Well obviously he won’t since he doesn’t have any evidence. And none of the energy-deprivation crusaders do.
But some of you out there might still not quite believe the scope of this hoax.
Bare in mind the obvious. If they had POSITIVE EVIDENCE of their own rather then buggering about criticising actual scientists then when they were challenged they would simply come up with the evidence.
So anyway, here is my latest attempt to shame some evidence out of the hoaxers.
JAMES ANNAN SEZ:
“Of course it’s not a “crisis”, but rather a long-term problem. “
SO I SEZ:
Global warming is NOT a long-term problem. What utter rubbish you people talk.
Its global COOLING that is the long-term problem.
Does anyone remember evidence?
31/3/07 7:02 AM
SO JAMES ANNAN SEZ:
Please don’t stop taking the tablets.
31/3/07 7:12 AM
SO I SEZ:
No no. Lets go over this again.
Now if you were right and I was wrong, and you WEREN’T in denial it would be a simple matter of you coming up with the evidence.
But the fact is you HAVE NO evidence.
So I must repeat.
1. We do not have a long-term warming problem. Thats you in total fantasy-land.
2. We have instead a long-term COOLING problem as we have had for some millions of years.
3. You have an EVIDENCE problem in that YOU DON’T HAVE ANY.
4. You have a leftist-projection problem in that you are projecting your own un-science onto your betters.
31/3/07 4:29 PM
Now as I said, if he had any actual evidence it would simply be a matter of waiting for him to come up with it. He won’t do so, or he’ll play a trick like linking to some massive book-length pdf.
Monitor his blog for evidence if you like. But don’t be holding your breath because he won’t come up with any.
Also I went to Harry Clarkes blog to try and get him to come up with evidence. But you can best believe he isn’t going to come up with any evidence either since there is none.
The evidence of a link between CO2 and warming is very strong.
SO I SEZ:
Not only is the evidence not strong Harry. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.
Now I thought that there was but there isn’t any. I still just assume it must have some effect BUT THATS SPECULATION ON MY PART. This is not science. This is speculation.
Don’t say that there is evidence when there isn’t.
Do you have any?
No of course not. No-one has. They might think they have localised evidence as I thought I had. But we never had global evidence so we had to assume powerful negative feedbacks wiping out the local effect.
But in fact we don’t have even any localised evidence and I was mistaken.
Now will YOU come up with some evidence Harry?
Because you’d be the first. I’m trying to shake down James Annan for some evidence. But I know already that he won’t come up with any since HE doesn’t have any since there isn’t any.
Don’t pass on these lies until you find some evidence.
There were no substantial mistakes in the documentary. Nothing which materially affected the argument. They didn’t trace the irradiance/temperature data past 1980 since that would have opened a can of worms.
But imagine in your minds eye the way the two graphs move together. This happens no matter who traces them.
CO2 doesn’t move in sympathy with temperature that way. If it did I’d agree with you.
I just caught that idiot Kevin Rudd claiming that “Climate Change is the great moral issue of the era”
Yes it is. And if you have any moral fibre whatsoever you’ll oppose this hoax and not compromise with these malevolent watermelon-commies in any way.
Make it a habit to at least once a week accuse one of them to their face of being fraudulent and at least once a week demand some evidence from one of the energy-deprivation-hoaxers.