Wikileaks Fallout: Fox News Comments are Nuts!

This is no big surprise - the commentators on Fox News are nuts - and nothing brings the nuts to the surface like a big news story pushing reality into their cosy neo-con world view as the fall out from the wikileaks story contines... Here's a tiny sample of the crazzzsy on offer there:

We are fighting a war here folks,s--t happens in war. If we have a group targeting our worst enemies,good for them,and i wish them much success. We already know Pakistan cannot be trusted,and that Iran assists our enemies,so what's new? Get out of the way Mr. President,and liberal anti-war activists,and let us win this war! Otherwise, Afghanistan will indeed be O'bama's Vietnam,and another of many blights on his legacy. Imagine being a worse President than Jimmy "pea-nuts" Carter.

Right - 'cos for the bulk of the war - from 2001 until 2009, the forces of the right were in control and they did sooo well winning the war. Not. Face it, the right had this war, ran it as it saw fit - and fucked it up royally. Next.

I say Obama himself is behind all this mess. Who else would have easy access to so many classified WAR documents? IMPEACH OBAMA, IMPEACH WIKILEAKS!

This has to be a joke. So Obama, who has taken over the war, leaks documents that embarras his running of the war and you want to impeach Wikileaks - a website? Woah. Logic died today.

There is no doubt in my mind that this leak and others is a deliberate attempt by left wing liberals worldwide to undermine us in the USA. We should be concentrating the Justice Department force on this, NOT the Arizona Laws. As long as this administration is run by left wing radicals you can forget having ANY secrets as there are traitors in our midst at ALL levels. It is time for the truth to be told that the USA has been infiltrated by communists for many years just waiting for the opportunity to destroy us. The fact that SERVING members of our military forces are part of this illegal exposure of what are effectively SECRETS should be a warning to all real Americans who do NOT want to be part of the New World Order as espoused by many of our politicians.

Ah, the New World Order - those sneaky people are behind everything! So the war that was started by the NWO is now being exposed by the NWO? Woah. Logic died today. Again.

12 Rules to Crazy Thinking

It's crazy day, and what better way to spend crazy day then with crazy as a companion. Today's slice of crazy comes from this comment. What is sooooo cool about it is that it shows a fool-proof way to ....

to inoculate our youth against the rising flood of propaganda manufactured by Big Government, Big Media and Big Academia working together against the best interests of the American people.

How cool is that. This is like the daddy of all bullshit-detectors...

Jay Richards’ “When-Not-To-Believe-The-Science-Of-Scientists” is the best rebuttal to the relentless drum beat of the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) zombies. ... Let's see, what might fit the logical absurdities ladled out in many of today’s AGW articles responding to ClimateGate revelations of scientific, political, media and academic misconduct and outright RICO ACT fraud? #10 looks pretty good to start with, but here, you choose the rest:

(1) When different claims get bundled together.
(2) When ad hominem attacks against dissenters predominate.
(3) When scientists are pressured to toe the party line.
(4) When publishing and peer review in the discipline is cliquish.
(5) When dissenting opinions are excluded from the relevant peer-reviewed literature not because of weak evidence or bad arguments but as part of a strategy to marginalize dissent.
(6) When the actual peer-reviewed literature is misrepresented.
(7) When consensus is declared hurriedly or before it even exists.
(8) When the subject matter seems, by its nature, to resist consensus.
(9) When “scientists say” or “science says” is a common locution.
(10) When it is being used to justify dramatic political or economic policies.
(11) When the “consensus” is maintained by an army of water-carrying journalists who defend it with uncritical and partisan zeal, and seem intent on helping certain scientists with their messaging rather than reporting on the field as objectively as possible.
(12) When we keep being told that there’s a scientific consensus.

OK, let's have some fun...

(1) When different claims get bundled together.

So bundling different things together makes them more likley not to be true. I don't see the logic in that at all. Lots of bits of science are inter-locking parts that mutually support one another, far from being a sign of weakness, it's a sign of strength because it shows the predictive power of the theory. So what is commonly called evolution is in fact a number of interlocking ideas bundled together; natural selection, Mendelian genetics to name but two parts.

