I Don’t Believe This Blogger is Pleased with Me or Climate Skeptics in General

I found the following comment this morning awaiting moderation. It was left today for a year-old post Richard Tol’s Excellent Summary of the Flaws in Cook et al. (2013) – The Infamous 97% Consensus Paper.  I approved it and its duplicate.  It’s very rare that I promote a comment to a blog post, but I felt it necessary in this case.

CAUTION – If profanity upsets you, read no further.

A REQUEST – If you chose to reply, please do not stoop to his level with profanity.  I’ll snip you.

Blogger Davy Slenderass writes here:

oh for fuck’s sake will you guys just quit? Scientists all over the world agree about this. It would have to be a conspiracy on the most ridiculous scale for this all to be a scam. There would have to have been doctorate and master’s students on 5 continents consistently producing flawed research for the last 50 years for the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis to be wrong. There isn’t even a motive for it – it is in the interests of the most powerful interests in the world to keep selling us oil, so why the hell would they invent a fairytale to try to STOP us from buying it?

You don’t even need to know about the 97% to know that we are causing global warming. It’s obvious we are. A simple fact – plants (as well as other life forms) affect concentrations of gas in the atmosphere. Humans have cut down half or more of the world’s trees. Result: different concentrations of gases emitted/absorbed by plants. Now do you doubt that different elements have different properties when it comes to absorbing/reflecting heat? Are you really naive enough to think that no matter how much we change the amount of different gases in the atmosphere it will have no impact? And that’s only the trees.

Another simple fact: When a depressed father fills his car with exhaust fumes, killing himself and his children inside after their mother left him for another man, those inside the car die because it is a finite volume of space that becomes filled with poisonous shit. If the doors are opened before they die, concentrations of the poisonous shit become less harmful and they might survive. But if the doors and windows remain closed, they’re goners. The earth’s atmosphere is like the car with all the doors closed. Although there is no physical wall around the earth, nevertheless our atmosphere is a finite volume of space, and we have been filling it with poisonous shit for a few hundred years now, and especially in the last twenty or thirty. This really isn’t difficult to understand. Finite volume of space + endless pollution = eventual disaster.

The reason you have not been able to make enough money and as a result had to stop full time blogging is because your work is total bullshit. There are so many of you out there, so offended at the changes that were necessary to ensure our survival that you set about discrediting them, reblogging each other’s equally flawed bullshit and presenting it as evidence, cherry picking the work of the handful of doubtful scientists out there, all contributing to the inertia that has plagued humanity this last twenty years as we have done nothing about this and are now faced with a shocking sudden rise in temperatures that threatens our survival in the very short term. So ignorant and ego driven are you that you think you know better than the laws of chemistry – that carbon molecules absorb heat more than oxygen. You are one of the luckiest people ever to have walked this earth. A pensioner now, you will probably perish before the sudden ecological collapse that awaits us, happy on your deathbed that you were right even though you couldn’t have been more wrong. I and others younger than you have to inherit this ruined earth. People like you have done your utmost to ensure it’s destruction continues for my generation and beyond. I hope you live to see the carnage that awaits. Fuck you asshole.

What blogger Davy Slenderass fails to recognize is that climate science under the umbrella of the IPCC is simply global politics at its worst.   Nothing more, nothing less.

I believe I’m going to ban blogger Davy Slenderass from posting future comments here.



About Bob Tisdale

Research interest: the long-term aftereffects of El Niño and La Nina events on global sea surface temperature and ocean heat content. Author of the ebook Who Turned on the Heat? and regular contributor at WattsUpWithThat.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to I Don’t Believe This Blogger is Pleased with Me or Climate Skeptics in General

  1. craigm350 says:

    I hope he doesn’t live to see the carnage the policies he wants to create his delusion would entail. With luck we will have moved past this green lunacy and let people in the developed world have energy from fossil fuels (or whatever is most cost effective) rather than them burning ****. But then again it’s not something in the future these maniacs have their green boots firmly planted on the necks of the world’s poor already. How far would we have come without the IPCC gravytrain?

  2. roaldjlarsen says:

    No, do not ban him, we do like free speech. Especially when it is so easy to refute him ..

