About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

September 8, 2012 8:00am by Kokila Patel

General Debate 8 September 2012

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment194

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (194)

Login to comment or vote

Colville

Just finished reading Enemy Coast Ahead by Guy Gibson, the bloke who lead the dam busters raid in 1943 which changed the course of the war and for which he was awarded the VC. Operation Chastise (dam busters) was his 174th sortie over enemy territory. The Yank bomber crews were routinely retired after 25 trips.
His dog “Nigger” a black lab was killed by a car on the eve of the DB raid which sucked but what sucked even more was him getting shot down and killed by friendly fire in 1944 !
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 12:45pm
thedavincimode

Heh. You showed ’em Red, that’s for sure. And those commies backed up for miles behind you. Serves them right too.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 12:47pm
Johnboy

We can always hope that chaps who use the “nigger” word can all be shot down by friendly fire Colville! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 12:48pm
Redbaiter

“Heh. You showed ‘em Red, that’s for sure.”

That’s right I did DVMoron, and soon after that the tolls were dropped and the booths removed because they were deemed illegal.

The council had already received this legal opinion but had refused to release it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 12:51pm
axeman

Gwiff and his “scientists” Meh. Rocket science is a rigorous discipline, the principles of which are well understood. Climate, by contrast, is infinately complex and only barely understood.

What is a “climate scientist”: someone who knows a bit about the chemistry of the atmosphere but who knows virtually nothing about the various feedback mechanisms and all the other agents which influence climate.

The whole climate alarm rests on the claim that there are positive feedback mechanisms which will greatly enhance the very modest direct effect of CO2. Yet there is no evidence whatsoever for this claim, and in fact what evidence there is shows that feedback is slightly negative.

You may have seen the alarmists use a medical analogy: if you had cancer you’d trust the specialist doctor over other people’s opinions. But the analogy is false because climate scientists aren’t the equivalent of cancer specialists, they are the equivalent of medieval quacks.

What would happen if a rocket scientist manipulated data like Hansen, or concealed contradictory evidence like Mann when creating the notorious Hockeystick?

In short, rocket scientists are real scientists.

The real scientists of NASA are tired of charlatans like Hansen and Schmidt ruining the reputation of that once prestigious and respected organisation.

’49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden in March admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.

“We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

The ones that signed the letter don’t comment on ‘climate science’ itself, they critise the failure of NASA, and specifically the Goddard Institute For Space Studies (GISS), to make an objective assessment of all available scientific data on climate change. They charge that NASA is relying too heavily on complex climate models that have proven scientifically inadequate in predicting climate only one or two decades in advance.

Credentials are important, yes. But to focus on credentials only is wrong (argumentum ad verecundiam).
And James E. Hansen who heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City and who is a vocal AGW’r isn’t a climate scientist either. This though shouldn’t have any bearing on the argument either.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 12:54pm
Redbaiter

Grief- the only remotely interesting thing about your pointless screeds is your insane and narcissistic assumption that I might care about your opinion. (On anything.)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:10pm
hj

wat dabney (1,878) Says:
September 8th, 2012 at 11:23 am
Griff,

“The hockey stick temperature graph that was made by including as many data sets as possible”

You really are utterly clueless about the subject aren’t you.
….
The High Court found your lot were deficient?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:13pm
wat dabney

Griff,

What you posted wasn’t a list of supposed hockeysticks.

The issue is your claim about the hockeystick, specifically that it “is still there and still taken as a true representation within the science community of the temperature record” and that “Its only within the denial networks that the myth of it being refuted is given any credence.”

You have been easily exposed as an ignorant talking head.

Question: Do you know what ‘short centering” is and how it leads to hockeystick charts?

Question: Are you aware that random data fed through Mann’s home-made computer program produces a hockeystick nearly 100% of the time? Ones that are indistinguishable from his published chart?

How do the answers to those questions (plus the point about Mann’s deliberate removal of data which didn’t suit his purpose) fit with your original claim that “the hockey stick is still there and still taken as a true representation within the science community of the temperature record” and that “Its only within the denial networks that the myth of it being refuted is given any credence”

Please, defend the hockeystick with evidence or stop making a complete fool of yourself.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:15pm
wat dabney

hj,

“The High Court found your lot were deficient?”

How so?

And what has that got to do with Griff’s claims?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:17pm
Keeping Stock

UpandComer said

Redbaiter is the new philu.

Whoah. What a dick.

In defence of Redbaiter, that is an unfair comparison. His use of full-stops is far more judicious!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:19pm
hinamanu

Red,

what are your thoughts on Chris Christie.

Do you have confidence in him as a Republican and a true conservative?

I feel if Romney stuffs up as president he will cripple Christie’s nomination bid.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:22pm
Redbaiter

Keeping Stock- the only reason the insane narcissist Philu thrived here was because idiots like you were obsessed with him and always gave him the attention that was his real objective.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:32pm
Griff

fucken hell look all the nutters are coming out of the wood work
’49 former NASA scientists and astronauts out of how many former employees of Nassa ?
Tens of thousands and all you can raise is 49 😆 I could go even further and examinees the credentials of the 49 as in those that believe in creation and the 90 year old engineers etc but why bother 49 out of thousands says it all oh and next time you post the crap above don’t forget to add hat crue and best to the list of temperature records you dont believe in

Fuck off nut job and come back facts not the usual collection of personal attacks and pointless letters by idiots who share in your silly ideas
The Ice is disappearing fast. Each decade hotter than the last. The old temperature extremes are become the new norm. The frustrating thing is I am on here for the long term and every piece of bullshit has been shot down many times until the next fuckwit comes along and posts the same old pile of dribble
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:33pm
Redbaiter

“Red, what are your thoughts on Chris Christie.”

Has some good things to say occasionally but at heart a Northern state RINO.

He has to be purged along with so many of the Republicans who just do not get it and do far too much to help the Democrats hold power.

The Tea Party is working from the base outwards and upwards, and such RINOS will eventually all be kicked out on their useless arses. It might take time, but it will happen. The Republicans are completely lost in their present condition.

