Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » AGW and climate change » Cool cartoon about a flustered Warminista

Cool cartoon about a flustered Warminista

Photobucket

This is just a beautiful cartoon, that really puts into perspective the false claims about any money that is paid to sceptics…
Now where is JM when  I need to have a very good laugh at Warminista conspiracy theorists… Especially when they resort to flat out lies to prosecute their argument.

That’s right he has wimped out forever…
Cheers Comrades

Oh yeah and a big Hat tip to Jo Nova

Advertisements

53 Comments

  1. GD says:

    It was drawn by John Spooner at the leftist Age. I wonder if he’ll still have a job tomorrow. 🙂

  2. Iain Hall says:

    That is something to ponder GD

  3. busby777 says:

    heh

  4. busby777 says:

    shared — great one

  5. PKD says:

    Ahhh Iain, whats the matter, your disingenuous and frankly dishonest one-eyed take on climate science has finally given JM cause to do what I told him to do ages ago – which is to stop feeding the denier troll that you are!

    Mate, I see you are also unsurprisingly in denial about denier-gate.
    I appreciate it must be embarrassing for you to find out that your heroes like Singer were in the secret of pay of the fossil fuel lobby. But a bit more openness to the facts than your one line link to another denier site denying denier gate would help your cause if you want JM or me to ever take you as anything other than a denier pretending to be a science sceptic…

  6. Craigy says:

    Iain, with an open mind I followed your links to Jo Nova and read what is in the sceptic handbook that Jo has put together……Then I checked the science……

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/docs/ScientificGuideSkepticsA5.pdf

    http://media.swissre.com/documents/rethinking_factsheet_climate_sceptic.pdf

    It is clear to anyone who reads your ‘facts’ and then the science, that your faith in denialist gurus like Jo Nova and Bolt runs very deep……Unfortunately all your ‘facts’ turn to jelly when exposed to real science.

    PKD, it’s good to see you here again. You are completely correct to point out the scandal of denier-gate. It puts into perspective the shrill claims by Iain and his gurus that the climate-gate emails totally disprove climate science.

    This scandal is much more damaging to Iain and friends who claim that one main reason why the science is flawed is that scientists get paid……The difference being that scientists get paid to tell the testable truth, while the deniers get paid to sell more oil and coal.

    It is embarrassing for them. So cue Iain or one of the winged monkeys with the ‘ I don’t need to read the scientific answers because science is wrong/bad/corrupt’ or some such excuse.

    No amount of scientific evidence will change the faith they have in conservative shock jocks.

  7. PKD says:

    Thanks for the kind words Craigy.

    Yeah, it is revealing that Iain appears to have remained relatively silent on denier-gate except for the link above. Compare and contrast with the huge outpouring of ‘climate-gate’ from Iain and any other time some wrong doing is alleged of an AGW proponent.

    Guilt by omission of being one-eyed and unbalanced in my book – certainly the act of a denier not a true sceptic!

  8. Iain Hall says:

    “deniergate”?????
    Oh PKD how can you say such a thing when the major document that this “scandal” is based upon is a proven fake???

    And that offer that has long been on the table for you to make the AGW case here at the Sandpit has still not been taken up what is it now five years after I made it to you?

    Welcome back BTW
    😉

    Craigy:
    Photobucket
    take a look at this and tell me if you think that this woman is traumatising her unborn child.

    Then I’ll get back to you and explain why i am posting this picture.

  9. PKD says:

    Iain, many of your ‘sceptic’ heroes are being funded by the Heartland Institute, which is funded by fossil fuel emitters. Heartland is focused on funding only the AGW ‘sceptics’. Anyone being secretly funded by the Heartland must be called into question on their objectivity. Would they have been funded if they weren’t ‘sceptics’? Hardly.

    The hypocrisy is clear in deniers like yourself claiming AGW scientists are being funded to produce AGW-supporting science and are in it for the money, and then denying that AGW ‘sceptics’ like Singer would be in any way motivated by money being thrown at them by the Heartland Institute.

    Hence your comparative silence on this very embarrassing issue…

  10. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    read the text in the cartoon again and then tell me what point that you think its making please.

  11. PKD says:

    Simply that Flannery is publicly paid for his services, whereas Carter, Singer, Watts et al have been receiving secret payments from the Heartland institute for their services. Some of them still refuse to discuss exactly what they are being paid for, and more telling why these payments have been paid in secret to date.

    Perhaps you’d like to have a go at answering that on their behalf, hmm?

    Somehow I think you’ll duck that one as usual!