(2) When ad hominem attacks against dissenters predominate.

You mean like you called proponent of AGW 'zombies'? Should that not be re-phrased as 'When ad hominem attacks against me and the people who agree with me predominate'? Still that is not a logical position but an opinion as to how debate should be conducted.

(3) When scientists are pressured to toe the party line.

So when the Bush administration pressured scientists to toe the party line that proved AGW? Again, not a position of logic or evidence, but politics - which is subjective.

All the rest of these 'logical absurdity detectors' are subjective; i.e. down to the interpretation of the person involved; there is no logical framework at all, no reliance on data - it is a set of political guidelines designed to reinforce selection bias. If that is the basis for your understanding of science, then you are royally fucked...

Stop Climate Change: Vote it Away!

Denialist commentators are great fun: they seemingly have a limitless supply of bonkers - however they have a very limited supply of logic (it ran out for them about 1995). So a recent article about the exoneration of Phil Jones from the CRU elicited the usual outputing of nuts. Here's one of my favourites:

VinceOZ : 02 Apr 2010 7:54:35pm

What a crock, its all a scam and we will vote about this and it will END.

Climate Change is a waste of good CO2.

Gazzoks! Why didn't I think of this? The science is pointing to huge problems with they way we live via CO2 emissions and so we solve the problem by voting it away. "All those in favour of repealing the laws of physics say Aye?" - Aye! - and it's done. While they are at it; can we repeal the laws of gravity because I've always wanted to be able to fly!

Here's another gem:

IanB : 03 Apr 2010 7:34:55am

Any investigation into climate science, global warming, climate-gate or climate change that does not include uncensored input from people like Ross McKitrick, Lord Christopher Monckton and Steve McIntyre is a farce.

Brilliant! The way to have an impartial investigation into climate science; give a platform to 3 non-climate scientists who are already opposed to the consensus on climate change (an economist, a mathematician and a clasics scholar). Amazing way to do science. What the commentator missed is that anyone could already submit uncensored input - and McIntyre did as did a number denialists.

And one more classic:

Chris Ryan : 03 Apr 2010 7:36:04pm

Gremlin, AGW is a myth concocted by those that want to make a killing swapping "carbon credits" on the exchanges. It does not exist.

"In the last 15 years, there has been no statistically significant global warming." So said Dr. Phil Jones of CRU and Climategate fame. Remember, this is the guy who feeds the data to the IPCC.

Remember too, the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University is funded by BP, various nuclear power companies, Greenpeace and the WWF. It is anything but an impartial, honest organization.

As might many denial claims of forums, the poster offers no evidence of the claims. However I did do a bit of research and the only references to it's funding I could find was that it was a government funded institution primarily funded by government sources. Even the denial camp's research seems to show this. No mention of BP, Greenpeace et al.

But hey, how needs evidence, when you have denial! Let's go with the fantasy that Greenpeace and the WWF, having run out of things to campaign against (the whales are all OK and the rainforest has been saved and no animals are endangered any more) decide to collude with the climate change scientists to create a global conspiracy - and yet no evidence of this comes in in their emails?

Yeah right. And the NWO proves the moon is made of green cheese.

Climate Denial: Failing Science 101 (Again)

The was one single peer-reviewed paper from Australia that went against the consensus on climate change. Now that one single one has been removed; so now there are zero. The story itself is interesting but one of the comments was quite fun - in an odd way. What the commenter is trying to do is justify where there are no peer reviews papers that support denialism...

There is NOT ONE SINGLE CENT of grant money to do any research into climate effects not being caused by humans at [the University of New South Wales] (or anywhere else for that matter!)...