(It has to happen here in NZ too, with the National Party completely infiltrated by Progressives.)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:37pm
Griff

Oh and wat the list was of research that supports the original hockey stick graph IE science has moved on from arguing about Manns 1998 reconstruction as so many other researches as listed above have found evidence of the unprecedented warming we now have that its taken as fact

If you need pretty pictures to help you a nice little hockey stick times 10 graph can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:50pm
axeman

Nah YOU fuck off you CAGW fuckwit nut job. You should try your whining to a sympathetic CGAW echo chamber where they have taken on a true religious fervour. And like with all the alarmists, well that’s NOT science. The most fanatical proponents of it, just like you, are now described as ‘true believers’ where they seek out the ‘heretics’ and try to shout them down.

It seems you alarmists shitheads are a tight knit, easily conned yet galatically stupid brigade who talk their bullshit theories on the interweb.

However just like the “Pet Rock” fad of the 1970’s, Gwiff’s “man-made global warming” is now officially part of pop culture past. It rode off into the warm sunset along with Al Gore’s relevance and Rosy O’Donnell’s television career. We can look forward to a future episode of “VH1’s I love the New Millennium” where they gather a bunch of comedians to time warp back to 2007-2008 and cleverly lampoon all the environmental religious left folks who scared school children into thinking the world was going to end in the name of man-made global warming.

And here are some more “scientists” calling bullshit on your bullshit

Canada – Dr. Fred Michel, (Paleoclimatologist) director of the Institute of Environmental Science and Associate Professor of the Department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Canada.
“Climate hysteria has been known to be a sham all along.”
“As someone who has worked in the arctic on topics such as permafrost, groundwater, and Quaternary glacial history, it has always been quite clear that the climate is constantly changing and that natural processes are able to produce very large changes over very short time periods.”
[We need] “to return our focus to the important issues that need to be addressed, which includes being aware of the effects of a changing climate whether it be warmer or colder.”

USA – Dr. Will Happer (Physicist), Princeton and noted energy expert sharply criticized global warming alarmism. Happer, author of over 200 scientific papers and a past director of energy research at the Department of Energy, called fears over global warming “mistaken”
“I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect”, said Happer. “Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.”
Dr. Happer views climate change as a predominately natural process. “The earth’s climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past.”
Dr Happer was appointed director of energy research for the US Department of Energy (1991). In 1993, he testified before Congress that the scientific data didn’t support widespread fears about the dangers of the ozone hole and global warming, remarks that caused, then, Vice President, Al Gore to fire him.
“I was told that science was not going to intrude on public policy but I did not need the job that badly”.
“Computer models used to generate frightening scenarios from increasing levels of carbon dioxide have scant credibility,” Happer concluded.
Dr Happer’s latest remarks were made as he asked to be included in a Senate Environment and Public Works report of scientists disputing global warming alarmism. Happer joins 650 other scientists on the list

South Africa – Dr. Philip Lloyd, UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author, Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer, and author of more than 150 refereed publications.
“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil. I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.”

Canada – Dr Tim Patterson (Paleoclimatologist) – Professor of Geology – Carlton University
“Many things we thought we knew about the climate system just a few years ago are now proving to be uncertain or quite mistaken.”
“Over the course of about a year, I switched allegiances,” he wrote. “As the proxy results began to come in, we were astounded to find that paleoclimatic and paleo-productivity records were full of cycles that corresponded to various sun-spot cycles. About that time, [geochemist] Jan Veizer and others [like Dr Shaviv] began to publish reasonable hypotheses as to how solar signals could be amplified and control climate.”
Patterson says his conversion “probably cost me a lot of grant money. However, as a scientist I go where the science takes me and not were activists want me to go.” Patterson now asserts that more and more scientists are converting to climate skeptics [realists].
“There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth’s temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years.”
Patterson asked the committee, “On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century’s modest warming?”
Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and “hundreds of other studies” reveal: “on all time scales, there is very good correlation between Earth’s temperature and natural celestial phenomena such changes in the brightness of the Sun.”
Dr Patterson also comments: “When the IPCC report was being written, specialists in the field knew there was good evidence this natural amplification of the direct heating effect of the sun could explain recent warming. However, the IPCC left the idea aside under the label “Very Low Scientific Understanding,” partly because of the short length of time for which good data existed. Even though the solar-cosmic ray climate link appeared to many experts to be more meaningful than the CO2 climate connection, skeptics of the cosmic ray theory have argued we are unable to differentiate between the impact of CO2 and solar activity when the only data we have was during a period when both were increasing in unison. Thanks to Veizer and Shaviv, the missing data now has been provided.

Norway – Dr Tom Segalstad (Geologist & Geochemist) UN-PCC Expert Reviewer , a professor and head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN IPCC:
“It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction.”

Japan – Dr Kiminori Itoh (Environmental Physical Chemist) Yokohama National University UN-IPCC expert reviewer
“Man-made warming is the worst scientific scandal in history.”
“When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”

UK – Dr. Wilson Flood (Chemist), of the Royal Society of Chemistry and a chemistry education consultant, wrote that it is an “unproven hypothesis that rising greenhouse gas levels are largely responsible for climate change” in a June 27, 2007 letter to the Scotsman newspaper.
“….Further Met Office data also shows that global temperatures have actually fallen slightly in the last decade and have shown no statistically significant rise since 1990. Just to cap it all, NASA studies show that atmospheric levels of the greenhouse gas methane are falling, not rising. All of the above are easily verifiable and fly in the face of the conventional wisdom. But, hey, we shouldn’t let a few inconvenient facts get in the way of what politicians believe, should we?”
Flood wrote In the May 2006 edition of Education in Chemistry, explaining:
“Of all the scientific disciplines, chemistry equips us best to grasp the essentials of the global warming debate. After all global warming comes down to the absorption of infrared radiation by organic molecules, coupled with the mole concept which allows us to convert tonnes of fossil fuels into tonnes of carbon dioxide.” Flood continued, “Those claiming that the effects of global warming from additional greenhouse gases can already be detected, I believe, are deluding themselves. It would take 5.5Wm-2 to produce a rise of 1K and an 11K rise (sometimes claimed) would need a massive 55W of additional energy for every square metre of the Earth’s surface. There simply is not that amount of energy available still to be absorbed from the Earth’s spectrum, most of which is largely saturated anyway owing to absorption by carbon dioxide and water vapour.” Flood said, “Those who promote apocalyptic global warming claim that the sensitivity is much higher than 0.18K, some claiming 0.75K and even 1.5K.6 These claims are mainly based on a postulated magnifying effect of water vapour but, from a consideration of infrared absorption spectroscopy in relation to the spectrum emitted by a body at 288K, it is not clear how such large values can be achieved.” Flood concluded by noting that the proponents of a climate catastrophe are out “to frighten the population.”