  12. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    Just consider the respective scale of the sort of monies involved here:

    Click for source

    and then tell me that the measly amount of money that may find its way into the pockets of sceptics is significant, because that is very much Spooner’s point with this cartoon, namely if such a small amount of money compared to the the AGW budgets is winning the argument doesn’t that suggest to you that the AGW argument is much weaker by orders of magnitude?

    Face it the AGW bandwagon is broken down and its horses are all but dead and no amount of solar stimulation is going to save it or its millenarian fantasies.

  13. PKD says:

    Iain, you ducked the question! I knew you would. Leopards don’t change spots and all that.

    My point stands – public funding of AGW science is in the open and declared, Heartland institute funding has been done secretly without being declared. It is funding only going to fund work that casts doubt on AGW.

    Perhaps you would now like a second go at why you think Carters funding needed to be made in secret, not in the open like Flannery’s?

    After all I answered your question, it would be a double standard of you to keep ducking this very simple question I have asked you in return…

  14. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    you do realise that the main document in this “scandal” is a fake don’t you?
    You seem to be suggesting otherwise

  15. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    I’m not ducking anything here but do you make public the details of where every cent of your money comes from?

  16. PKD says:

    What I am suggesting is Carter was being secretly paid by the Heartland Institute, a lobby group funded by fossil-fuel corporations.

    Answer the question – why did Carter feel the need to keep his payments secret, whereas Flannery’s payments are on public record?

    These are the 2 people you are comparing in your post after all!

  17. Iain Hall says:

    Correction PKD Its spoooner, the cartoonist who is making the comparison rather than me and he is not talking about “secret” payments at all. All that he is citing is the relative magnitude of the money going to both sides of the debate, and how the AGW crowd seemingly get a rather poor “bang for their Buck”

    But please drop the very tired “paid by the fossil fuel industry” crap its a stupid attempt to mislead when the AGW industry dwarfs by many orders of magnitude any lobbying against AGW theory.

  18. Craigy says:

    I would like to hear Iain answer that as well PKD.

    Then it would be nice if he could explain why he has faith in Jo Nova given the false and misleading document she is pushing.

    You do see how she is totally wrong, don’t you Iain?

    You did read both documents (hers and the rebuttal from scientists) with an open mind?

    Oh and I have no idea about your spinning woman thing…….

  19. Craigy says:

    Oh and with regard to the cartoon, I think it is best summed up by a letter published in today’s Age…..

    JOHN Spooner’s cartoon (The Saturday Age, 18/2) relies on two fallacies. The first is that climate change predictions are simply for warmer and drier. Rather, they describe a system with more energy that will lead more frequently to greater extremes of heat, cold, drought, fires, floods and cyclones – trending overall to warmer and drier but with more rain in tropical and outback Australia.

    And the second fallacy is that Gillard’s government – a captive of the coal and mining industries – wants to hear that climate change is an urgent problem, and that if we took it as seriously as we should we would terminate all coal exports forthwith. Indeed, none of us wants to hear that message, not even my crowd of GetUppers and greenies who know that good planets are hard to find. We would all love Bob Carter to be right and Tim Flannery wrong. There is no vested interest in climate change.

    Colin Smith, St Kilda

    http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/learning-from-the-best-at-tests-20120219-1th2n.html?skin=text-only

  20. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy

    Oh and I have no idea about your spinning woman thing…….

    if that woman was the mother of your unborn child would you be concerned about her doing that?

  21. Iain Hall says:

    You know what he was paid for don’t you PKD? He was paid to co-edit their journal what is so unusual about that? And as I have been suggesting earlier the only people who need to know the details are his employer and the tax man and really 20k a year ain’t that much
    Flannery gets that much for less than two days “work” the (unsurprising) real scandal here is that Australia gets such a poor return from the stipend paid to Flannery, not that Carter is paid a pittance to co edit a journal.

  22. PKD says:

    Soooo, why was Carters payments made in secret then Iain, if it was just to edit a journal???

    (We’ll lead this horse to the water eventually, even if the horse denies its water and refuses to drink it!)

  23. Craigy says:

    I’ve got no idea what you’re attempting to prove Iain.

    If there is a chance it might make her and her baby unwell, then I might be a bit concerned …..Is that what you want me to say?

    So can you now explain why you have faith in Jo Nova, given the false and misleading document she is pushing?

  24. Iain Hall says:

    Is it really secret considering that we are talking about it?

  25. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    the point about the spinning woman is that she is not in fact pregnant at all, look closely at where her belly contacts the ground and you will see that it has a flat base that lifts onto an edge as she spins, clearly it is a false belly and the gif is created to deceive. which is rather like a great deal of “climate science”it may look kosher but closer inspection it does not hold up.

