RE: [energyresources] NASA data set out of line
- See comments about, BY, and arguing with "Steve Goddard" at posts 326, 351, and 391, 432, 434, 451, 457, 466-467, 481, 489, etc, in response to the main piece at:
Before anybody jumps in with too much complaint about "Steve Goddard" being incognito, please remember that the same prevailed for a long time with Professor Goose, Gail the Actuary, Heading Out, et al, on The Oil Drum. Even now, I only have some of those people sorted out.
At least there is argumentative dialogue at the above hyperlink, although much of it not dealing with temperature measurement comparisons. Plus it's subsequent to Goddard's June 2008 piece on The Register which Francisco cites below.
Unless I come up with any other pieces from Science or wherever, I probably need to bow out of global warming issues here for the time being. It is not one of my (few in number) expertises.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Francisco González
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: [energyresources] NASA data set out of line
The article by Steve Goddard gives plenty of facts, references, charts and maps generated by McIntyre. That YOU cannot handle them, or prefer not to, is confirmed by your idiotic cheering of the notion to make The Register a banned source of information. Simply because it is information you don't like. If you could say something about it, I imagine you would. Since you can't, you prefer to rant about the twitness of upperclassiness and similar irrelevant stuff.
Here it is. Handle it. Or stop driveling.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> You are quite right, Joe, he does see himself as way above the rest ofhis
> us....Pope Frankie the Good, maybe. But with his convoluted "logic"
> holiness would not stop at climate scientists, surely he wouldNo.
> excommunicate anybody who disagreed with him.
> Do you think all his "edicts" to the list are his form of the Spanish
> (Non nobis solum, sed toti mundo nati)
> 53.22N 2.07W
He believes his 'epistles' to be both informative and interesting
even though they are mainly copied whole from sacrastic denier-blogs,
so a human touch is totally missing. Unfortunately his personal
comments are confined to ridiculing people who bother to read his posts
as 'drooling idiots'.
Here is some constructive criticism for the improvement of our would-be
In church and on the public green, Medieval audiences were
unconstrained and could be rude and discourteous to the preacher. It
was not uncommon for the people in attendance to move freely about and
socialize with one another, address the friar, or walk out on the friar
in the middle of his sermon. Thus, to keep the attention of the people,
the popular sermon needed to be short, said in the vernacular, and
include an element of which the people could relate or find of
interest. The friar might tell an antidote, use folklore or verse
sermon. To help make a point, it was not uncommon for the friar to
embellish concerns of good and evil. The friar would use the occasional
large word or a word from a foreign language to impress the lewd
audience. The result was a vibrant, creative and well-received sermon.
And like Monckton, he could dazzle us with an occasional interjection
of Latin--mirabile dictu!