laserguy

Harry Plotter and the Warming Wormhole.

No Ossie,never heard the name before. I did think (and still do) that the premise of the article was funny. Spare me the details of L LR,it's clear that I've gone,unwittingly,somewhere I shouldn't,and I offer you,Dev,and anyone else who may have been caused offence my full apology.

Yes,the tide is most assuredly turning http://www.larouchepac.com/node/12520

By Jingo you're right! I sometimes fantasise about chucking it 'all' (all what?) in and living a simple existance in the middle of nowhere and living off the fat of the land (or summat like that!). I guess many of us do from time to time. If I was confident that I had the nous and ability to survive I'd probably take the leap (and if I did,I'd pray very hard for global warming to come on in leaps and bounds)! As a confirmed denier I'm fed up of (but have grown accustomed to) warmists assuming that I'm a rampant consumer who has money aplenty and I'm unwilling to sacrifice stuff. That's almost as far from reality as you can get. How many of you warmers have a car that's less than twelve years old? How many foreign holidays do you take every year (if it's just the one,it's one more than I can afford to)? How many of you refuse to buy anything that you could make yourself,and take the hard way to get it? I could go on,but I've been down this road before on here so won't repeat myself. The point is,I suppose,to highlight the hypocritical,holier-than-thou attide of those who go along with the sham and somehow think that I,as a denier,am responsible for their imagined global warming apocalypse to come. Nah,I just 'deny' it because it's wrong,nothing more sinister than that. Ever noticed how it's only the developed countries who claim to be concerned about AGW,y'know,those who are involved in/are dependant on the trading of fossil fuels and largely live the phoney existance described by OGTB? Get a clue,everyone... And to keep this on-topic,as far as the warmest year in blah blah whatever years,it's beyond me how anyone can take official proclamations like this seriously (and even if true it means nothing in the scheme of things and is certainly not brought about by even the most wasteful,consumerist elements of society,however much I dislike them)) after recent revelations of cover-ups,fudged data etc etc. You're better off just looking out the window and taking note of weather events around the world which can be truly verified. Right,I'm off to knock-up a quick wicker hammock!

Many a true word spoken in jest?!

Gaaah... of course it is! Why didn't I think of that ? Had me going for a minute,thinking they were off to change a planet's atmospheric processes by sharing around those ol' CO2 emissions! I feel such a fool !

What sort of 'job' is that supposed to be ?? If he attends which one of the two Jags will he use to get to his climate-friendly jet to whisk him off to yet another knees-up in the ludicrous aim of saving the world from people like him? And folk wonder why I'm cynical while I'm walking to work at 4.30am in lashing rain,wondering how to pay the fuel bill and get the car (which my missus needs to get her sick dad to one of his frequent hospital visits that day) through it's looming MOT. These people make me thouroughly sick. Tackle climate change? No,I refuse to go off on one....

I know you've got a low opinion of us Pete,but c'mon there's no need for that !

Really? I'm surprised at that. Mind you,haven't seen the news on teevee for ages. I just have a daily scan of teletext on both channels - seen no mention at all on those since it broke. Don't read newspapers,except for the Sun which was loitering in the dentist's waiting room this morning. Incredibly(!) there was no mention in that either. Page 3 was alright tho' .

Ossie,your prodigious talents as a wordsmith are well-noted,certainly by myself,and I freely admit to being a little envious at your seemingly effortless flow. I guess the reason many of us (though I note you generally single out the sceptics/deniers) link to commentary by others who have achieved the position they are in,is because most of us lack the word-skills they have,though they encapsulate neatly what we could never articulate. I see nothing wrong with it,it is afterall no more than introducing others to articles/commentaries and opinion that may otherwise have gone overlooked. Perhaps you are concerned that readers might be 'turned'? I don't object to how much pro-AGW stuff is linked to - it's up to me what I make of it. I appreciate those who wish to study purely the science aspect,but it can't be escaped that AGW/politics are so closely entwined as to be inseparable wrt 'what has to be done'. Hence,all the political content.

The bulk of Joe Public won't even be aware of them. So far,it's hardly been broadcast from the rooftops unlike anything 'pro' AGW. Now why would that be,I don't wonder?

Will it help me back more winners on the nags,VP ? Isn't Yellowstone supposed to pop its cork once every 600,000 years or so,and it's about due right now? If it went off three times in quick succession that means we'd be alright for 1.8 million years. Relax folks,global warming might have caught up with us by then.

You've all seen those dentists on teevee ads,getting paid a fortune to sell a product which promises to reduce cavities,plaque,etc? Where would those dentists be if we all brushed and flossed three times a day and avoided sugary snacks an' stuff?

You might find this commentary interesting,particularly the second last paragraph.... or not! (Dev won't like it one bit - hey-ho). http://factsnotfanta...print-scam.html

Having been familiar with your view for a long time Pete,I know that comment is genuine. However..... this is the start of the phase where the penny drops for many 'AGW types'. Get ready for lots and lots of comments (not just on here!!) along the lines of "well y'know I never really believed in all that stuff",accompanied by a weak chuckle. 'AGW' is all over,bar the shouting. Failure of it's demise very soon should be all the proof one ever needs of the reason for it's continued existance. Meanwhile,the storm continues to brew. Great,the longer it takes for it to break,the more spectacular it will be. CO2 is a GHG alright,but there ain't enough of it. A speck of sand in the corner of my kid's school playing field does not make a beach! Sorry - I've only just got up.

Hacked? Leaked? I don't know,but they've been rumbled for sure. The recriminations are going to be marvellous. Where's me popcorn?

These latest shenanigans are only adding to the already highly amusing global warming/climate change/CO2 debacle. Can't really say much more until things become a lot clearer. I'm off to neck some beer . I suggest y'all do the same!

I think it was Dev ! Sorry Jethro (and Dev!),just trying to cool things (pun unintentional) a little! I'll start the car....

No it most certainly wouldn't. Haven't I made that perfectly clear? Such a scenario would have to run it's course,as will the current one. But the circumstances by which it has come to the fore cannot be condoned. Are we going to try squeezing toothpaste back into the tube,next? My "put it to rest" comment referred to the fact that the deed had been done and there's no going back on that,not a comment on AGW science,in case there's any confusion.

I think agreement on that is unanimous on here,wherever one 'stands' on AGW. Can we put it to rest now,please? The deed has been done so no going back,just see where things go from here on in.

Um,I don't PP! Just that the AGW sham is closest to my heart for reasons I'm frankly not sure of,and therefore the most vocal about. Given that you see almost the entire world as one big conspiracy,I'm amazed that you haven't seen through the most obvious one. Anyway,I bet they didn't see this one coming down their mythical 'pipeline' .

I'll second that. The hackers are akin to the nutjobs who protest atop power stations. A pity it's come to this. 'Ways and Means...' I've just got home from work,looks like I've a bit of catching up to do. Noticed that there's well over a 1,000 comments on WUWT - wow!

Oh no,not again! Pete,I do think it's a bit rich,associating 'data manipulation' exclusively with sceptics! And I'd like to clarify that I'm not aware of any sceptic anywhere (including me,who is probably the most hard-line on here!) who does not accept that CO2 is a GHG. But when we're talking the minutest anthro percentage of an already minute total percentage,amongst an unidentifiable number of factors affecting global temp,it simply does not come into the game. Anyway,off to work now,be interesting to see how this develops,or not.

Me neither.

I can't recall WUWT getting so many comments in so short a time. I've tried going to ClimateAudit,but gave up after five minutes - must be frantic over there.