OK. What else have you got about this? Keep going. Make your case further.

As fine an example of cherry picking as has ever been produced. The original claim by Christy et al was that the whole troposphere was not showing the correct fingerprint, according to their satellite data. Upon investigation, it was their satellite data that was wrong.

They came back with a revised claim, the mid level, tropical troposphere hotspot was the problem now, a vastly reduced scope from the original claim. Their graph is highly misleading, as it shows the deviation from the modelled projections. The spot has warmed, but not as much, according to their measurements. The ‘missing’ is not missing, they are displaying the deviation from the projection. That the models have hot it 90% correct is not the problem for them. As it is, the deviation is within the bounds of error, and is being investigated, just as all the science is being investigated, and re-investigated. It’s an ongoing process, because it will never be finished. That is the nature of science. Given the evidence that has been collected, the convergent streams from the various sources referred to in the reports, AGW is still mostly correct. (And for science, that’s usually as good as it gets.)

When people make claims for science and they are in contempt of evidence thats heretical for me. A lot of people may have become desenstized but its objectively insensitive behaviour amongst those who hold jealously those perogatives that had in the past been accorded to science.

I know what evidence is. So this little bitch (male or female) is lying. And being insensitve. Matter of fact I’m getting all hurt thinking about it.

Now lets have your several retractions. Why are you coming here (not this blog but this entire subject-matter) to a place where some people are NOT in contempt of evidence. Don’t you know that amongst those who still believe in scientific values that you are about as welcome as a KKK member at a Black Panther meeting.

Gramscian Marxists are not at home with science. She is not for you…… this thing we call science. You don’t belong even so much as within the boundaries of the subject-matter.

Science was probably practiced a lot better in the religious age when people just thought “well if this is how God made it we are happy with whatever it is we will find…”

Now we have leftists trying to CREATE reality rather than just discover it.

This is why you are not welcome in the subject-matter. You ought to be spectators or just go away. There are those who think that the observer tries to discover reality. Whereas there are those who think that the observer creates it. The latter ought to beat it.

Everywhere we see ourselves overtaken by people not really interested in science for its own sake, as an expression of its own values. Instead they are interested only on the basis of what the “party” decision is. How it will affect politics. The Leninist concept of democratic centralism writ large.

For the communists TRUTH was by definition what the decision of the party was. For you guys its the consensus. But the scientists saw natural reality as beyond the decision-making capacity of puny humans and our petty squabbles didn’t change reality even a little bit either way.

Now the better exponents of some of the favoured tools are held up to be fine scientists but they are no such thing. Since in reality science is NATURAL PHILOSOPHY…. And maths and statistics are only tools of this discipline.

For instance, please show us the “evidence” for you apparently assuming that I am female.

Not that this should have any relevance to “discussions” here anyway…

TrueSkeptic?

Did you have that brain transplant?

NO I DIDN’T THINK SO.

Did you get have that SLUT-TUMOUR -REMOVAL?

I don’t suppose so..

Well…………

Did you find that elusive evidence that you could not come up with before?

No you didn’t even try.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Face it sister. I’ve got you pinned down head first. Your hair knotted in my hand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I’m not fussy when it comes to evidence.

Just start with SOME evidence and if you can get CONVERGENT evidence than I’ll be won over don’t doubt it.

There is no way of convincing someone like you of anything that conflicts with your predetermined and politically motivated beliefs, and your style here is hardly likely to convert any fence-sitters to your side.

You are a moron mate. You and plover ought to be horsewhipped until you come up with the evidence.

So lets have it and we can avoid the in-betweens.

You see you and plover are just laying on the mindless bluff. Else you would have made good on the evidence already.

One has to ask whether the purpose of this blog is to discredit climate denialists. You won’t find a worse collection of foul-mouthed deluded incompetents anywhere.

I salute all the rational people who try to educate the uneducable denizens here, but really, it is futile, isn’t it? Leave them to wallow in their own bog of Phantasy Physics and general ignorance.