    All it takes is one arcticle (actually 2 in 1)

    1875 coldest year in 10000 years and no warming for 58 years

    Ok, that was the empirical side of it.

    97% consensus, yeah, like science is done by counting heads.
    The vast majority of the 1,7 million scientists in the world aren’t even asked, most of them won’t even answer if being asked because it’s not in their line of expertise.

    Those who know climate science there not even one real scientist saying we got a man made global warming problem, not one!

    Activists, however, oh yeah, 13 by the dozens ..

    Dishonest activists use to post lists of these, a list og rent and grant seekers.

    Here’s the list of real scientists disagreeing with the man made global warming scam; http://petitionproject.org/

    Where is the list of scientists (real scientists) saying there is, despite the empirical evidence posted above, a problem, and that we are causing it?

    And where is the evidence?

    Isn’t evidence important when Trillions are going to be spent?

    Everyone can use profanity, that isn’t science either ..

  3. Janice Moore says:

    Hi, Bob,

    There are so MANY errors in that comment! If I thought the writer was genuinely interested in learning the facts, starting with one as basic as carbon monoxide is not carbon dioxide and on to not one quantitative measurement shows meaningful causation linking human CO2 emissions to climate change of the “globe,” I would take the time to write quite a lengthy primer. I will not.

    This troubled man’s ravings are not worthy of dignifying with a response.

    So! I’ll just say something worthwhile: thank you, Bob Tisdale. Thank you for the years of conscientiously scrupulous, world-class, science knowledge you have documented for the rest of us with such painstaking care for no pay at all.

    You are the quiet-but-powerful, unseen, wind beneath the wings of truth and a GREAT blessing to the world — for you are setting it free of Envirostalinist and Enviroprofiteering tyranny. You are a dedicated scientist and, even more, however, that you continue in the face of such vile and vicious attacks makes you a true hero.

    With admiration and gratitude,


  4. Jenne says:

    Don’t ban him: it shows how little comprehension/appreciation he has about science in general and climate science more specifically. Beyond dogmatic, beyond Duning-Kruger, beyond reason. Religious zealotry, fundamentalism, maybe.

    It is seeing people like him in action that make me understand why dictators and fundamentalists exist and why people are willing to support them.

  5. vuurklip says:

    Well said Ms Moore! I fully agree.

  6. Janice Moore says:

    Thank you, vuurklip! 🙂 Glad to know it. Bob Tisdale is, truly, a treasure.

  7. TinyCO2 says:

    Yeah, what Janice wrote.

    What I find so curious is how he could get that angry about something he’s spent so little time understanding.

  8. catweazle666 says:

    Oh please don’t ban him, Bob!

    Apart from his posts being highly amusing, it’s possible that in the course of typing them he might build up enough pressure to do himself an injury,

  9. Ben Palmer says:

    I second Janice in thanking Bob for the tremendous work he has done and is still doing.

  10. It IS a conspiracy on the most ridiculous scale. He is (unconsciously) right, although he blows right past the truth of it. He should listen to himself when he is trying to tell himself to stop and think “what if I’m wrong”. But you’ve given him a full post now; I would ban him from my blog, which is dedicated to informing people of the simplest, most definitive evidence (all of which consistently disproves the consensus climate science).

  11. Andrew Hamilton says:

    The problem is that there are far too many people like this blogger Davy Slender, who think it’s ok to mouth off when they clearly don’t have an appropriate understanding of the issues. It is a problem of access to information.

    Unfortunately, people like Davy Slender “know” that they are right and have no interest in finding out the inconvenient facts.

  12. Tom O says:

    I have to admit, Mr. Slenderbutt does have a valid point in that we have affected the environment. I can’t deny half of what he says, but he doesn’t understand that the environment isn’t climate. He doesn’t express well what he is trying to say even though it reads like he actually is above average intelligence, but below average in education. I can’t blame him for his lack of understanding because that is the fault of the media and the culture in which he was brought up. Mr. Slenderbutt is unaware that there truly IS a reason for keeping the oil in the ground because he is undereducated. The reason for keeping oil in the ground is that you can make a profit off it many times over if you create recyclable synthetics instead of burning it for energy. But when you are undereducated, you are unable to follow any line of logic that wasn’t part of your non education. Mr. Slenderbutt isn’t aware, because of his lack of education, that there is a real desire amount the elite to reduce population because that concept has been pitched to him by the media as “conspiracy theory.” Mr. Slenderbutt isn’t alone in this.