USA – Dr. Chris Walcek (Atmospheric Scientist), a professor at the University at Albany in NY and a Senior Research Associate at the Atmospheric Sciences Research Center who studies the relationship of pollutants within the atmosphere. Walcek is a sceptic of man-made global warming fears: “10,000 years ago we were sitting under 2,000 feet of ice right here. It looked like Antarctica right here. And then over a one to two thousand year period, we went into today’s climate and the cause of that change is not, well, nobody has a definitive theory about why that happened,” Walcek said according to a November 6, 2007 article In a separate May 5, 2007 interview, Walcek expanded on his climate skepticism and accused former Vice President Al Gore of having “exaggerated” part of his film. “A lot of the imagery like hurricanes and tornados. And as far as tornados go, there is no evidence at all that tornados are affected. And a recent committee of scientists concluded that there isn’t a strong correlation between climate change and hurricane intensity. A lot of people are saying we’re going to see more Katrina’s and there’s just not much evidence of that. We have had strong hurricanes throughout the last hundred years and we’re probably going to have strong hurricanes once in a while,” Walcek said. “We are over-due for an ice-age if you look at the geological records, we have had a period of not having a thousand feet of ice sitting here in Albany [New York].”

Dr Lubos Motl (Physicist) Formerly of Harvard University
“Recall that most of the 1.1 degree – about 0.7 degrees – has already occurred since the beginning of the industrial era. This fact itself is an indication that the climate sensitivity is unlikely to be much greater than 1 Celsius degree: the effect of most of the doubling has already been made and it led to 0.7 K of warming,” Motl wrote in an August 17, 2007.
“By the end of the (CO2) doubling i.e. 560 ppm (parts per million) expected slightly before (the year) 2100 — assuming a business-as-usual continued growth of CO2 that has been linear for some time — Schwartz and others would expect 0.4 C of extra warming only – a typical fluctuation that occurs within four months and certainly nothing that the politicians should pay attention to.”.
“As far as I can say, all the people who end up with 2 or even 3 Celsius degrees for the climate sensitivity are just playing the children’s game to scare each other, as [MIT climate scientist] Richard Lindzen says, by making artificial biased assumptions about positive feedbacks. There is no reasonable, balanced, and self-consistent work that would lead to such a relatively high sensitivity.”

USA – Joel Schwartz MS (Planetary Science) from CIT, American Enterprise Institute (AEI) considered that the work by Stephen Schwartz overturned the UN IPCC ‘consensus’ in one fell swoop:”
“New research from Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Lab concludes that the Earth’s climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the IPCC assumes
The study’s “result is 63% lower than the IPCC’s estimate of 3 degrees C for a doubling of CO2 (2.0–4.5 degrees C, 2SD range). Right now we’re about 41% above the estimated pre-industrial CO2 level of 270 ppm. At the current rate of increase of about 0.55% per year, CO2 will double around 2070. Based on Schwartz’s results, we should expect about a 0.6 degrees C additional increase in temperature between now and 2070 due to this additional CO2. That doesn’t seem particularly alarming,” AEI’s Schwartz explained.
“In other words, there’s hardly any additional warming ‘in the pipeline’ from previous greenhouse gas emissions. This is in contrast to the IPCC, which predicts that the Earth’s average temperature will rise an additional 0.6 degrees C during the 21st Century even if greenhouse gas concentrations stopped increasing,” he added.
“Along with dozens of other studies in the scientific literature, [this] new study belies Al Gore’s claim that there is no legitimate scholarly alternative to climate catastrophism. Indeed, if Schwartz’s results are correct, that alone would be enough to overturn in one fell swoop the IPCC’s scientific ‘consensus’, the environmentalists’ climate hysteria, and the political pretext for the energy-restriction policies that have become so popular with the world’s environmental regulators, elected officials, and corporations. The question is, will anyone in the mainstream media notice?” AEI’s Schwartz concluded.

Dr. Bruce West , U.S Army Chief Scientist dissented from climate fears in 2008. Dr West faulted the UN IPCC for having: “concluded that the contribution of solar variability to global warming is negligible.” West argued argues many global warming researchers have not adequate modeled the Sun’s impact, according to a June 3, 2008 article. West believes the UN and others have “significantly over-estimated” the “anthropogenic contribution to global warming.” Dr West along with:

Nicola Scafetta of Duke University Physics Department published a March 2008 analysis showing the sun “could account for as much as 69% of the increase in Earth’s average temperature
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:53pm
renderer

RedBaiter can see that the traffic on Trueblue is such you have to come here for the attention YOU crave
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:53pm
Redbaiter

Renderer- please try and talk about something else besides Redbaiter.

You’re driving other readers of GD crazy with your endless obsession.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 1:59pm
renderer

Try pulling your head out of your bum and talk some sense
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:02pm
hinamanu

(It has to happen here in NZ too, with the National Party completely infiltrated by Progressives.)

Labour’s integrity is shot…. if National brings in carbon tax (and we really have to stop that this November)

they’ll be shot.

Time for third party representation and well over due
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:03pm
Redbaiter

Renderer- Clearly you don’t recognise sense and would prefer to revive the earlier flame war.

Not that hypocrisy has ever worried those too stupid to recognise it in themselves.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:04pm
hinamanu

Not to mention water metering the nation. National is pressuring every council to implement them. Super councils will make that target easier.

privatisation govts have to be stopped
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:06pm
Redbaiter

Time for third party representation and well over due

Yeah well, we already have a third party, and a fourth and a fifth, but their representation only adds to the overall leftward tilt.

