Slashdot Mirror

“If you want to go beyond the local maximum AND the local minimum, you will still see we've had no significant warming since around 1900. Surprise! The government's own unmanipulated data shows that quite clearly.” [Jane Q. Public, 2014-05-13]

“NOBODY in their right minds has — and I certainly have not — been arguing that the globe has not been getting warmer! That is not the issue and never was. The globe has been trending warmer for the last 6,000 years! The data are clear. Someone would have to be an idiot or totally uninformed to make such a claim.” [Jane Q. Public, 2007-10-24]

“I do not disagree that the globe is warming. That would be denying facts... the earth has been trending warmer for over 6,000 years!” [Jane Q. Public, 2008-06-22]

“Trying to prove to me that the globe is warming was a pretty silly thing to do. I do not dispute that the earth has been getting warmer, and never did! It has been trending warmer for the last 6,000 years!” [Jane Q. Public, 2009-04-18]

“We know the earth has been warming. It has been doing so for approximately 6,000 years.” [Lonny Eachus, 2009-07-02]

“First, people with at least half a brain — including in the U.S. — know the climate is getting warmer. It has been trending warmer for roughly 6,000 years, industry or not.” [Jane Q. Public, 2011-07-17]

"It's possible that both the AGW deniers and AGW alarmists are wrong. Climate change could be real, but caused by natural factors that are out of our control, the same ones that have caused ice ages and warm periods in the past when carbon outputs were nowhere near as high as they are now."

The problem with this is that it is exactly what many of those so-called AGW "deniers" have been saying all along. [Jane Q. Public]

Exactly what who's been saying all along? Aside from all your short term "cooling/recovery" trends, you've smeared paleoclimate studies while making these uncited claims about the paleoclimate:

NOBODY in their right minds has -- and I certainly have not -- been arguing that the globe has not been getting warmer! That is not the issue and never was. The globe has been trending warmer for the last 6,000 years! The data are clear. Someone would have to be an idiot or totally uninformed to make such a claim. [Jane Q. Public, 2007-10-24]

Not quite 0.74 degrees, but yes it has warmed. So what? The earth has been trending steadily warmer for the last 6,000 years!!! [Jane Q. Public, 2008-06-22]

The trend over 5 or 6 THOUSAND years has been warmer. [Jane Q. Public, 2008-06-22]

I do not disagree that the globe is warming. That would be denying facts... the earth has been trending warmer for over 6,000 years! [Jane Q. Public, 2008-06-22]

Trying to prove to me that the globe is warming was a pretty silly thing to do. I do not dispute that the earth has been getting warmer, and never did! It has been trending warmer for the last 6,000 years! [Jane Q. Public, 2009-04-18]

We know the earth has been warming. It has been doing so for approximately 6,000 years. [Lonny Eachus, 2009-07-02]

Certainly the globe has been warming... it has been trending warmer for thousands of years. [Jane Q. Public, 2010-02-03]

First, people with at least half a brain -- including in the U.S. -- know the climate is getting warmer. It has been trending warmer for roughly 6,000 years, industry or not. [Jane Q. Public, 2011-07-17]

Jane and Lonny Eachus are wrong. According to Marcott et al. 2013 (PDF), the world has actually been cooling for most of the last 6,000 years.

You've probably been listening to Fox news or talk radio too much. Try stepping out of the epistemic closure echo chamber and looking at some actual data on satisfaction with health care

If you're having trouble explaining the software patent issue to someone you think might be interested, refer them to Julian Sanchez' recent article which sums it up very nicely.

This is why scientists will never "win" a politicized debate.

Anybody can grab a couple one-way hash arguments off their favorite talking heads and it takes a couple of pages of context to explain why a relatively simple statement is wrong even though it has truthiness to it.

For example opening the data probably wouldn't help anybody because institutions who are actually qualified to look at the data all ready have access to it. You'd just get a bunch of quacks who'd "poke holes" using more truth-y statements without scientific process. The "75% of the whole tree ring data" canard as described above is a good example.

Full text of the JUSTICE Act at http://www.eff.org/files/HEN09874.pdf or http://www.juliansanchez.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/JUSTICEAct.pdf

EFF's) blog post on the bill http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/09/eff-supports-justice

Feingold's press release http://feingold.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=317927

My Dailykos diary http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/9/17/19226/5990

Facebook "Pass the JUSTICE ACT" group http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=134538932549

Picture the following. A Sith Lord walks up, pulls out his light saber, lights it up, pulls back, and starts the swing that will decapitate his target, only to hear a chorus of "CARE BEAR, STTAAARRRRREEEE!!!!!", followed by a bright beam of rainbow light smashing into his face.

http://juliansanchez.com/notes/archives/2007/11/care_bear_stare.php

I'd pay a $1 to see that.