Archive | February, 2010

Eyeballing and other nonsense

Over at Skeptical Science — a must read for those interested in sound explanations of climate science — John Cook has posted an analysis and refutation of an American Thinker article by Gary Thompson. Let’s look briefly at Gary Thompson’s article, The AGW Smoking Gun.  First of all, note the title. Every skeptic and denier […]

Continue reading

A bit of levity…

The previous post was getting me down what with all the negative Nellies, so luckily, I visited Climate Progress and got a great laugh at this 2007 cartoon: I know some readers will be insulted, but I found it quite a good laugh and really, speaks to a lot of issues from the climate wars. […]

Continue reading

The One — Chopped Down to Size

Over at Climate Audit, McIntyre has stopped his manic posting on the Muir Inquiry long enough to give notice that he was disinvited to the World Dendro Conference. On December 8, 2009, I received one of my rare invitations to make a presentation to climate scientists – a keynote speech at the plenary session on […]

Continue reading

More lies, damned lies and statistics…

Over at Open Mind, Tamino has done it again – pointing out errors in the “skeptic” so-called science used to deny global warming. He reviews the work of Steven Goddard posted at Watts Up With That, which claims that it’s getting increasingly snowy over the Northern Hemisphere — an increase according to his data of […]

Continue reading

One of these things is not like the other…

Yesterday, I blogged about the game of telephone skeptics have been playing with a fabricated quote from Sir John Houghton. Apparently someone dug up an old interview from 1995 in which Sir Houghton talks about religion and his beliefs in God as proof that while he may not have actually said the words attributed to […]

Continue reading

Turtles all the way down

One of the favorite claims of ‘skeptics’ — and I’m growing more and more hesitant about using that term without scary quotes because there just doesn’t seem to be any real ones around, at least as far as I can see — is that NASA or NOAA or CRU or other climate researchers selectively alter […]

Continue reading