Take Your Pick: Stupid or Crazy (Updated x2)
[Guest post by DRJ]
Howard Dean implies Republicans are stupid because he says they just don’t believe in science anymore:
HOWARD DEAN: “One of the most disturbing things about the Republican Party over the last couple of decades is they just don’t believe in science anymore. That’s not likely and not an approach that’s likely to generate any kind of creative thinking or any serious thinking about the future. People who use snowstorms as an example of why global warming doesn’t exist don’t understand the science and they don’t care.”
It sounds like Dean is adopting a modified version of Al Gore’s “crazy” approach to global warming doubters:
AL GORE: “Seth, we are at a critical moment when it comes to the climate crisis. In my new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the climate Crisis”, I detail the ways we can address the problem. But I also want to have a back-up plan. ***
SETH: “What is your back-up plan?”
AL GORE: “I’m going to start acting crazy. Seth, I think it’s crazy that our politicians aren’t more worried about the climate crisis, so it’s time for us to out-crazy the crazies.”
There you have it. Liberals think people who doubt global warming are either stupid or crazy. Thanks, guys!
In fairness, Gore’s approach is a lot funnier than Dean’s, including this unintentionally funny part toward the end of the Gore clip:
AL GORE: “Have you been outside today? It’s 60 degrees in late November. I mean, there’s a Christmas tree in front of this building and guys are walking around in flip flops. You can’t say this isn’t real.”
Blizzards or heat waves, liberals have all the answers when it comes to global warming … er, climate change.
— DRJ
UPDATE — SonicFrog.net notes the Death of the Hockey Stick:
“Did anyone else just hear the “bump-bump” of the Jones bus running right over the infamous Hockey Stick?
Dr. Phil Jones, the man at the center of the Climategate scandal, has for the first time admitted that the Medieval Warm Period could have been warmer than the present day, flying directly in the face of the stupid HockeyStick Graph that caused so much of the Climate panic in the first place.
***
Let this be a cautionary tale to others. Just be honest and open, and this kind of thing would be avoided.”
UDPATE 2 — America has snow in 49 states at one time. While that’s very unusual, it doesn’t prove or disprove global warming:
“A snowy winter doesn’t disprove — or prove — global warming, Petersen and Robinson said. This is weather, which is variable, not long-term climate, and there is a huge difference.
“This has nothing to do with long-term trends,” Petersen said. “This is just a several-week period.”
So much for those flip flops, Al Gore.
Why can’t he be both?
daleyrocks (718861) — 2/13/2010 @ 9:10 pmAgain, AGW skeptics are more interested in the science than the adherents. As we’ve seen in CRU’s emails, and the analysis that’s been done with the temperature record data, the science has been corrupted by the AGW adherents.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/13/2010 @ 9:14 pmDean and Gore have it half right. Although Republicans might “believe” in science, we do not necessarily “believe” in aome “scientists.”
As a matter of fact, science is not a proper subject for “belief.” “Belief” is proper for those things that “science” cannot explain. I believe in God but I understand science.
Longwalker (996c34) — 2/13/2010 @ 9:27 pmIsn’t it interesting that liberals want candidates they can look up to and conservatives want candidates they think are like them? I can see value in both but it’s the difference in perspective that interests me.
DRJ (6a8003) — 2/13/2010 @ 9:40 pmI updated the post with news about hockey sticks and snow.
DRJ (6a8003) — 2/13/2010 @ 9:57 pmAmost like birthers – we are to trust people who say they’ve examined a document (of which they are not qualified to examine its authenticity) or have the guy actually provide it like he made his opponent – a guy who has a foreign father –
but yeah, after all being president isnt all that important that you need proper paperwork – unless you are a Republican who served your country honorably…
EricPWJohnson (8f5192) — 2/13/2010 @ 9:58 pmIt’s ironic that screamin’ Howard made his foolish remarks on the same day that Phil Jones acknowledged there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 15 years.
grs (c4740b) — 2/13/2010 @ 10:05 pmYes.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 2/13/2010 @ 10:10 pmAnd the rise in frostbite cases in Philly are directly related to Al Gore
EricPWJohnson (8f5192) — 2/13/2010 @ 10:22 pmFuture flim-flam artists are going to study the AGW crowd to try and figure out how they were so successful in crafting a narrative whereby no matter what happened with the weather it somehow served to prove their thesis. It truly is one of the most remarkable con jobs since the advent of snake oil.
