Thought For The Day … Wouldn’t It Be Nice If The Self Appointed Guardians Of Truth Knew WTF They Were Talking About? There Are Two Types Of Climate Nutters

And, this is why I don’t spend much time with running down details of each and every paper which comes down the pike. It’s distracting from the greater point and most often requires accepting information which has never shown to be true.  Sure, understanding the concepts are great help in rebutting some things, but often people get mired in details which have no relevance, or the relevance isn’t applied, to the greater discussion. 

Don’t get me wrong, some of the great work skeptics have done was, indeed, to chase down the details of various supposed works of science, such as McIntyre’s relentless pursuit of truth regarding Mann’s idiocy and deception.  But, once these things are clearly established, there’s no longer any reason to chase after such things.  Worse, it lends the alarmist sophists a degree of credibility which has never been earned. 

So, the guy who helped come up with this absurdity …..


Is accusing a fellow blogger of spreading FUD.  No, really!!! 

For those not familiar, this is the BEST data series, which a fellow named Steve Mosher helped create.  They pretend to have some insight as to what the temperatures around the globe were back in the 1750s.  As memory serves, they had a grand total of about 12 thermometers, all in either Europe and in present day US.  Apparently, they felt justified in doing so, because they included what they thought was the margin of error, or uncertainty.  Is there any better way to spread uncertainty than to proclaim insight to something, but, excuse yourself by saying ‘but, we’re not really sure’, and then leaving it at that?  That is the epitome of spreading uncertainty and doubt.  And, then, regarding “fear” ……..  As most readers know, I’m very familiar with Steve Goddard’s writings.  It can be characterized in many ways, but, regarding the climate?  Fear is certainly not what he’s spreading.  He’s showing and telling people that there isn’t anything to fear from our climate.  And, I wholeheartedly agree with him.  

Goddard’s style may be abrasive to some, but, most often, Steve brings a clarity to his writings which expresses very little uncertainty. 

During the course of the skeptical movement, many skeptics tried to chase down the very fine points and claims of the nutters.  And, I’m glad they did.  The world owes a debt to the people like Steve McIntyre.  But, today, there is very little utility in doing so.  Don’t get me wrong, the critiques are legitimate, but, what comes of it?  For instance, McIntyre is running down the details of Rosenthal et al 2013, mostly because of was stated in support of the lunatics, even after contradicting the lunatics. 

In a reconstruction of Pacific Ocean temperatures in the last 10,000 years, researchers have found that its middle depths have warmed 15 times faster in the last 60 years than they did during apparent natural warming cycles in the previous 10,000.

When i read garbage like this, I stop and consider all of the things necessary to make such a statement.  Consider this from Mac’s blog ….

It reported on interesting Mg-Ca ocean cores in the western Pacific from the foraminfera H. Balthica, which is believed to be a proxy for “intermediate water temperatures”.

Now, let’s think about this.  Magnesium and Calcium… well first, we have to establish that these are, indeed, good proxies for our past temps.  Now, consider for a moment Mann’s trick.  Remember that?  And, why?  Certain sophists and imbeciles thought, and some still do, that tree rings were a good proxy for our temperatures.  But, as noted by Mann and others, the tree rings of the more recent times behaved differently than in the past.  (or so we’re told).  So how did they determine how a tree ring was suppose to react to temperatures?  Supposedly, they found some places with a temp record nearby and calibrated the historical temps to what the tree rings of the distant past were telling us.  ……… Now, this already brings us to some great uncertainty.  Proximity to the tree rings can make a huge difference.  As does the surroundings of the thermometer.  The fact is, even that step invalidates any certainty one may have over the tree rings.  Is everyone with me so far?

Now consider the ocean cores.  …………  uhmm, derp!!!! 

We don’t have any past thermometers to compare the cores with.  None, zero, nade.  Proximity and environment doesn’t matter, because there are no thermometers to compare with!  So, that leaves us only with recent data to compare the cores with.  Now, anyone with even cursory experience reading about ocean cores already know and understand that you can’t use recent years because of how time alters such records. 


Researchers reconstructed 10,000 years of temperature change in the Pacific Ocean’s middle depths by analyzing the fossil shells of the one-celled organism, Hyalinea balthica. (

You see, using these types of things requires, and I’ll say it again, requires that the organisms’ shell would react with Mg and Calcium in the exact same way it is doing today.  We all know this is highly unlikely because of environmental changes. 