    Please tell me which document by Jo Nova is “false and misleading” and why you make this claim.

  26. craigy says:

    The handbook she has written. On the front page of her blog. You use her as a source and you have not been to her blog? Wow you really do have faith.

    The links debunking her ‘science’ are in my comment above. Do yourself a favour and read it.

  27. PKD says:

    Iain,
    We are only talking about these payments because of the leak – they were made in secret and would otherwise still be secret without the leak.

    That was your 3rd dodging of the question as to why you think Carter should feel the need to take payments in secret for a fossil-fuel funded lobby.

    So I’ll answer if for you – because if it were made public it would do much discredit the ‘balanced sceptical science’ Carter was putting out. No other reason I can see.

    Still, your constant ducking is proof you still can’t talk facts when they make for uncomfortable reading. Like your woman with the false belly, your arguments don’t hold up to any sort of inspection…yes, quite an ironic gif you’ve displayed there! 🙂

  28. Iain Hall says:

    Ok I have found what you are talking about but I don’t buy your “deceptive and misleading” claim

  29. GD says:

    unbelievable, Craigy cites a letter writer called ‘Smith’ in his argument for AGW 🙂

  30. GD says:

    so this bloke called ‘Smith’ says, although he offers no proof, ‘There is no vested interest in climate change.’

    …and Craigy believes him. 🙂

    It just gets better and better.

  31. Iain Hall says:

    PKD

    We are only talking about these payments because of the leak – they were made in secret and would otherwise still be secret without the leak.

    Was it any secret that Carter was Co-editor of the Journal? would you expect that such a job would be a paid position?

    That was your 3rd dodging of the question as to why you think Carter should feel the need to take payments in secret for a fossil-fuel funded lobby.

    So I’ll answer if for you – because if it were made public it would do much discredit the ‘balanced sceptical science’ Carter was putting out. No other reason I can see.

    No I don’t buy that smear at all

    Still, your constant ducking is proof you still can’t talk facts when they make for uncomfortable reading. Like your woman with the false belly, your arguments don’t hold up to any sort of inspection…yes, quite an ironic gif you’ve displayed there! 🙂

    I have not been “dodging” anything because I simply don’t buy your suggestions of wrong doing real or implied here. Obviously you are seeing just what you want to see in these err “revelations”
    Photobucket

  32. Craigy says:

    Okay Iain, whatever…….

  33. Iain Hall says:

    Oh don’t give up so easily Craigy!
    where are your sporting instincts?”

  34. Craigy says:

    Well then explain why you……”don’t buy your “deceptive and misleading” claim”

    Why is your hat tip person credible given that her handbook on why you should be a sceptic is so easily debunked like most denialist stuff.

  35. PKD says:

    I have not been “dodging” anything because I simply don’t buy your suggestions of wrong doing real or implied here.

    Indeed – most deniers don’t! This is kinda why JM has finally given up on your – you’re not really interested in any facts, just political smearing (are you sure the Heartland Institute aren’t paying you btw? ;))

  36. GD says:

    PKD, the document is a fake. What ‘facts’ are you talking about?

    BTW, good to see you back here, after hanging out at St*lkwatch. That’s the blog devoted entirely to sniggering at comments and posts Iain, Ray and others make here. Such a mature way to spend your time. If I remember rightly, you last took a break from this blog because Iain was repeatedly asking you to justify your stance on AGW, ie proof. He mentioned it again today.

    And you have the gall to say he is dodging the question!

  37. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    I offered a hat tip to Jo Nova simply because that is where I saw the cartoon but as for you debunking claim its a nonsense the citations you provided do no such thing.
    PKD

    Indeed – most deniers don’t! This is kinda why JM has finally given up on your – you’re not really interested in any facts, just political smearing (are you sure the Heartland Institute aren’t paying you btw? 😉 )

    I wish the Heartland Institute were paying me PKD and then I could afford some really cool new PS3 games. and a 100 inch flat screen and a new turbo for the car as well as double overhead cam grease nipples for my daughters Morris minor.

    JM was a total plonker PKD, who did a very good job of proving what a liar he was, he thought he could push my buttons so that I would ban him when he could not get traction with his futile appeals to his own authority. I resisted his tactics untill he had a hissy fit and banned himself.

  38. PKD says:

    Ah GD such a imaginative recollection of events you have. I personally subscribe to the view of History that if no-one was allowed to know anything that happened more than 6 months ago the world would be a much more peaceful place! It would certainly be better than your recollection of things mate…but I thank you too for your welcome, so cheers for that.