JVW (53aeb2) — 2/13/2010 @ 11:22 pmThere is no global warming.
Their temperature record is for shit.
Only four thermometers in the whole of California. All of them in cities on the coast.
How hot is it in Death Valley? Doesn’t matter.
How cold in the Sierra? Doesn’t matter.
When you remove the temp records of mountains and valleys (which the GHCN has been doing incrimentally since 1992), instead using thermometers in Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco, suddenly Professor “coal trains equal death trains” Hansen finds a California warming trend.
Just barely.
It’s all crap.
papertiger (7b38bb) — 2/14/2010 @ 12:05 amJones did more … the part I liked:
First question labeled ‘A’”
A – Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?
And the response:
So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.
Yes — Phil gave up the whole game. No unprecedented warming. The hockey stick has kinks as big as the paddle again. It’s not the warmest ever.
bill-tb (541ea9) — 2/14/2010 @ 12:30 amI know a guy named Ted, who wants to kill the AGW fraud dead in it’s tracks.
He wants to put it up to a vote.
Thumbs up, Al Gore is right, screw the condors, we’re all going to use windmill power.
Thumbs down, “sit on it Arnold” you muscle bound steroid addled goof, get us some off shore oil rigs, and start pumping us up for a change.
No brainer, right?
But there’s a problem. While Ted has no end of people who say “hey that’s a good idea“, what he doesn’t have are financial backers. What he doesn’t have are like minded Californian’s spreading the word.
He does have these advertisement clickable banner thingies ready made to plug in a blog.
So why isn’t anyone taking this seriously?
You say you want a revolution
papertiger (850657) — 2/14/2010 @ 12:46 amwell you know.
click here to see the plan
I’m asking for your contribution.
well you know
I’m doing what I can.
I’m but a poor, simple soldier, but I understand a fair amount of science including entropy, the second law of thermodynamics.
Dean thinks it is good science to counter global warming by using false data, embracing a disproven 19th century theory, modeling it in a disproven computer simulation that contradicts the laws of physics.
Gore thinks sanity is a state where the cause occurs after the result.
Orwell would be proud. This is indeed a Brave New World.
arch (24f4f2) — 2/14/2010 @ 4:59 amStatus quo for Dean. First it’s conservatives don’t care if children go to bed hungry and now it’s they don’t believe in science.
Orwellian indeed, and perhaps even worse. At least Orwell assumed it would take a totalitarian government to make newspeak become the societal point of reference. I don’t know how many ever thought the majority of a free press would do it to themselves. The phrase “The world gone mad” comes to mind concerning WWII, I don’t know if that was a book or just a commentary I read once. That is what the “free press” projects.
MD in Philly (d4668b) — 2/14/2010 @ 5:48 amJVW, they have to claim all aspects of weather to point to AGW, that way the skeptics won’t have anything to point to indicate the opposite. Their motto is like a 1st grader’s, I already claimed it so now you can’t claim it. You know the old coin flip toss phrase, “Heads we win, tails you lose!”
peedoffamerican (c15fe4) — 2/14/2010 @ 6:58 amThis headline just in.
peedoffamerican (c15fe4) — 2/14/2010 @ 6:59 am/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Global Warming Causes New Ice Age
Gore, of course, is a clown who flunked Divinity School. Dean is a physician but I would hate to ask him any chemistry questions now. I’m trying to think of a similar scam in American history. The best I can do, I guess, is Prohibition. I have a book called “When the Creeks Ran Red,” which is about the wineries in the Napa Valley that had been storing the fine wine they had made before Prohibition and hoping that it would eventually be repealed. They were finally forced to dump all that wine and most went bankrupt.