I did laugh - and I'd recommend the commenter to look at the science for Non-scientists bit cos he is falling down at the first hurdle; if you are going to criticise something, at least understand what it is first. Science 101 is that you do research according to the principles of the scientific method then your conclusions are led by what you find. Then you share this with others who can then critique it (peer review). The commenter seems to be confusing science with opinion; it does not work that way. The reason why the science is all coming out supporting the consensus on global warming is because that is what all the evidence shows.

To do science to support one point of view is to ruin your experimental process before you've even begun. Big-ass doh! DOH!

Plus; how do you prove a negative? You can't - it's a logical fallacy. Helpfully, another commentator takes the idiot to task..

The money for research is granted equally for papers that would show the presence of AGW as for papers that do not support AGW. This is because the funding is for papers that look at evidence and use scientific methods to show support for or against hypotheses. The fact that the evidence shows that AGW is indeed occuring is the reason why there are no papers that demonstrate any great error in the AGW hypothesis.

Even more Crazy Comments

YouTube comments are notorious for being bonkers (and nasty).

So it is no surprise to find bonkers-to-the-max comments... Imagine if you believed what they commenters claim at face value - all from a video discussing global warming:

nalcon1: Al Gore is the same guy that said he invented the internet. This zero to do with science and everything to do with global control over private industry. China and Russia are sitting back waiting for this to become global law. Goodby free world, hello communism!

Right; so global warming is about Al Gore promoting communism and assisting China and Russia, who are looking to use new global laws to spread communism. Got it.

BruceLeeKickYoAss4: The CROOK HYPOCRITE nazi U.S is trying to SCAM the world's developing countries again. Half of these fascist SPOILED ameriKKKans are driving the trucks and SUV that suck gasoline like the hungry whores, while they bulsittt lecture the developing countries about polution. The nazi U.S's scam tricks in this climate talk are: 1) To SLOW developing countries(China...) from progressing and become stronger. 2) Sell its so called "green technology" to developing countries at INFLATED price.

What? So it's not China and Russia nor communism, but the opposite. It's about the US trying to keep third world countries like China and Russia down so the US can promote fascism? Got it.

Zile77: Global Warming is the biggest bunch of B.S. ever invented. It is a total hoax created to literally force people to cough up more money... for NOTHING! Ever hear the song, "money for nothing"? Al Gore and all the globalist nutjobs should go to Alaska to see if the icebergs are melting. THEY'RE NOT. Yes, some do for a few days in summer, but it's natural, not man made. The lies of the left are getting a lot of folks really pissed off now, so they'd better be careful. Oblama is just a con man liar.

What??? So now Al Gore is not working for China and Russia but is instead working for the Globalists. So now it's not the US vs China and Russia but all countries the US, Russia and China must be under threat from the Globalists?

Man, conspiracy theories are hard work.... it's almost as if crazy people are making things up...

Crazy is as Crazy Does: Denial Comments Go Nutz

Now I've started to look for bonkers denial comments; I can't seem to stop finding them. Check these gems from that bastion of science and logic, the Torygragh;

Remember Socialism (and any other Political ISM, for that matter) only works, as long as there’s other people’s money available to fund it.

Oh my oh my, how will they be able to pay the interest on their profligacy, after having maxxed out the Public Credit Card, now that their last great hope of Carbon Derivative theft, has blown up in their faces?

For some historical perspective, this is the same sort of insane stuff that brought down the Western Roman Empire, and, 1,000 years later, the Eastern Roman Empire, amongst others.

What. The. Fuck. Are. You. Going. On. About, Mate? I assume the guy is trying to be poetic, yet it comes across like a mad stream of conciousness rant-a-thon. have no idea what this guys point is....and that is only part of his post. How's this for a gem;

I am amazed at how afraid these AGW scammers are of the truth. In no other scientific debate has data been kept from the public except in wartime or cold war emergency.
Wiki is now trying to stop debate. This surely confirms the conspiracy that is beeing kept from the public.

