly chock full of detail.
Eric Steig was on line answering other peoples questions at the time, he had to have seen my email but instead of answering, it was CUT, SNIPPED, CHOPPED, CENSORED AND BLOCKED.
Not my fault.
page48 said
It seems obvious by now that they’re not going to let you play in their sandbox, but I think it’s admirable that you keep trying. Have a nice evening!
peter vd berg said
religious fanatics don’t take it well if you shake the foundation of their beliefs.I guess we just have ourselves a whole new religion. No point in discussing
psi said
Jeff–
Keep asking the valid questions. That will always put you on the “real” side of climate or any other subject. Censorious fanatics may be able to temporarily create a self-inclosed world of collective delusion, but ultimately reality will come crashing in on them.
Keep up your record of what happens as you persevere.
In the end, the journey is our destination.
Cheers,
psi
DJ said
Jeff,
I’ve come across this Title instead of using “Denier” use “Contrarian”. I’ve seen it used a number of times. It seems to have a certain “Ring” to it! What do you think? Keep up the great work.
Regards,
DJ
Jeff Id said
You’re right. But I don’t like contrarian, it sounds like the science of being continuously contrary. I like naturalist, they’re turning me into a climate naturalist.
Tim L said
I like climate Independent thinker.
Jeff,
there is another way to look at change AM and FM.
most are looking at am but i think fm might be the way to go.
H. W. CLOUGH
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/048/mwr-048-10-0593.pdf
page 595 table 1
you can see the period change from short to long and back.
why is frequency modulation a good thing?
it will mask out noise much better that average or second squares.
Archibald was on to this with a start at peak on sun spots then end at minimum rather than count spots and average or conclude from am numbers.
also, if the temps taken from UHI’s or moved stations will have less effect rounding errors gone.
Thank you
Tim
The Diatribe Guy said
“Climate naturalist.”
I like it. I wish I had thought of it.
Sign me up.
Adam Gallon said
They’re very selective in what questions they allow to be asked.
Try drawing attention to their previous pronouncements on Antarctic temps, that cooling there is commesurate with Global Warming, http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/02/antarctica-is-cold/langswitch_lang/sk
Try posting that “An Inconvenient Truth” has been tested in The High Court and found wanting,
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/corporate_law/article2633838.ece
I notice they’ve a thread up about glaciers now, I think I’ll pop in a question about this article. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7580294.stm
page48 said
I like “Climate Rationalist,” myself.
Vephurnerut said
Maaaan, you know there is such thing in the web like search engine, http://google.com if you don’t, go there to understand why this post is bullshit
Philip Thomas said
Climate Realist is muy prefered term.
Schrodinger's Cat said
I guess that they don’t want objective science to interfere with their subjective propaganda.