Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A classic example of a warmist jackass deception
#1
I get really peeved when someone tries hard to distort an obviously 100% correct claim made as shown at Steve Goddard's Real Science blog where he brings up a clear and convincing rebuttal to a Newspaper claim of rising sea levels.

Steve Goddard's post is HERE but the limited blog comment format compels me to write my lengthy reply here to a misnamed Actual Skeptic who tried hard to contradict a correctly and honestly produced chart made by Steve who also posted the link to the data.

Actual Skeptic writes like the dishonest jackass he is with these stupid words in his reply to my COMMENT:

Actual Skeptic says:

Quote:I will use small words for you.
I used the data, not the chart. What am I lying about? I’ve given you the link to the data, the spreadsheet I created, the method I used to create the spreadsheet. Since the answer doesn’t match your preconceptions and is in opposition to the assertion in this blog, then you attack the messenger. Stop being intellectually lazy and try it yourself.

What you reveal here is evidence that you are another pompous dishonest lying warmist scumbag to pollute the blog with and here is why I say this:

First Steve plainly states in his blog post:

Quote:There has been no sea level rise in California for decades.

And since his chart runs from early 1980 to about 2012 that means FOUR decades therefore there is nothing deceptive or dishonest in what Steve stated:

[Image: screenhunter_793-apr-30-07-47.jpg?w=640]

Meanwhile you reveal your warmist dishonesty and lies by making a claim that Steve made that chart in error:

Actual Skeptic says:

Quote:I’d like to thank you for posting a link to your data source. I’m curious why all of the “skeptics” that commented above were not skeptical enough to spend 10 minutes loading the data into a spreadsheet to create their own chart and trend line. The thing I can’t figure out is why, on my chart, the data points look similar but the trend line goes up. On yours it is level. You either have an application error, user error, you played with the data, or you just drew in a level trend line.

It’s all well and good to claim that you are free thinkers and everyone else is gullible, but if you don’t follow through on your free thinking, then you are no better than the sheep you look down on.

bolding mine

What a pompous jackass since as he after being asked by ME later in the thread for the evidence:

Quote:You have to POST the evidence to support your claim that Steve is in error.

Since you claim you have done all the work to find this claimed error it should not be hard to post it here.

So far all you have done is use words and NOT evidence thus you are not believed.

So what we have is this so called Actual Skeptic making claims that Steve is in error and not posting evidence of it then was asked for the evidence and does post it with a clean link to HIS OWN CHART (link) he generated using the same database (link) that Steve used and boy his attempt to make Steve look bad and in error backfired spectacularly because his own chart reveals what a scumbag he is since he used a very different starting point and yet publically state in public that Steve was in error when he never was at all.

Actual Skeptic started from 1973 while Steve started from 1980 and yes both charts are correct but Steve was talking about a few decades and NOT from 1973 and clearly showing he started from 1980 with the chart he posted.Steve was always telling the truth and made the chart correctly too.

Here is why Steve is correct and Actual Skeptic is not:

From the Actual Skeptics OWN CHART shows that Steve's chart was correctly generated and that what he says is true that the trend from 1980 is FLAT.

The numbers are right there is the liars own chart he made that shows in early 1980 the level was 7076 Milli meters and was 6994 Milli meters in late 2011 obviously no increase in past 31 years.

He was told by Steve these words early on:

Quote:You are an idiot and a liar. The data is straight off the PSMSL web page, unaltered.

But the idiot that he is answers:

Quote:I’ll assume user error then. I’m neither an idiot nor a liar, as a simple checking of your work will show. Your trend line is wrong.

But he IS an idiot and liar since Steve answers correctly:

Quote:You are a complete idiot. There has been no rise in sea level at Monterey for over 30 years, just as the graph shows.

My claim was “There has been no sea level rise in California for decades.” That is accurate and you are a liar trying to infer otherwise.

The Troll replies again and again with idiocy and lies as the warmist troll he is since the warmist/alarmist aim is to sow misdirection and confusion using lies and bullshit.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#2
Sunsettommy
I swear. A friend of mine did some research and wrote an article on how global warming alarm is meant to scare people and not protect them.
He submitted it to a blog Dialogues on global Warming (Pro global Warming) and was severely falsified.
Reply
#3
(10-14-2016, 03:00 AM)EricRomm Wrote: Sunsettommy
I swear. A friend of mine did some research and wrote an article on how global warming alarm is meant to scare people and not protect them.
He submitted it to a blog Dialogues on global Warming (Pro global Warming) and was severely falsified.

The point I was making here was that the misnamed Actual Skeptic, was being overtly dishonest, in his replies to Tony's sea level claim. He used a different STARTING point to try misleading people against Tony's sea level chart.Tony was never wrong as the data was honestly used to make his chart.

Global warming alarmism, is a profound example of how rotten people are out there,taking advantage of their ignorance of the true state of the climate,to promote a socialist solution to a non problem.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Warmist stupidity and Ignorance Sunsettommy 0 546 12-14-2016, 12:05 PM
Last Post: Sunsettommy



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)