What is needed is a party that gives voters an opportunity to express dissatisfaction with the leftist approach of National.

Everything that is wrong with this country has occurred because National has betrayed its founding principles.

So we have to get them back to those principles and to stop them being subordinated to the left/ liberal/progressives whose ambition is to control everything starting with our culture.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:09pm
wat dabney

Griff,

“Oh and wat the list was of research that supports the original hockey stick graph”

It is nothing of the sort.

Even you must know that. So why the blatent lies? Just so you can “win” an argument? What’s the point of that? A need to feel superior or something?

Question: Do you know what ‘short centering” is and how it leads to hockeystick charts?

Question: Are you aware that random data fed through Mann’s home-made computer program produces a hockeystick nearly 100% of the time? Ones that are indistinguishable from his published chart?

How do the answers to those questions (plus the point about Mann’s deliberate removal of data which didn’t suit his purpose) fit with your original claim that “the hockey stick is still there and still taken as a true representation within the science community of the temperature record” and that “Its only within the denial networks that the myth of it being refuted is given any credence”

Please, defend the hockeystick with evidence or stop making a complete fool of yourself.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:09pm
hinamanu

This is my thought of the race in November closing the gap between National and third party representation.

The future race for treasury seats will be between Greens (youth vote) and NZ First (adult vote)

Labour doesn’t need enemies. It’s shot itself in the feet so much for so long their feet look like a French Foreign Legionaires feet after his final test of the Kepi march. When the legionnaire takes his boots off, blood flows out.

Labour can march no longer. It’s integrity is in tatters.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:14pm
Griff

If you need pretty pictures to help you a nice little hockey stick times 10 graph can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
Ten reconstruction dating from post manns 1998 work that still make a pretty hockey stick shape wat how many tomes do I have to post the same thing science has moved on from is it unprecedented warming that is taken as fact due to the number of studies that have come out with the same conclusions

axeman a list of nutters that i really cant be fucked researching except to note that physicists astrologists and chemists opinion don’t cut the mustard and repeating over and over again that agw is a hoax and proven wrong does not prove anything but your own blindness to the reality around you
Your first post was sufficient to discount your crap 49 astronauts and engineers out of how many former employees of NASSA? and you think that proves a point?
heres the full list of nutters weridos and fuckwits for you to play with for your next post http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/inhofe-global-warming-deniers-scientists-46011008-2
And I counter with All major scientific bodies 87% of published climate scientist and the governments of the western world wins over any list of nutters you can find
Conspiracy theorys are why you denialist earn the Nutter name that and going to court to disprove science then not accepting it and the blind refusal to actually look at any evidence as wat is doing now
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 2:46pm
wat dabney

Griff,

“Ten reconstruction dating from post manns 1998 work that still make a pretty hockey stick shape”

Does the name Yamal mean anything to you? It is a data-set which was widely used in other hockeystick creations:

“Yamal was seized upon by climatologists, appearing again and again in temperature reconstructions; it became virtually ubiquitous in the field: apart from Briffa 2000, it also contributed to the reconstructions in Mann and Jones 2003, Jones and Mann 2004, Moberg et al 2005, D’Arrigo et al 2006, Osborn and Briffa 2006 and Hegerl et al 2007, among others.”

What was puzzling was why the author iof the data-set – Keith Briffa – had used just a particular subset of the data that was available (I mean, why not use all the available data?) After years of trying to obtain the data, the whole sordid story came out:

“McIntyre therefore prepared a revised dataset, replacing Briffa’s selected 12 cores with the 34 from Khadyta River. The revised chronology was simply staggering. The sharp uptick in the series at the end of the twentieth century had vanished, leaving a twentieth century apparently without a significant trend. ”

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/9/29/the-yamal-implosion.html

This is the “science” that you are blindly cheerleading for.

How is it not fraud?

And are you ever going to answer my questions?

Question: Do you know what ‘short centering” is and how it leads to hockeystick charts?

Question: Are you aware that random data fed through Mann’s home-made computer program produces a hockeystick nearly 100% of the time? Ones that are indistinguishable from his published chart?

How do the answers to those questions (plus the point about Mann’s deliberate removal of data which didn’t suit his purpose) fit with your original claim that “the hockey stick is still there and still taken as a true representation within the science community of the temperature record” and that “Its only within the denial networks that the myth of it being refuted is given any credence”

When are you going to stop blindly copy and pasting stuff and actually start examining it?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 3:05pm
MH

Colville – Forget about the Dam Busters,why Jackson does repeats I don’t know. Herald reports on the Lion of Crete, Vasili-Dudley Perkins being made into a filum by co producer Michael Wrenn to be filmed in central Otago. Going to Melbourne to raise some of the &8 mill required. Perkins was twice recommended for the VC-echoes of the Manahi fuss,but because his actions were not witnessed by an officer(Brit) ,not awarded. Eventually killed in an ambush. I still think the greatest filum yet to be made about war or NZ involvement, would have to be James Baxter’s old man as written in the book “We shall not cease”. A conchie or conscientious objector in WWI who was dragged to France and into the front lines,suffered harsh martial punishment but still had the hard won respect of the common NZ digger. I think if anything could depict the character of the average NZer at that time then that would be it. Both protagonists anti war,still looking to mother England and yet as the silent division,different,coming to terms of nationhood. Along with the Aussies the best soldiers in the world. It’s a shame Jackson hasn’t the ability to make a film without allegorical hobbits or apes in it.
They say the damage to the dams and the effect on the German war effort was not significant.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 3:07pm
axeman

Give it up Gwiff (and at least try and prove your bullshit to wat)

You tight knit, easily conned yet galatically stupid brigade CAGW alarmist shitheads desperately cling to your Mythological Scientist Consensus. But as Dr. Charles Wax, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists has said.

“First off, there isn’t a consensus among scientists. Don’t let anybody tell you there is.”

