Projection is the common thread
|
- Modus operandi of Green/left is to make shouty accusations against right or skeptics.
- 2. there is always this contradiction that this is exactly what they were doing themselves
| Shermers call for Right Wing to stop Skepticism
somehow I have lost my notes about Shermer most of which I posted in the BH thread Libertarians, tea partyers, & free market advocates: you're on the wrong side of the climate issue. The science is rock solid. Follow data.
....This is the same Michael Shermer who uses the 97% argument in a recent Scientific-American article ! that no one can say is a serious scientific statistic
- So his plea is a Good article to take into your local high school so the kids can pick over the logical fallacies.
- How the mighty have fallen. (Shermer & Un-Scientific GreenDogmaLovin American Magazine)
| The word Skeptic is used like Democratic in country names
|
- Anything prefixed with 'Skeptical' or 'Skeptics' has as much in common with the description as 'Democratic' does in the title of countries so monikered. SkepticalScience, SkepticsGuideU
Likewise for any academic subject having the word 'science' in its title. "Scientist" in "New Scientist" as well.
- in SkS or SGU is just a pseudo moniker like "democratic" some countries use which means exactly the opposite
| check for PROJECTION
- My standard tool for alarmist rants, is to check for PROJECTION ie are they guilty of what they accuse others of ?
.. to mre yes , as warmists are the ones that have abandoned the limits of uncertainty and pushed it into the certainty of dogma
- this video shows him talking about how people hold conflicting views in their brain at same time : believe in logic and say something nutty which is exactly what he's doing now.
- I have long criticised the US pop skeptics..I notice how their scepticism is about laughing at people, rather than respecting science .. others now point out their skepticsm is not about true science, but is relying on a system of approved dogma ie argument from authority
| Shermer/Mooney poisoning the wells Fallacy
- (how is this different from me saying greens all do one thing like projection maybe cos I am saying observe rather than discount)
- From the UK this "climate skepticism comes from a liberal right wing" thing espoused by Chris Mooney and championed by Shermer is a very strange idea. Surely it's just the poisoning of the wells fallacy ? (It's trying to say "since all arguments from the right are wrong, so climate skepticism must be wrong"
- which is bunk from 3 angles)
1. It's up to the advicate of CAGW to prove their case, rather than someone disprove.
2. Logical argument stands on its own merits, not who is making it.
3. It's sounds like an UNEVIDENCED conspiracy theory "oh, the reason the public don't believe CAGW is cos there is a liberal conspiracy supported by Big Oil"
- I'm sorry I've been a "proper" skeptic for a long time and at no other time have skeptics used the "you are on the wrong side" line.
- It's an ad-hom when All you need to do is show proper scientific evidence to counter a negative claim (cos you prove a positive). e.g. to counter the Earth is flat
- or for a positive claim like "vaccines cause autism or Big Foot and UFOs exist", you point out the weakness of their evidence.
- Yep apart from James Randi/Penn & Teller the "pop-skeptic cool people" are unscientific about bits of science which are their pet causes (giving them a free-pass from the normal rigor)
Crock Solid ...is what Shermer meant, he just mistyped the tweet
- Ah yes it does look like on Twitter he has ran away afraid to debate .. as per the normal warmist modus operandi of slinging mud and then hiding saying "we can't debate a skeptic, cos that will give them credibility"
.. Good on warmist Bill Nye for showing up to debate Morano on Stossel show on Fox News
| | | | |
|
I
|
somehow I have lost my notes about Walport most of which I posted in the BH thread
Walport's reverse thinking
"Climate sceptics should stop attacking the science of global warming and have a “grown-up” debate, the Government’s most senior scientist has said"
- What science can Walport quote for the justification of his choosing the photo and words to accompany his message "Children play on the edge of flood water in the cut-off village of Muchelney in Somerset"
- Give us the publication details for this magic science that links currents weather events to CO2 ?
"I am not going to debate you EVER" cried cry baby Sir Mark Walpole and his gang
, then he ran home and said
"Mummy, those nasty skeptics, they won't ever debate us, they just keep spoiling our game !"
Sounds like a challenge from Walport
WHEN, WHERE & WHICH TV channel do Lindzen, Ridley and the GWPF team turn up to ?
- and if your team don't turn up can we just debate your empty chairs ?
