Having read the recent Don Easterbrook two part reply at WUWT (link part1 & link part2) I am a little confused about what it is that can and can't be supported at WUWT.
For those of you who have followed the rebuttal against Shakun et al. (Nature paper claiming that CO2 preceded late glacial warming) I have to ask myself how can Anthony Watts support this argument when he also says CO2 drives temperature!
John O'Sullivan and the Slayers (good name for a rock and roll band) support evidence that there is no such mechanism in existence in the Earths atmosphere to drive any warming and just like Don Easterbrook, support the science that CO2 follows a temperature increase. So it then becomes a bit of a mystery as to why Anthony Watts will not support John O'Sullivan and the Slayers in the same way.
Article continues below this advert:
There must be an explanation for this complete contradiction on where Anthony Watts stands in this respect.
Does Anthony Watts support "Man Made" climate change?
Is it OK for Anthony Watts to be all for CO2 following an increase in the Earths temperature AND also go on to support an increase in temperature from "Man Made" CO2, this I'm sure you would agree is a complete riddle!
Anthony you do a great job but not letting John O'Sullivan and the Slayers have their say is a complete contradiction to what your great site (WUWT) stands for, and that is freedom of speech!...GR
Posted by kencoffman (Twitter) on Apr 19th 2012, 8:00 AM EDT
Anthony has confessed he has not studied atmospheric physics and made no effort to understand the mechanisms that supposedly support the +CO2 = +Warming idea. There are a lot of people like this...their brains go into overload with any kind of math or technical details. They simply disconnect and refuse to go there. Anthony (and Willis Eschenbach and Don Easterbrook) generally understand the fraud and nonsense of modern climatology, but can't believe they have been so completely led astray by the conventional wisdom. They might argue the magnitude of CO2-caused warming and the positive feedback of water vapor, but they don't see the full extent of the corruption and madness embedded in these ideas. Eventually, the realization of how thoroughly they were duped will sink in. They will never give the Sky Dragon Slayers any credit or respect, that's simply something we'll have to live with. It will be enough to win the battle. Which, there is no question, we are.
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on Apr 19th 2012, 8:26 AM EDT
Hi Ken
We will just have to assume your close to Anthony in this matter, I take on board what your saying but what is wrong with Anthony putting forward another view, he is either a skeptic or he is not.
Anthony has put this site in a "fringe" group classification at WUWT and he has stirred up a hornets nest in respect of his CO2 views.
You can tell him from me and from the rest of the "Climate Realists" we want him to remove that classification!
Regards
Gabriel
Comment edited by Co2sceptic (forum) on Thursday April 19, 2012 at 8:43 AM EDT
Posted by Chris Mortimer (Twitter) on Apr 19th 2012, 10:41 AM EDT
Hi Guys
I am a regular reader of both CR and WUWT sites and find that both contain thought provoking material. In particular, I find the difference in approach to the CO2 GHG theory fascinating and, if I'm honest, a little confusing at times (I fit in to the keen layman position). I look forward to reading the comments in the hope (and trust) that they shed further light on the article provoking those comments - can't say that the above has met my expectations this time.
I see the common "enemy" of both sites as being those that espouse AGW and continue to disseminate lies in order to scare the public in order to make it easier to pick our pockets, and find these kind of off-topic rants distracting and unhelpful.
I may appear hypocritical with this, my own rant, but I had to get it off my chest.
Keep up the good work and thanks for a great site.
I can't help but think having nothing to say in this matter will result in the change of anything, I can only hope that If I can point out to Anthony as to how silly he has been in regard to what the "slayers" have to say he may change his views, pigs may fly etc.
Anthony has been against the "Slayers" as they say there is NO CO2 effect on the Earth's atmosphere and all Anthony can do is state this site is a "Transcendent Rant" blog site with "way out there theory" and then he agrees that CO2 follows temperature increase and does not drive it!!
It's a very strange situation and I hope you enjoy the fireworks!!
The "rant", there is a personal attack against one of our members, sorry to say it's best left for public show.
Posted by Chris Mortimer (Twitter) on Apr 19th 2012, 11:17 AM EDT
I do enjoy a good bun fight and tend to agree with you regarding the confused message coming from WUWT. Time, and good science, will eventually provide an answer I trust.
Mr Pratt
I enjoy the contributions you make to the discussions on this site and, I believe, I understand your point of view - it is not that different to the way that I am beginning to lean.
My point was that I do not believe that your comments contributed to the discussion on a scientific basis, the reason I visit this site, and used the word "rant" based on the definition of "a piece of writing that incites anger". I had no intention of upsetting anybody - just a request to keep it helpful and non-personal.
Posted by Will Pratt (Twitter) on Apr 19th 2012, 8:07 PM EDT
Ok Gabriel,
have it your way.
Olson has given me all I need to tie up any loose ends in my write-up on my experiences with "slayers". This entire thread has been archived for legal reasons.
I have you both attempting to slander me with lies. I have informed you that Olson has lied in order to slander me and asked you to remove those lies and you have refused unless I allow you to sensor me.
You have framed yourself in all of this Gabriel and you are a fool. If you lie with dogs you will get flees.
» News articles may contain quotes, these are copyright to the respective publication which will be stated, along with a link to the source article where available.
» If you feel your copyright has been violated please contact us and the article will be removed or amended at your request.
Articles Recently Viewed
2,567
Donations
» Please support the site by making a donation. No matter how big or small, your contribution helps to support the cause.
Tweet Article
Post to Facebook
Print Article