In considering any claim to scientific consensus, it seems appropriate to note the following statement by Dr Benjamin Santer, a climate researcher at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and author of the 2007 IPCC report chapter on the detection of greenhouse warming. He commented:

“It’s unfortunate that many people read the media hype before they read the (IPCC report) chapter “on the detection of greenhouse warming.” I think the caveats are there. We say quite clearly that few scientists would say that the attribution issue [man-made climate change] was a done deal.” The true opinion of some IPCC scientists slipped out in the ‘IPCC Climate Change 2001’ report, Chapter 1; page 97, concluding:

“Climate has always varied on all time-scales, so the observed change may be natural.”

And do you remember when the credibility of the computer model predictions took a significant hit in June 2007 when Dr. Jim Renwick, a top UN IPCC scientist, admitted that climate models do not account for half the variability in nature and thus are not reliable. Relevant Quotes from the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs – Report on the Economics of Climate Change 2005/6 (this was before the current global temperature stasis was confirmed by Phil Jones)

“It is a concern that the IPCC has not always sought to ensure that dissenting voices are given a full hearing. In the view of Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, current climate models would have predicted a substantially greater increase in the past temperature than has been observed in the past 150 years, perhaps +3 deg C compared to the +0.6 deg C we have witnessed.”

“Testing the validity of climate models is obviously difficult. In so far as the models predict climate change, the predictions can easily be in error and only the passage of time can validate the predictions.” “The scientific context is one of uncertainty. It is important that the Government continues to take a leading role in supporting climate science and encourages a dispassionate evidence-based approach to debate and decision.”

“A precautionary approach is called for but precaution cannot be the right option at any cost.”

IPCC ADMITTED IN 2001 THAT CLIMATE PREDICTION IS IMPOSSIBLE QUOTE: “In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”

And for good measure some more scientists who don’t agree with your bullshit

USA – Dr John Christy – Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Centre at the University of Alabama, Huntsville (also Alabama State Climatologist) UN IPCC Lead Author “Public discussion about ‘carbon policy’ or ‘reducing greenhouse gases’ centres around the need to reduce human emissions of carbon dioxide. Yet even educated persons mostly have no comprehension that the overwhelmingly dominant greenhouse gas is water vapour.” “I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol.” “I don’t see a catastrophe developing from our emissions into the air of what should be correctly identified as ‘plant food.'” “Scepticism, a hallmark of science, is frowned upon. (I suspect the IPCC bureaucracy cringes whenever I’m identified as an IPCC Lead Author) The tendency to succumb to group-think and the herd-instinct (now formally called the “informational cascade”) is perhaps as tempting among scientists as any group because we, by definition, must be the “ones who know” (from the Latin sciere, to know).” “The signature statement of the 2007 IPCC report may be paraphrased as this: ‘We are 90% confident that most of the warming in the past 50 years is due to humans.’ We are not told here that this assertion is based on computer model output, not direct observation. The simple fact is we don’t have thermometers marked with ‘this much is human-caused’ and ‘this much is natural”. So, I would have written this conclusion as “Our climate models are incapable of reproducing the last 50 years of surface temperatures without a push from how we think greenhouse gases influence the climate. Other processes may also account for much of this change.”

Dr. Paul Berenson (Physicist), M.I.T-educated, was the executive secretary of the Defense Science Board for the U.S. Department of Defense, the Scientific Advisor to NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), and Scientific Advisor to the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command. “Water vapor (H2O) is the primary greenhouse gas, contributing roughly 80 % of the greenhouse effect. Without the warming effect of the greenhouse gases, the Earth would be roughly 10 degrees cooler, and probably uninhabitable by humans. It has been estimated that the warming effect of CO2 is roughly one thousandth that of water vapor,” he added. “The analytical models used to predict higher atmospheric CO2 content and temperature have not been validated, and do not predict the measured values from the last 200 years; e.g., the cooling of roughly 1 degree C from about 1940 to 1975. Thus they are not valid and should not be used. They are not valid because they do not include major effects on the climate such as clouds, rain, electric currents, cosmic rays, sun spots, etc.”

Dr Larry Vardiman (Atmospheric Scientist) Professor of Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri. Man-made carbon dioxide is generally thought to produce global warming. However, in a recent article entitled “Does Carbon Dioxide Drive Global Warming?” I presented several major reasons why carbon dioxide is probably not the primary cause. But if carbon dioxide is not the cause, then what is? Evidence is accumulating that cosmic rays associated with fluctuations in the sun’s electromagnetic field may be what drives global warming. A new theory called cosmoclimatology that proposes a natural mechanism for climate fluctuations has been developed by Henrik Svensmark, Head of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish National Space Center. New Zealand –

Dr Willem de Lange is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Waikato, specialising in coastal oceanography and a UN IPCC expert reviewer and chapter co-author wrote on 23 May 2009: “I am a climate realist because the available evidence indicates that climate change is predominantly, if not entirely, natural. It occurs mostly in response to variations in solar heating of the oceans, and the consequences this has for the rest of the Earth’s climate system. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis [of] runaway catastrophic climate change due to human activities.” “I was an invited reviewer for a chapter dealing with the economic impact of sea level rise on small island nations. In keeping with IPCC procedures, the chapter was written and reviewed in isolation from the rest of the report, and I had no input into the process after my review of the chapter draft. I was not asked if I supported the view expressed in my name, and my understanding at the time was that no evidence of a discernable human influence on global climate existed.” “The IPCC Second Assessment Report assessed sea level rise by AD 2100 as being in the range 0.20-0.86 m, with a most likely value of 0.49 m (less than half the rate assumed for the economic analysis). Subsequent research has demonstrated that coral atolls and associated islands are likely to increase in elevation as sea level rises. Hence, the assumptions were invalid, and I was convinced that IPCC projections were unrealistic and exaggerated the problem.” “The IPCC Assessment Report 4 report emphasises a single paper, which was not available when I conducted my review, which spliced the satellite data onto the tide gauge data to “find” acceleration in sea level rise over the period of satellite measurement. This is being used to imply that global sea level rise is accelerating due to global warming (now renamed Climate Change). The satellite data only covered the period of increasing sea level associated with decadal cycles, and the known discrepancy between satellite trends and tide gauge trends was not corrected for. This is poor science comparable to the splicing of proxy and instrument data in the infamous Hockey Stick graph, and the splicing of ice core and instrumental CO2 measurements to exaggerate the changes.” Netherlands – Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm (Economist), UN IPCC expert reviewer, global warming author, and economist, a lecturer at the Netherlands Defense Academy, started out as a man-made global warming believer but later switched his view after conducting climate research. “I started as an anthropogenic global warming believer, then I read the [UN’s IPCC] Summary for Policymakers and the research of prominent skeptics ….. After that, I changed my mind.” “’Climate change is real’ is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural ‘noise’.”

Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, UN IPCC expert reviewer, past director and state geologist with the Kansas Geological Society and a senior scientist emeritus of the University of Kansas. “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) concept until the furor started after [NASA’s James] Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980s. I went to the scientific literature to study the basis of the claim, starting at first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false, they did not correlate with recorded human history.” “Depending on the period in earth’s history that is chosen, the climate will either be warming or cooling. Choosing whether earth is warming or cooling is simply a matter of picking end points.”

Dr. Aynsley Kellow, UN IPCC Contributing Author, referee for the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, former professor at the Australian School of Environmental Studies at Griffith University. “They [IPCC] really do emphasize the bad news. They’re looking for bad news in all of this.” “The IPCC is assuming rates of economic growth that dwarf the nineteenth-century success of the USA, the twentieth century in Japan and so on. The USA experienced, I think, a nine fold increase in GDP per capita; these are making assumptions about 30-fold increases. So you can question their credibility. But if you do that, you’re questioning the emissions scenarios that are driving the climate models.” “I’m not holding my breath for this criticism to be taken on board, which underscores a fault in the whole peer review process for the IPCC: There is no chance of a chapter [of the IPCC report] ever being rejected for publication, no matter how flawed it might be.” “The scientists are in there but it is, after all, called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The scientists are there at the nomination of governments.”

Dr Tad Murty (Oceanographer) adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa, Canada: “Global warming is the biggest scientific hoax being perpetrated on humanity. There is no global warming due to human anthropogenic activities. The atmosphere hasn’t changed much in 280 million years, and there have always been cycles of warming and cooling. The Cretaceous period was the warmest on earth. You could have grown tomatoes at the North Pole “

Dr. John T. Everett, UN IPCC lead author and reviewer, led work on five impact analyses for the IPCC including Fisheries, Polar Regions, Oceans and Coastal Zones. a former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) senior manager, project manager for the UN Atlas of the Oceans, received an award while at NOAA for “accomplishments in assessing the impacts of climate change on global oceans and fisheries” “It is time for a reality check: warming is not a big deal and is not a bad thing, The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change.” “I would much rather have the present warm climate, and even further warming, than the next ice age that will bring temperatures much colder than even today. The NOAA PaleoClimate Program shows us that when the dinosaurs roamed the earth, the earth was much warmer, the CO2 levels were 2 to 4 times higher, and coral reefs were much more expansive. The earth was so productive then that we are still using the oil, coal, and gas it generated.” “For most life in the oceans, warming means faster growth, reduced energy requirements to stay warm, lower winter mortalities, and wider ranges of distribution,” he explained. “No one knows whether the Earth is going to keep warming, or since reaching a peak in 1998, we are at the start of a cooling cycle that will last several decades or more.”

Dr Richard A. Muller, Professor of Physics, University of California, Berkeley gives his considered views on ‘The Hockey Stick Curve:’ Published by M. Mann and colleagues in 1998 and 1999, the [hockey stick] plot showed that the climate of the Northern Hemisphere had been remarkably constant for 900 years until it suddenly began to heat up about 100 years ago – right about the time that human use of fossil fuels began to push up levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The overall shape of the curve resembled a hockey stick laying on its back-a straight part with a sudden bend upwards near the end. The hockey stick was turned from a scientific plot into the most widely reproduced picture of the global warming discussion. The hockey stick figure appears five times in just the IPCC report summary volume alone.’ The version below comes from the influential 2001 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “There was a minor scientific glitch. The hockey stick contradicted previous work that had concluded that there had been a “medieval warm period.” In fact, it disagreed with a plot published by the IPCC itself a decade earlier (in its 1990 report) that showed pronounced warm temperatures from the years 1000 to 1400. It was unfortunate that many scientists endorsed the hockey stick before it could be subjected to the tedious review of time. Ironically, it appears that these scientists skipped the vetting precisely because the results were so important. Then last month the situation became even more complex. S. McIntyre and R. McKitrick published a paper in Energy and Environment with a detailed critique of the original hockey stick work. They stated bluntly that the original Mann papers contained “collation errors, unjustifiable truncations of extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, geographical location errors, incorrect calculations of principal components, and other quality control defects.” Moreover, when they corrected these errors, the medieval warm period came back-strongly. Mann, et al., disagreed. They immediately posted a reply on the Web, with their criticism of McIntyre and McKitrick’s analysis. Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate. I would love to believe that the results of Mann et al. are correct, and that the last few years have been the warmest in a millennium. Love to believe? My own words make me shudder. They trigger my scientist’s instinct for caution. When a conclusion is attractive, I am tempted to lower my standards, to do shoddy work. But that is not the way to truth. When the conclusions are attractive, we must be extra cautious. I talked about this [the Hockey Stick Curve] at length in my December 2003 article [preceding]. Unfortunately, discussion of this plot has been so polluted by political and activist frenzy that it is hard to dig into it to reach the science. My earlier article was largely a plea to let science proceed unmolested. Unfortunately, the very importance of the issue has made careful science difficult to pursue. But now a shock: Canadian scientists Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick have uncovered a fundamental mathematical flaw in the computer program that was used to produce the hockey stick. In his original publications of the stick, Mann purported to use a standard method known as principal component analysis, or PCA, to find the dominant features in a set of more than 70 different climate records. But it wasn’t so. McIntyre and McKitrick obtained part of the program that Mann used, and they found serious problems. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken. Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppress all data that do not. To demonstrate this effect, McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called “Monte Carlo” analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape! That discovery hit me like a bombshell, and I suspect it is having the same effect on many others. Suddenly the hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. How could it happen? [Sceptics may say ‘contrived mathematics’]
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 4:15pm
Griff

. Apparently everything to do with climate science is a massive lie because all of radiative physics, climate history, the instrumental record, modelling and satellite observations turn out to be based on 12 trees in an obscure part of Siberia. Who knew?