- DramaGreens are documented as always refusing to debate sceptics publicly, but have the front to claim sceptics won't debate.
e.g. When GWPF society suggested the debate the Royal Society refused any debate and eventually allowed a meeting where they told us what they thought, on the condition that what was said was kept secret.
A good test for projection is to substitute the sides in the accusation
sceptics DRAMAGREENS should stop attacking (with propaganda)science of global warming REALITY and have a “grown-up” debate, the Government’s most senior scientist SHOULD SAY.
Sir Mark Walport SHOULD HAVE accused DRAMAGREENS of PLAYING DOWN the scientific evidence in order to dodge the more challenging questionS about the failure of their green fantasy view.
Walports shows PROJECTION typical of the Green/left
“There are some people who don’t like the policy implications of climate change and think that the best way to duck the discussion is to deny the science"
.. sorry who is ducking the discussion? Your lot are the cowards who won't come to debates, but rather deny scientific reality by throwing up propaganda whitewash over it..
- Policy implications, your Greendream world will not be realised and you greenbiz and green hedgefund mates won't be raking in the subsidy money
..oh and grants might get cut
Tinyco2 suggests the new meme comes out of a video by Mark Henderson from about 20:10. http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/1/20/science-journalists-in-the-raw.html
| walport slings insults instead of debating
Ah @AngusPangus you beat me,DRAMAGREENS should stop attacking the science of global warmingREALITY and have a 'grown-up' debate, the Government's most senior scientist SHOULD SAY,Sir Mark Walport SHOULD HAVE accused DRAMAGREENS of PLAYING DOWN the scientific evidence in order to dodge the more challenging questionS about the failure of their green fantasy view...Sounds like a challenge Walport,WHEN, WHERE & WHICH TV channel do Lindzen, Ridly and the GWPF team turn up to ?,- and if you don't team turn up can we just debate your empty chairs ?,
- DramaGreens are documented as always refusing to debate sceptics publicly, but have the front to claim sceptics won't debate.,e.g. When GWPF society suggested the debate the Royal Society refused any debate and eventually allowed a meeting where they told us what they thought as long as the meeting was secret
- What science can Walport quote for the justification of his choosing the photo and words to accompany his message "Children play on the edge of flood water in the cut-off village of Muchelney in Somerset",
- Give us the publication details for this magic science that links currents weather events to CO2 ?
Oct 2013 did same
: 2 Oct 2013 is the date on that Indy article I found Top scientist Sir Mark Walport urges climate change deniers to give in,,
Sub : "Environment Secretary Owen Paterson played down the dangers of global warming recently",,BTW look what Google threw up : from the Independent (owned by friend to the oil oligarchs),The climate change sceptics are winning by LIAM DENNIS, 28 May 2013,winner of the most biased chimney photo EVER,,,ask Julia Gillard how it will pan out ,
| E
|
Greens they make their facts up !
......don't they Michael Mann
SkepticalScience actualy stands for GreenDogma
....Green's don't do science they only do dogma
The Martin Lewis MoneysavingExpert.com newsletter today is plugging solar PV panels so I just protested in their forum Martin L pushing up bills by plugging solar !
- It's subsidy is just a tax put on poor peoples bills ad given to the rich and solar mafia biz.
- The more people get panels the more subsidy will be
paid out, the more other peoples bills will have to go up to cover it.
- So I can no longer support Martin and MSE now they are encouraging more unrodctve & needless expense in the electricity supply chain.
(I'm a mathematically literate electrical engineer, not paid by the industry)
Subsidies show warmists case is weak
|
- When someone does something wrong you present the evidence in a court of law and prosecute them ..That's JUSTICE,,However if you don't have evidence you don't have proper evidence that will stand up in court, you can come up with some twisted idea of balance.,1. Give their competitors a huge subsidy. That's INJUSTICE,and now he has this idea to 2. Brainwash some politicians into changing the law,more taxes ? ..what when the energy taxes are going so well ? I thought the EU are set to back down (reported on BBC),
- Since tax rises mean price rises it does mean bigger profits for the companies (higher profit on the same margin), but it hurts the people and thru them the politicians ..not likely ..,,
Comment from the school girls who run the Met Office : " We didn't say when ..maybe we meant in 5000, or 5 million years time.. and we had our fingers crossed behind our backs when we said it !",
| | | | | | |
|