I wonder when they will give up on those poisonous fluorescent light bulbs.
Mike K (2cf494) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:09 amMike,
Don’t forget all of the whiskey ageing in oak barrells that the Jack Daniel’s distilley had to dump. That was even more of a crime.
peedoffamerican (c15fe4) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:18 am“UDPATE 2 — America has snow in 49 states at one time. While that’s very unusual, it doesn’t prove or disprove global warming:
It’s just consistent with it. But people don’t seem to understand what that means. It does provide plenty of chances for the, say, glenn becks or sean hannities of the world to make asses out of themselves.
imdw (8f8ead) — 2/14/2010 @ 6:36 pmConsistent with global warming? Do explain.
JD (aeb697) — 2/14/2010 @ 6:55 pmIts been pointed out to imdw how often AGW adherents have pointed to extreme weather, claiming it supported the AGW hypothesis – without any scientific basis whatsoever – but it continues to pretend that only skeptics point to extreme weather as a rebuttal.
That’s trolling.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:01 pmThe way it has been explained to me is that global climate change will cause local climate shifts that are not necessarily for the “warmer.” Because climate patterns are changing. However, here is another explanation of how more winter precipitation is consistent with global warming:
http://rawstory.com/2010/02/dylan-ratigan-schools-glenn-beck/
imdw (5f60be) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:03 pmAbout 2 minutes into this video, however, we see another phenomenon described:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/264085/february-10-2010/we-re-off-to-see-the-blizzard
imdw (5f60be) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:07 pmMeanwhile, imdw, the IPCC WGII report claims that AGW will cause less precipitation in places like Africa.
When all predictions are “consistent” with a hypothesis, its not science. Its Astrology.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:21 pmis bunkum.
We have been experiencing a period of decreased solar luminescence, which results in less warming.
Whether that will develop into a longer term trend remains to be seen, but for the moment global warming has significantly diminished.
And not because of teh crazy Al Gore.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:23 pmJust what I expected from dimwit.
JD (30371c) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:40 pm“We have been experiencing a period of decreased solar luminescence, which results in less warming.”
Just on the other thread they were talking about how temperatures have gone up but not at the 95% confidence interval.
imdw (842182) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:48 pmSo you didn’t watch the vids jd?
imdw (842182) — 2/14/2010 @ 7:49 pmAre you totally stupid, or do you just have no reading comprehension at all?
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 2/14/2010 @ 8:08 pmCan’t it be both, EW1?
JD (30371c) — 2/14/2010 @ 8:11 pmIMDW: JD doesn’t watch videos that haven’t been produced with the official seal of the RNC. Everything else is just lies, right JD?
Intelliology (00d844) — 2/14/2010 @ 8:24 pm“Just on the other thread they were talking about how temperatures have gone up but not at the 95% confidence interval.”
imdw – Read it again and check the years carefully.
daleyrocks (718861) — 2/14/2010 @ 8:50 pmNo, that is not right, Idiotology. Again, another lie. Par for the course with you.
JD (43ed0d) — 2/14/2010 @ 9:15 pmWe need to discuss your definition of ‘lie’. It was more of a joke (though, I suspect, probably pretty close to the truth). But knowing the difference is not something I would expect you to understand. So, my bad. I will try to amend my comments to your intelligence level. After all, I am the intelligence expert.
Intelliology (00d844) — 2/14/2010 @ 9:24 pmAgain, you suspect wrong. It seems to be a common theme with you, that much of what you believe simply is not so.
JD (43ed0d) — 2/14/2010 @ 9:36 pmI disagree. I think that much of what I believe is simply correct. That makes you a liar, liar.
Intelliology (00d844) — 2/14/2010 @ 9:39 pmI think that the rest of you waaaaaaaaay over-estimated the maturity of this one.
JD (43ed0d) — 2/14/2010 @ 9:44 pmno, not really…. you’re more the ex-spurt, and a poster child for birth control, regular AND retroactive.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 2/14/2010 @ 10:35 pm