Did Rosenthal fudge and cheat a bit on their statistical analysis?  Did they alter data in their SI without telling anyone?  Probably, and yes.  Does it matter?  No, this is akin to arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. 

What does this have to do with Mosher and Goddard?  Mosh pays attention to only some of the things necessary in climate concerns, but, ignores the most obvious and fundamental things.  For this, he construes that others who have a better grasp on the issues are somehow less honest, less diligent, and less knowledgeable than he and his chosen few are.

Here’s the brass tacks.  Climate skepticism has progressed from showing how wrong the lunatics are on the finer technical details of their idiocy.  Consider all of the fallacies we’ve, as the larger group of skeptics, have uncovered.  Well, why?  Why is it that paper after paper contains these sort of errors and questionable practices?  BECAUSE THEY’VE GOTTEN THE FUNDAMENTALS ENTIRELY WRONG!!!!!

When you dedicate a lot of hard and good work to running down and arguing such things, you’re simply playing into the nutters’ hands.  It’s a method of distraction.  Mosh is either too stupid to understand this, or too dishonest to acknowledge it. 

The questions before us isn’t whether or not Rosenthal or Mann or Hansen fudge the numbers.  They most certainly do.  But, the question, which is answered daily, is this imaginary climate change adversely effecting humanity?  Will it?

On studies like above, don’t waste your time running down all of the details, ask them to show you their proof of concept.  Are those little critters’ shells a good proxy for past temp reconstructions?  Of course no one can possibly know that.  Laugh at them and their sophist stupidity and move on to their next bit of sophistry which is spewed daily.  Show where they lie, sure, but, they’ve many more obvious and egregious lies to demonstrate on a daily basis.  Want to expose the lunatics for what they are?  Show them the snow data.  Show them the global ice data, show them the wild fire and hurricane data.  Show them the tidal gauges.  But, most of all, show the absurdity of their lunacy …… which is what Goddard does on a daily basis.  Mosh?  He comes up with something pertinent about every 6 months.  I’d take one Goddard to 100 Moshes any day of the week.  

Mosh is just unhappy because he’s too stupid to understand this.  He’s the same guy who helped put a graph up about our temperatures in the 1750s, knowing full well there was no validity in such an assertion.  And, he thinks Goddard gives skeptics a bad name?  Look at Mosh’s idiocy!!! 

This entry was posted in Climate. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Thought For The Day … Wouldn’t It Be Nice If The Self Appointed Guardians Of Truth Knew WTF They Were Talking About? There Are Two Types Of Climate Nutters

  1. philjourdan says:

    Mosh is one of the rational warmists. But he has a history with Goddard. Indeed, one of the first posts I read over at Anthonys had a debate between the 2. Shortly after that, Steve started his own blog.

    • suyts says:

      Yeh, I had been reading WUWT for a couple of years before that. I remember it well and was another unnecessary attack by Mosh.

      • cdquarles says:

        To me, some of the larger issues are related to conflation of issues and confounding of variables. Take carbon dioxide as an example. It is IR active. Still to extrapolate the behavior of carbon dioxide in a bottle in a lab to the very real and dynamic atmosphere is to, in the words of the best chemistry professor I’ve studied under, “to make vast conclusions from half-vast data”. We need better data.

        To start with, we should be sounding our atmosphere for all of the constituents we can measure, in as close to real time and at the highest resolution we can. Satellites help, but without a proper frame of reference, they complicate things via conflation of issues and confounding of variables. That we still do not sound for things like carbon dioxide is very telling to me.

      • suyts says:

        I agree, there are tells all over the spectrum of climate change, as I just got done writing about re snow cover. We can, we just don’t, even though it would give us a clearer picture of what’s happening. Instead, we’ll send people out on drunken pleasure cruises to the antarctic.

  2. DirkH says:

    I don’t have the faintest clue what drives Mosher to do what he does.

  3. Latitude says:

    I can help with the Hyalinea….. 🙂
    Hyalinea are non-photo and get their Ca and Mg through diet.
    All they have shown is that the oceans used to be more rich…plankton…
    Which is something we already knew.

    Mosh is a Nick….you have to want to believe

    • suyts says:

      Lat, I’m really glad you commented with that. I wanted to, but, wasn’t absolutely sure of my marine biology.

