Harassment of climate scientists needs to stop | Richard Schiffman | Comment is free | theguardian.com

This opinion piece uses that trick where there's so many twisted facts and flat out lies it's difficult to know where to begin. Every sentence could be challenged.

But if they're going to use words like "denier" let's start by talking about the Guardian themselves. You know who they are right?

They're the leftist rag out of Britain who bought into that Propaganda junkett to Antarctica last winter that was going to show how warm and melty everything was down there. It's pretty sad when you start believing your own bullshit.

It is in this case for sure, because their ship got frozen in and it took at least three nations, I don't even know how many millions of dollars, and at least a couple weeks to finally fly all those lunatics out of there.

OK, so how do you attack a fortress of lies. One lie at at time, I guess.

Let's start with this one. "Mann also did not imagine that he would be spending quite so much time with lawyers and in courtrooms." They then quickly slip in that he's the plaintiff in this case today. It goes by so quick you may have missed the significance there. He's the plaintiff. He's the plaintiff in all the cases where he's suing his critics. That might be your first clue you're going to be spending some time in court Michael. When you take people to court.

He's a litigious clown of a pseudo-scientist who's so laughably bad he once posted a graph upside down, and then was so pompous that, as far as I know, he to this day refuses to put it right side up. He's also the "hide the decline guy" with the discredited hockey stick graph that not even the IPCC will support anymore. He gets critiqued, because if there's any BS artist in the world who deserves it he's the guy. And if there's any justice left in the world he's going to lose this case just like he lost against the last guy he sued for pointing out what a grant sucking, lying parasite on the system he is.

It's going to be so cool when Mark Steyn finally gets him into court and demolishes him.

I'm pretty sure he was threatening to sue the guys who made the viral vid below as well.

I agree. The harassment of global warming advocates has got to stop. It's now time for mockery and ridicule.

Which step of the scientific method is that?

The one where data manipulating crybabies like Michael Mann need to be taken to the quiet room to have their dydees changed.

I see it took you less than one sentence to "blame the messenger". A new record!



If only they were seeking to prove that.

The important thing is that the science is settled. Not just climate science, but ALL science. We can pack it in, our theories are perfect and further investigation will yield no results.

Hey, there's a new movie coming out. Gotta see it.



Oh and fine, no mocking, Doc. Even though the article you posted is about blackening the rep of Mann's opposition to defend his. You say it's about the scientific method - prove it. Show me anything by Michael Man that you think relies on the scientific method. I'll show you why you're wrong.

I think you lost the plot again. I don't care about Michael Mann. With or without his hockey stick graph, the evidence for global warming is overwhelming. And there are many other data plots that match his.

What I rail against is people like Warren Buffet or the Koch Brothers who pay good money to go on a fishing expedition to try to find Mr. Mann's 'Anthony Weiner' moment so that they can use that to discredit the Science instead of funding Science themselves (The Koch Brothers do fund some PBS Science programs however). It delays the very short time line we have to do something about it, while it's still possible to do anything at all.

Or do you have evidence that Berkshire Hathaway and The Koch Foundations aren't behind the Climate Denial movement, and really are trying to open our eyes with contrasting theories for the available data? If so, what possible use could Micheal Mann's decade old emails from the University of Virginia be?

I think you lost the plot again. I don't care about Michael Mann.

Then why post a BS, lying whitewash of him?



Nevertheless if we concentrate on the lying article in the OP, the catastrophic warming implied by Mann's discredited, BS, hide the decline, Hockey stick graph is vastly underwhelming. And I didn't even know such a thing was possible...to be vastly underwhelming.



Not even the worse crooks in climate pseudo-science dare to post another Hockey Stick graph. Feel free to show me somebody else who's using Mann's inverted Tiljander data as well. Oh and are they still "hiding the decline". I see them trying to pass that "trick" off as common. If it is it's still crooked.

As to the rest of your post, it's diversionary BS meant to distract from what you now realize can only be a defense of the indefensible.

But hey, if you seriously want to get into it about what we find when we follow the money, post a thread. I'll be by with my shoes shined to show you how the lion's share of the cash comes from Big Green, Big Red, and big government.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/06/big-g ... z2jygROxeC

I think you lost the plot again. I don't care about Michael Mann.
Then why post a BS, lying whitewash of him?

Because he appears to be the designated whipping boy of the deniers (as verified by your response), and because a judge ruled on the same lines as what I've been thinking all along. There were other similar articles about the judges decision, but this one included the background bits that I wanted highlighted.



Actually, the rest of my post was exactly on topic with the article. Having trouble with the answers to my questions? As for diversionary . . .you are also welcome to start your own thread on that subject to regurgitate your scripted talking points, but is likely to only attract the chirp of crickets.

Which step of the scientific method is that?

It's the one Obama is following:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... rvine.html