IF WATERMELONS ARE NOT ON THE RUN, WHY HIDE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. GORDON BROWN THE CHAMPION OF AGW IS SO SCARED HE WILL NOT DEBATE IT, AL GORE IS AFRAID TO GO UP AGAINST LORD MONCKTON IN PUBLIC…REALLY ROBUST SCIENCE WELCOMES FALSIFICATION…THE AGW ALARMIST CABAL SHOW THEMSELVES AS ROGUES AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY.

Again, wtf? Watermellons? I have another question; WHY DO DENIALISTS USE SO MANY CAPITAL LETTERS IN POSTS? IT'S LIKE THEY ARE SHOUTING ALL THE TIME! Chillax, people, really. I did try reading though the whole thread, but it is mad as a box of frogs; every insane conspiracy theory seems to get an outing from the Bliderberg to the worldwide KleptoKratz(??) conspiracy:

IF these KleptoKratz get their way then;

The very Rich will get VERY much richer and be able to have WHATEVER they want. – Remember ALL that PsyOps TRILLIONS that is er… unaccountable year by year must be making some shit hot technology WE have no idea?

The Middle Classes will cease to exist. – The Rich HATE the middle classes, because they are a ‘threat’

The Rich LOVE the poor, partly because they STILL seem to show deference (See how people goo gooed over Prince Charles when he went to see the COCKERMOUTH! floods) and it’s a good example to keep the middle classes on their toes and keep doing those jobs!

EVERYONE will be skint.

That means then everyone who is left, after several years of a One Child Policy…. lets say 500 Million, will be there to do the bidding of the aforementioned KleptoKratz

MORE CAPITAL LETTERS - and, ah yes, the evil KleptoKratz - I am assuming they are a sub-group of the New World Order? Or another name for David Ike's Lizard Cabal? This stuff is nutty to the max! However what do you expect the the author of the article, the man who writes to his congregation on climate science, does not understand the science, also seems to post gibberish. James Delingpole posted on his thread:

@everyone I’ve just added an amusing link at the bottom of the piece.

Only to re-appear 5 minutes later to remark..

Actually no, I’ve taken that link down again. It was funny in parts but there was too much weird, freaky, porno stuff in it.

Nice.

Is There No End to the Stupid?

If we could turn stupidity into energy then we would solve all of the worlds energy problems. If we could turn stupidity into energy then denialism would be new Saudi Arabia. Why? Read the comments on any global warming thead and the gish-gallop of stupid and shit is staggering. Take this thread in the Guardian for example, reading though it there is sooooooooo much shit on offer...

MMGW activiists are demanding the destruction of our way of life, while we are handing over hundreds of billions of dollars in payments to third world dictators.

I assume MMGW is Man Made Global Warming? As for the rest of it - fuck me, what shit - but lets go with it, yes I demand the destruction of my way of life and I demand billions go to the Burmese junta this instant! Or else...

This one is great fun, it is a complex rehash of the 'humans are too puny to change the climate' argument but in a New Age styleee;

A dualist separation between Man and Nature implied by AGW opposes philosophies such as Advaita Vedanta. AGW is an offshoot of Individualism, which is in turn is rooted Judeochristianity and Aristotelian physics... In Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism, the problem with dualist thinking is that of identification which prevents a person from seeing reality; especially identification with a false Ego and notions that one can somehow "do" something. According to these philosophies, it is indeed impossible to "do" anything at all because one is a slave, not merely to one's own body, but to every passing event, every environmental stimulus, every cognitive impression, every mood, every whim.... AGW is merely a particularly absurd form of individualism which presupposes that Man as a species can "do" something about immeasurably greater global forces.

And ten people recommended it!! Jesus wept into his Marmite. There is loads of this 'show me the evidence type stuff:

Some sort of proof - please, anything! - that man made CO2 drives temperatures. (So far - there's not one paper, any where. Not one.)

This is like the moment Dawkins is telling the crazy-woman from 'Concerned Women of America' that the evidence for evolution is in the museum down the road, but noooo that's not good enough for her. She repeats show me the evidence and when it is shown, refuses to look.

There is tonnes of evidence. To answer that particular point: CO2 drives global temperatures and human CO2 is the main issue.