The number of lies untruths and deceptive comments in the blog you refer to is astounding Wat It may make sense to you that a small part of the reconstructions have destroyed totally the science of climate change. With or without the inclusion of the your tree ring data the reconstructions still look the same Temperature reconstruction relies on far more data then tree rings from a obscure area of Siberia Temperatures are still hotter than it has been in the last thousand years and rising quicker than at any time science has reliable information for. I have given you lists of papers in substantiation of science and you have given me opinion pieces on blogs.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 4:37pm
Griff

fuck that a paste and cut addict if I ever saw one
flecth we have a new friend for you
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 4:39pm
Manolo

That’s what he needs: an aging whore showing her back. http://www.france24.com/en/20120907-madonna-backs-obama-literally
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 4:50pm
Johnboy

Know you missed me boys and girls. Bloody power cut. Here is a photo of Guy and his beloved Nigger! 🙂

http://www.google.co.nz/imgres?q=guy+gibson&start=160&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1142&bih=598&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnso&tbnid=_WgLjsgWiSS21M:&imgrefurl=http://newslite.tv/2011/06/14/dam-busters-remake-will-rename.html&docid=29_hwEj1SFQ7vM&imgurl=http://newsliteimgs.s3.amazonaws.com/110614_digger.jpg&w=300&h=300&ei=ps9KUPLzLqTeige8tgE&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=462&vpy=206&dur=560&hovh=134&hovw=134&tx=134&ty=92&sig=104124734316792355775&page=7&tbnh=134&tbnw=134&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:160,i:279
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 4:58pm
Reid

Know you missed me boys and girls. Bloody power cut.

You should live in Eastbourne Johnboy. They wouldn’t dare cut off our power. We’re conservatives!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 5:17pm
RF

That Westcoast Labour MP, Damian someone . The anti gay one. was on Newstalk ZB this morning running down asset sales. When the host asked him what was the solution in lieu of sales, the answer was “just borrow it”.

A simple solution to our debt crisis. Dear God keep Labour away from the treasury benches.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 5:38pm
Johnboy

They don’t care about us Wainuio Martians Reid. Apart from Guy and me we are mostly Niggers! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 5:49pm
Reid

We care, Johnboy. If it happens again set your house on fire to make a smoke signal and I’ll post a comment here on GD so DVM can call the PM and get things happening. Unfortunately there’s so much bloody wind a common-or-garden garden fire won’t cut the mustard so it has to be big and you may have to set your neighbour’s house on fire as well, but hey, pretend there was a highly localised earthquake that caused the whole thing and EQC will be right on it, at least according to all the “highly satisfied” reports I’m hearing from their work in ChCh.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:03pm
Hamnida

RF – New Zealand has an extremely low level of public debt by OECD standards.

Most New Zealanders would prefer keeping the assets and pushing the surplus out to 2017.

In any case, I doubt Treasury and Bill English will make the self-imposed 2014 goal because of their tax “implementation gap”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:09pm
Johnboy

I take on board what you say Reid.
I’ve just told Eru to use greener wood next time he lights a hangi and wait for a Northeasterly.
Whetu and I will attempt to confine our lovemaking until it coincides with a tectonic plate movement! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:11pm
Elaycee

Johnboy:

Whetu and I will attempt to confine our lovemaking….

Are you playing away, Johnboy? What happened to Baaaaaaaab’ra? 😯
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:18pm
Johnboy

She went to the works as all sheep must do Elaycee and I have replaced her with a black sheep.

Whetu the sheep and I get on really well! 🙂

One must keep up with the changing face of New Zealand society! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:22pm
Griff

Ha you have the politicians so you deserve the wind up here in the winter less north its raining lightly but not a wiff of wind
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:33pm
Elaycee

@Johnboy – Is she named after the other famous ‘Whetu’ who represented your electorate? 😯
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:39pm
OneTrack

Hamnida – “Most New Zealanders would prefer keeping the assets and pushing the surplus out to 2017.”

How is the citizens initiated referendum (initiated by the Green Party) going? Have they reached the required 300k yet? I thought it was only going to take a few weeks.

Nb if you keep borrowing when will you ever get back to surplus?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:43pm
Johnboy

She is but she is much prettier Elaycee! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:45pm
Hamnida

The signatures will be in by late September/early October.

300,000 is not enough, it is more likely 350,000 will be collected.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:47pm
Griff

350000 so that there is at least 100000 left once M Mouse. D Duck and B Simpson are accounted for
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:51pm
Johnboy

Aren’t M Mouse. D Duck and B Simpson all Green party MP’s.

If not they might as well be. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 6:54pm
Elaycee

@Johnboy – The Gweens have a member who loves to dress as Ronald McDonald…..

Oh, the humanity. 🙁
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:01pm
Reid

300,000 is not enough, it is more likely 350,000 will be collected.

How do you feel about the Gweens using taxpayer’s money to fund the collection effort Hamnida given that we had something called a general election which put the issue not just to the signatories but to the entire population which means the govt won’t be holding a referenda so it’s going to be wasted except for Wussell making a hysterical point about it and what do you think Sue Bradford would have said if the conservatives had engaged in PRECISELY the same tactics during the anti-smacking legislation passage and would Sue have been right and the conservatives wrong, if that had happened? And why? e.g. because it’s for the cause and that makes it all OK?

The Gweens have a member who loves to dress as Ronald McDonald

Yes I hear their caucus claps and cheers as “ronald” leaps onto Hamburgler (who represents the conservatives) during their caucus meetings Elaycee. Apparently it’s a morale booster for them, then they get out their guitars and have a gay old sing-along.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:05pm
big bruv

Just watched Melodie Robinson interview the great Hugo Porta on TV.

Is he the best first five of all time?