      • cdquarles says:

        First rule of biology. Biological organisms have stereotyped responses to stress. This results in the inverted quadratic growth curve. Growth and survival will be functions of the most limited nutrient. The most limited nutrient will almost never be the same one over the life of a single specimen, let alone populations over time. Biological time series will likely, if not always, have built in survivor biases. Do our paleo people ever consider or address this? (JIm Bouldin, to my knowledge, is the only one to confess the necessity)

  4. Latitude says:

    BTW…this is an excellent post! 😀

  5. suyts says:

    I probably should have shown where all this came from if people aren’t already familiar …..

  6. Me says:

    Mosh, is a #1 Assclown, It didn’t take me long reading some of his stuff at WUWT to understand that. He is like one of those door to door salesmen, constantly keeping his foot in the door so it don’t get slamed shut……

  7. Poptech says:

    Mosher is very simple to understand, as we have only one other person with his mentality in the broader skeptic community and that is Brandon Shollenberger. Brandon is known for giving Lucia Lundgren (The Blackboard) all sorts of hysterical and ridiculous IT security “advice”. Her security ramblings and “policies” have become so insane (IP Banning random innocent people) I stopped even passively checking her site. Both Brandon and Mosher believe themselves to be your intellectual and moral superiors. Only they can objectively give a non-biased opinion among all the skeptics and no matter how absurd a conclusion they come up with it is unquestionably right. Mosher being much older than Brandon suffers much more from this superiority complex and pseudo-philosophical righteousness. Delingpole mistakenly elevated Mosher to undeserved recognition during Climategate by comparing him to Watergate’s Woodward and Bernstein. Something Mosher actually believes himself to be.

    Mosher’s sole claim to fame is calling out Gleick with his fake Heartland memo. I am also fairly certain he had something to do with the fake “Richard Muller is a recovering skeptic” meme that got pushed in the NYT and took me days to deal with (it is fairly neutered now).

  8. slimething says:

    I asked Mosher too many times to count to explain the upside down greenhouse effect hypothesis which is apparently the new and improved AGW science, that being the surface is warming faster than the troposphere, exactly opposite what we were told 25 years ago. And since this is all about simple high school physics, where is the missing hot spot? Or maybe now it doesn’t really matter. Yes, all that matters is for people to believe the phony surface temperature records that have been so manipulated they are unrecognizable from the raw data.

    Who else remembers in the 80’s when we were told the “greenhouse effect”, was going to go out of control by the year 2000? Who else besides me believed this garbage? I bought it because there was no internet and no alternative sources outside the Big 3 news talking heads that only brought in the scaremonger “scientists” to sound the alarm.

    • Me says:

      Makes ya wonder why they want to control the internet too now, doesn’t it? Naa, it doesn’t make you wonder, you know why!

      • Send Al to the Pole says:

        Which reveals this (and many other) effort(s) were never about the issue presented. This is why I advocate (much as James does in this post) that we push aside the climate con, and attack the real issue with blunt dialog. We waste our time debating with the Klimate faithful. Time to peel back the curtain and see the monster running this scam.

        I use ridicule and derision to attack the Priests of warming. They have tried to shut down my email several times. I’m surprised there aren’t men in black at your door, James.

      • suyts says:

        LOL, it’s not that they haven’t done some mean and strange things in the past. Once, late at night, I was looking at my views, seeing the progress of the blog, and I watched every one of my posts get “viewed”, just once, in a matter of about an hour. They do that from time to time, but, I haven’t noticed it lately. But, then, I’m not watching like I used to, either.

        • DirkH says:

          That can also be someone using a wget script or a tool like teleport to make a safety backup of a blog. Or it can be a trawler from the wayback machine. Legit uses.

        • Latitude says:

          Once, late at night… was David Appell

        • suyts says:

          Could be. I’ve had to increase my password security a couple of times for both this blog and my email. Appell’s not smart enough to do some of the things which were done.

    • Jim Masterson says:

      I made a simple model based on Kiehl and Trenberth 1997 (their updated paper doesn’t change the basic model design), and that model requires that the atmospheric temperature rise faster than the surface if the surface temperature rise is due to the GHG effect. When I point out this fact, most just ignore me. I see you are aware of this problem too.


  9. DirkH says:

    The destructor comes in many forms. Global Warming will lead to manifestation of gargantuan corndog attacking the US, at least that’s how an Accuweather projection looks like.

  10. Poptech says:

    OT, suyts random question, what country are you from?

  11. Poptech says:

    Further verification of Lucia’s random IP banning of innocent users,

    “Bob says: March 10, 2014 at 1:18 pm
    I have seen times when Lucia will adjust her filters, and accidentally block some of her readers. This time she has blocked me.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s