    Finally, I don’t agree that Mr. Slenderbutt has no interest in finding out the inconvenient facts, I believe Mr. Slenderbutt has been educated to believe that the truth has been placed before him, and there is no reason to look at things that he has no capacity to understand. Most of the denial side of the argument is scientific data that is not something that he has the tools to make it comprehensible. Look at Mr. Slenderbutt as the intellectual equivalent of being color blind and all the proof is in colors.. I think Mr. Slenderbutt can be brought about to understand that the “climate scare crisis” does not exist, but it has to be at the level of language that he can understand, and there are few, if any climate questioning blogs that speak to people at that level.

  13. N. Ominous says:

    It seems to me that attempting to reason with abusive bigots is a waste of time. Even if they could be persuaded to change their opinion it would mean nothing if it were the result of whim or social pressure rather than critical thinking. Besides, even if a thousand Mr. SAs became sceptics it would imperceptibly reduce the clamour of the millions of remaining SAs.

    On the other hand, what if a celebrity scientist, such as Brian Cox, could be persuaded to admit that there was greater uncertainty than he had been led to believe, and that he had been wrong to castigate sceptics? Reasoning with Cox would certainly be easier than reasoning with SA, and a sceptical Cox must be worth several thousand sceptical SAs in terms of effect. As for Stephen Hawking…

  14. scotts4sf says:

    Go ahead and ban him. He is a waste of time and one will never convince him.

  15. MRW says:

    Am I naive in thinking that when the PDO and AMO go negative (together) by 2020 that the world’s realization of the global warming putsch is going to be risible? Further, wasn’t the PDO only identified in 1998, a decade after the CO2 scare started?

  16. Bob Tisdale says:

    MRW, the AMO or PDO being positive or negative have no direct impacts on global warming or cooling.

    First, the PDO does not represent the sea surface temperature of the extratropical North Pacific, where it’s derived. See Chapter 3.5 of “On Global Warming and the Illusion of Control”.

    Click to access tisdale-on-global-warming-and-the-illusion-of-control-part-1.pdf

    The AMO, on the other hand, is simply long-term sea surface temperature anomaly data of the North Atlantic that has been detrended. But its being positive or negative really doesn’t tell us whether or not the North Atlantic is contributing to or suppressing global warming. The latest AMO value is still positive. See data here:

    But the sea surface temperature anomalies of the North Atlantic show that there has been little to no warming there for over a decade, and cooling in recent years.

    So, in recent years, the impacts of the AMO on the North Atlantic have suppressed global warming.
    Also see Chapter 3.3 of “On Global Warming and the Illusion of Control” for more info on the AMO.


  17. MRW says:

    Thanks, Bob!

  18. Nolan Clark says:

    A global search of technical journals shows zero results for this writer “Tisdale”. There is. Tisdale at MIT but this wrirer is not that guy.
    So what qualifications and access to computational resources does he have? My son is a Ph.D. In computational mechanics and uses the big government technical computers at UIUC (blue water) and trained on the classified stuff at the Department of Energy. He says this guy Tisdale has not got a clue and is a text book example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

  19. Bob Tisdale says:

    Thank you for your irrelevant comment, Nolan Clark.


  20. N. Ominous says:

    Hi Nolan, It’s great that your son has a PhD and trained on “the classified stuff”. No doubt you intend us to be impressed. But I have/had three relatives, all “climate sceptics”, with PhDs in science and engineering who have/had expertise relevant to C-AGW. Do I win?

    What a shame your son seems not to have the time to explain (for the sake of those of us who are, inexplicably, unimpressed by my 3:1 victory) where Tisdale is mistaken.

  21. catweazle666 says:

    “…and trained on the classified stuff at the Department of Energy.”

    By that I assume you mean he signed the Official Secrets Act.

    So have I – several times, as I suspect many other contributors to this blog have also.

    So what?

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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