Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

An example of the 97% lie

A quote from Dr Idso answering a question about his paper

So Astro, you are saying the scientists own words on his own paper being misrepresented are #denial ? You would be cause that 97% agree was the cornerstone of your defence of your belief that the IPCC are not a #fraud

This was obviously a question, not an implicit claim that it does, yet it is classed as part of the 97% that agree. One of MANY examples
Cook is one of the teachers at this IPCC paid for MOOC to arm MMCC warriors with lies.

 

Another example of the 97% lie, this 97% is on the home page of that IPCC MMCC warrior training site.

Dr. Scafetta, your paper 'Phenomenological solar contribution to the 1900–2000 global surface warming' is categorized by Cook et al. (2013) as; "Explicitly endorses and quantifies AGW as 50+%"
From Scafetta himself I broke it down so the forum doesn't hide most of it till you click it.

"engaging into a metamorphosis to save" is also true for turning "global warming" into "man made climate change" because the warming stopped in 1998.

I am amazed at how many believers still don;t believe that warming stopped in 98.

 

I can post more gross misreprentation of scientists papers in the 97% lie. That lie is the cornerstone of the MMCC believers defence and it's a complete lie.

Are the sceintists themselves in #denial?

But Astro, it seems even the scientists themselves saying their work has been taken and twisted is not enough evidence for you to dismiss that 97% agree kack.

 

Another.. by Cook the dude from Skeptical science, an IPCC funded web project and MMCC warrior teacher..
Dr. Shaviv, your paper 'On climate response to changes in the cosmic ray flux and radiative budget' is categorized by Cook et al. (2013) as; "Explicitly endorses but does not quantify or minimise"
From Shaviv himself

This ^^^, one of my many arguments for faulty IPCC modelling yet this is the frist time I read about his work

^^proof that the miscategorisation of his paper was intentional

We also have Shaviv personally busting one of your main defences Astro, consensus
#science not #denial

 

Dr. Tol found 7 papers falsely classified and 112 omitted,

...from 112 omitted papers, one strongly endorses AGW and 111 are neutral"
On Twitter Dr. Tol had a heated exchange with one of the "Skeptical Science" authors of Cook et al. (2013) - Dana Nuccitelli,
Tol: "@dana1981 I think your data are a load of crap. Why is that a lie? I really think so."

Tol: "@dana1981 I think your sampling strategy is a load of nonsense. How is that a misrepresentation? Did I falsely describe your sample?"

 

Dr. Morner, your paper 'Estimating future sea level changes from past records' is categorized by Cook et al. (2013) as having; "No Position on AGW".

Here we have a paper that is strongly dissenting and is still added to the 97% agree or neutral pile when it strongly disagrees.
I referred to the sea levels previously, yesterday actually, showing the IPCC to be full of ****, here we have a scientist backing up that with his paper and totally excluding dissenting papers without adding them to the don't agree pile.

Scientists were not asked if they agree, papes were read by IPCC folks and thrown into the pile of Agreeming with MMCC alarmist views without even asking the scientist that wrote the paper.

So the "97% of scientists agree" means nothing because none of them were even asked.
It's propaganda

The list goes on and on. But do I need to post more to show what the IPCC are.

The guys who did most of that 97% lie work are now running that course I posted about, hmmm?

#fraud
#epicfraud

 

So Astro, consider your main defence as absolutely annihilated mate, eaten and shat out. Enjoy the bitternes that is sure to follow lad So bang on about me and #conspiracy all you like, I'll take it as a compliment
#thisisnotagame
#putthisintothesisufolder

 

Very nice #meltdown Sisu but I don't think I've ever used the 97% or whatever argument, and I have no position to defend or "believe in"

You are the one who believes in something, that there is a specific #conspiracy

As a result you trawl the internet looking for confirmation bias and gladly lumping bad science and bad arguments in with any good ones you might have

Yesterday, I asked you did you read that Nature paper. Well, did you? Or did you just get its name from an anti-cimate change article published in a magazine (probably with an advert at the end to buy a book explaining how it's all a #fraud)

 

That's all you got!!


Completely mullered and you drag out that drivel, have totally lost repsect for your skills

now I just pity you, like I pity old people who've lost their memory and can't understand why they are standing in the middle of the highstreet in their PJs

****ING OWNED

You fight like the French


#astrohasbeenrelegated
#putthisinyourSisufolder

 

Nope, like a spammer you go for quantity over quality and hope that something sticks. I didn't even read all your #meltdown let alone be inclined to respond.

When you see a mental person on the street screaming about God you don't engage, you just cross the road and get on with your day

I know from the whole Robitaille discussion you don't think for yourself (or have the education to understand the issues at hand) and just copy and paste propaganda word for word from apologist websites (or youtube videos)

 

You talk but all I read is you trying to cover for you fail by not addressing even one point I made

#fail
#AstroFail
#failoftheday
#maybefailoftheyear
#iknowthisgetstoyou
#putthisinyourSisufoldertoo
#spineless

 

nothing gets to me on not606

#untouchable

 

Now you are playing last post wins
#anothersignofFail

What are you laughing at Astro? #yourfailure

please log in to view this image

Scientists say their own papers are misrepresented.
Astro claims there is a #conspiracy.
#irony
#ohtheIrony

 

For you @astroturfnaut
This course is for people who need to be given their opinions to be able to deal with people who can form their own opinions #signup
https://www.edx.org/course/making-sense-climate-science-denial-uqx-denial101x

#opinions4u

Wonder if Astro is off looking furiously for ammo

 

Oh oh you will have to watch out now, it was after I pointed out to him that he isn't a free thinker that he had his last meltdown ( lose track to be fair). Remember he does think for himself its just that sometimes we are unable to see what he is thinking because we are all zombie creatures controlled by the media etc I see he's already gone for the 'owned' claim with you so who knows what he will claim next.

 

Am so tempted to take you off ignore given it's this thread and the lack of an argument from yer man but I am just so much more pleasant on here when I cant read your posts.

#shame

Unless its actually not a reply to me at all, if so then disregard this post.
#mybad

 

If you put me on ignore then do I get a message saying that you are following me, because that's what happened recently? Confused.

Saying you have me on ignore is just too easy a dodge when I you to back a point up?

 

Given another reply update I assume you were actually posting to me, you could actually be any one of three people. but I totally assume it's Tobes?

Wasting your time mate.

 

Watcing Kinsgman and the amount of global warming propaganda in it is hilarious.
Yet another way to spend their 27 billion in funding.
Is nothing sacred IPCC you ****s, ruining my movies with your #fraud

 

FFS just enjoy the action, adventure and comedy