    As for St#lkwatch GD I think you’ll find Ray/Sock spends far more time than I ever have there, although I can understand why Iain has such a fervent following. At some point it takes 2 to tango y’know, Iain does himself no favours sometimes.

  39. GD says:

    I like how the alarmists move the goalposts every few years. At first it was that man-made carbon emissions are causing the temperature of the planet to rise to catastrophic levels. Now, after mankind’s carbon emissions have increased and the temperature has failed to do what they predicted, they rope in ‘extreme weather’. Of course they overlook the fact that the world has always had extreme weather.

    Even proving that Hurricane Katrina and the Brisbane floods couldn’t be attributed to AGW didn’t dissuade Bob Brown and the loony greens here from reckoning otherwise.

    There is no proof that human carbon emissions cause either heating or flooding or cyclones, yet the socialists want us to believe that the rich people must pay for this imagined destruction of the climate.

    This is the crux of the matter. Does anybody really think the carbon tax will lower the world’s temperature? Does anybody think that taxing companies to send jobs off-shore will magically create new sources of clean energy?

    Does anybody believe that by Australia acting alone with its gargantuan carbon tax, that we will make any difference to the world’s climate? Especially when we send the very coal we won’t let our industries burn to China, and let them burn it instead!

    Insanity!

    This is the Labor way. Economically unsound, illogical, and ideologically flawed.

  40. Iain Hall says:

    I found this statement form Bob Carter posted on Jennifer Marohasy’s site:

    STATEMENT FROM BOB CARTER

    I am a retired academic who engages in professional pro bono and paid consultancy activity from time to time, including for the Heartland Institute amongst other organisations. That said, the details of my personal finances are just that, personal and private, and I therefore have no comment to make on the stolen, and inaccurate by tampering, Heartland papers.

    Because I am a professional scientist, to state or imply that I (or any other senior scientist) would accept funding that was conditional on my expressing a particular scientific viewpoint is both offensive and inaccurate, and will expose anyone who writes or says it in public to legal hazard.

    Sounds reasonable to me PKD

  41. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    this is my last public word on this here.

    At some point it takes 2 to tango y’know, Iain does himself no favours sometimes.

    I am far less a sinner than one sinned against here and if you can’t see that then you need new spectacles mate.

  42. damage says:

    “I personally subscribe to the view of History that if no-one was allowed to know anything that happened more than 6 months ago the world would be a much more peaceful place! ”

    That would allow us all to forget the efforts of Castro, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Min and Lenin.
    Well be intitled to forget Kim Jon Il in a few months too. Yipee!!!

  43. PKD says:

    It would also avoid recurring conflicts, recriminations and reprisals based on events before our lifetime e.g persecuting the Jewish people for 2000 years based on something that allegedly happened in Roman times. Or Sunnis vs Shiites. Likewise never-ending reprisals and revenge against people who supported said dictators (often support given out of fear) that you listed above damage.
    But whatever, such concepts are probably too complex for you to consider in a sensible manner, judging by your post…

  44. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    Your advocacy for a goldfish like memory for history is just utterly silly, for while it may allow slights and offences to be forgotten it would also make building upon good or virtious events just as impossible.

    Those who don’t learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat its mistakes

    More valuable would be the ability to truly forgive rather than to forget as you advocate.

  45. PKD says:

    You obviously didn’t notice either my tongue was firmly in my cheek when I said it – it’s actually a line I remembered from a comedian sometime back.

    But still sometime never a truer word is said in jest, I agree with you what is more needed is to learn from history so people don’t keep conflicts simmering away from past generations…

  46. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    one of the shortcomings of written dialogue over face to face communication is the fact that text does badly when it comes to imparting the subtleties of tone and sarcasm.

    That said I had my doubts that you were totally serious in your original comment.

  47. Craigy says:

    “as for you debunking claim its a nonsense the citations you provided do no such thing.”

    If you say so Iain, as I said ‘whatever’.

    Ask me to argue with you and then wimp out….sheesh!

  48. Iain Hall says:

    Sorry Craigy but I’m not currently up to a blow by blow rebuttal of your citations (counting down the hours until I can take more painkillers)

  49. PKD says:

    I should hope you were able to get the joke – the number of Men In Black you would need to enforce a global 6 month memory of History would clearly be unfeasible!

  50. Iain Hall says:

    Why stop at 6 months PKD why not go the whole way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    why not go the whole way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    not go the whole way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    go the whole way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    the whole way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    whole way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    way to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    to a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    a goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    goldfish like 6 seconds?…
    like 6 seconds?…
    6 seconds?…
    seconds?…

    ..
    .

  51. Craigy says:

    No worries Iain.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: