Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Phil Clarke denies Mann fails to present his data and that Jones lost his

Nice battle, though, and thanks. I'm not sure I've had as fun a fight since I quit arguing at alarmist sites.

Apr 3, 2016 at 11:48 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Kim, you must understand that for some, truth is just poetic licence in perpetual motion.

If Phil Clarke copy/pastes someone else's opinion, that matches his belief system, he automatically takes that as proof he is right. This simple and easy system of proof, is the structural glue that binds climate science together, in a clod.

Apr 4, 2016 at 12:39 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

debating with Phil Clarke is like debating with a cold doughnut. The thrill soon passes. he remains a doughbut, however. Does anyone suspect a positive IQ in his empty chasm of a brain?

Apr 4, 2016 at 12:44 AM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

Nope, d; very bright. I've slowly come to realize that many of these disputants, who appear as 'true believers', or cynical, are fundamentally and passionately motivated by fear. It is not irrational fear, even, merely mistaken.

Apr 4, 2016 at 12:50 AM | Unregistered Commenterkim

I agree, kim. Mr Clarke has shown himself to be smart, but not, it would seem, smart enough to realise that he has been duped by his… peers? Or superiors? Difficult to see the hierarchy of his world. Then there is the question of honesty – not with us, as we are really irrelevant – but with himself. He must be aware that there is an awful lot of data that does not match the paradigm to which he cleaves, yet he apparently refuses to accept. I know I have it somewhere in my notes, but cannot find the full quote that goes along the lines: “A man will give you whatever answer you want, if his pay depends upon it.” To be generous to Mr Clarke, perhaps his pay depends upon him defending the indefensible.

Apr 4, 2016 at 10:20 AM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it

- Upton Sinclair.

Cuts both ways, of course.

If my diet was dependent on my gardening skills I'd starve, similarly and fortunately no part of my salary depends on my viewpoint on AGW, which of course, aligns well with that of every scientific association on the planet.

Diogenes, I've taken a copy of your post as a reminder of why I am departing, and to show anyone who may be considering engaging over here the level of discourse they may expect. Good work.

Enjoy the echos.


Apr 4, 2016 at 10:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

… every scientific association…
And therein lies the rub, Mr Clarke: every scientific association I can think of has some dependency on the largesse of politicians. So many of the world’s politicians see the scare of “AGW” as a good way of promoting their own agenda, and use it ruthlessly for their own advantage. Certainly the Nullius in verba of the Royal Society has been severely compromised, as has that of the NAS; many other associations have very suspicious spokespersons. Have you never wondered why many of those shouting out the fear are so keen to change “the world order” (Chisholm, Strong, Figueres, et al)? Perhaps it is those that you find more comfortable, rather than the “science”.

Apr 4, 2016 at 12:59 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salvation depends upon his not understanding it.

Apr 4, 2016 at 1:13 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

The Green Blob can depart, safe in the knowledge that they have left the world a poorer place.

Apr 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

New version

"It is difficult to get a man to remember something, when his salvation depends upon his wife not remembering either".

Forgot wedding anniversary today.

Doghouse beckons.

Apr 4, 2016 at 4:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Kendall