For me it comes down to a choice between Barry John, Hugo Porta, Michael Lynagh and Dan Carter.

My money is on Porta.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:06pm
Johnboy

Boys will be boys even if they are MP’s Elaycee! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:07pm
Griff

My money is on B Simpson followed of course by R Baiter and C Craig
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:08pm
Elaycee

Boys will be boys even if they are MP’s Elaycee!

Especially when an exercise ball is involved….. 😛
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:09pm
Johnboy

Helen never rode an pair of excercise balls Elaycee.

God how we miss her! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:12pm
Elaycee

Yes I hear their caucus claps and cheers as “ronald” leaps onto Hamburgler…

So it’s a case of ‘2 all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun’? 😀
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:15pm
Elaycee

God how we miss her!

Yup. Like we miss a bad case of croup…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:16pm
Komata

Hamnida

As you present yourself as an ardent NZ Labour Party supporter, perhaps you can answer me a couple of questions?

As a prudent house-owner, family provider etc, it is absolutely essential that I run a budget to make sure that I live within my means – that is, that I arrange my financial outgoings so that if I don’t actually have a surplus at the end of each pay week, I am at least not in debt at that date. it’s extremely difficult to do, but the consequences if I don’t are dire – loss of my house, unable to provide for my family etc, etc. No doubt you are familiar with such a scenario.

Why is it then that the NZ Labour Party, who are by extension the ‘providers’ for the greater New Zealand family,and who are charged by that family (aka the Electorate) to look after them, seem to believe that the best solution is to repeatedly borrow and borrow to provide for the ‘family’ and then, having done so, walk away without qualm, gleefully congratulating themselves at being so clever by creating a huge debt when they leave office? To continue with the family analogy, to do so would seem to be the equivalent of an alcoholic father who, having completely wrecked everything and forced his family into deep debt and total misery then leaves and wilfully and deliberately walks away from everything he has destroyed, laughing as he goes and with no sense that there is anything wrong with such an action.

If I was to do something similar I would be taken to task very quickly, yet the NZLP seems to believe that such an action on its part is totally acceptable.

Why? Perhaps you can explain (and yes, this IS a serious question). Thanks.

PS: If YOU as a responsible house owner and person responsible for the financial well-being of your own family were to do something similar to the NZLP, do you think that you would be able to get away with it – repeatedly? And would you see yourself as being a ‘responsible’ individual if you did?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:19pm
Griff

we all miss
Yes to think I had her all lined up in the sights of my trusty .303
Harpy hunting is like that
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:19pm
Johnboy

It’s very sad that erstwhile erudite commenters here are intimately familiar with a McDonalds menu.

Sort of really fucks their image of chutzpah! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:20pm
Elaycee

Johnboy – the reason is more mundane…

Many moons ago, McD’s had a campaign where they gave away a free Big Mac if you could recite the ingredients.

The ‘dining experience’ at the student flat cost SFA during the week they had it on… 😀
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:24pm
RF

What about the old Tusker who was the Ginga’s landlady .. Annette King. She kept a low profile during the Police investigation. It was her medicine ball so I am tod.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:24pm
Johnboy

Ah well Elaycee when I resided in a student flat we had Mummy send Jeeves around in the Roller with the leftovers!

Shit times were hard in those days! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:28pm
Komata

JB:

Re: ‘It’s very sad that erstwhile erudite commenters here are intimately familiar with a McDonalds menu’

It’s actually not surprising really – one Labour Party MP of considerable girth made it very acceptable, so if the so-called ‘leaders’ set the example what else do you expect. . . ?

(No reflection on those reading this, of course. . . )
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:29pm
wat dabney

Griff,

“The number of lies untruths and deceptive comments in the blog you refer to is astounding Wat ”

Can you point out any factual inaccuracies that I used to demonstrate how utterly worthless the hockeystick is, and how worthless the various me-too charts are?
Facts are facts. Briffa is exposed as having cherry-picked from the available data and created a chart which looks nothing like what the entire data-set reveals.

And perhaps more importantly, can you explain why you simply overlook the dishonesty and fraud that has been revealed; with “scientists” at the heart of the alarmist movement proven to have fabricated their charts by secretely discarding all the data which contradicts it?

Why would or should anyone trust these people further than they can throw them?

They cooked their data and for years fought to prevent it being scrutinised.

Can you think of any other context where such behaviour would not have resulted in a criminal record?

Yet useful idiots like yourself instead choose berate proper scepticism.

“With or without the inclusion of the your tree ring data the reconstructions still look the same Temperature reconstruction relies on far more data then tree rings from a obscure area of Siberia Temperatures are still hotter than it has been in the last thousand years and rising quicker than at any time science has reliable information for.

That’s just utter rubbish isn’t it. Temperatures are “rising quicker than at any time science has reliable information for”? Temperatures have been flat for a good decade now. There is no possible way your claim could be based in anything but a fevered imagination. Why do you invent such obvious lies?

Seriously. I’d like to know.

Why do you post such obvious lies here?

What is the point?

And there is ample evidence that temperatures in the Medieval Warm Period were at least as warm, and quite possibly warmer, than they are now.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:30pm
Johnboy

And once we thought that David Lange, Michael Bassett, Roger Douglas and Mike Moore were at the forefront of haute cuisine komata!

You learn something everyday eh? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:34pm
big bruv

If the pre game rain dance (aka Haka) is supposed to be so ferocious why do they need microphones on the ground to amplify the sound?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:35pm
Johnboy

For the deaf Honkies that refuse to accede to the threats BB! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 7:41pm
nasska

What is a real woman? A real woman is a man’s best friend.

She will:

Never stand him up and never let him down. Reassure him when he feels insecure and comfort him after a bad day. Inspire him to do things he never thought he could do; to live without fear and regret. Enable him to express his deepest emotions and give in to his most intimate desires. Make sure he always feels as though he’s the most handsome man in the room. Enable him to be the most confident, sexy, seductive, invincible…

No, wait… I’m actually thinking of alcohol.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:03pm
Hamnida

Reid – I am more than comfortable with the Greens collecting signatures. I consider it democracy in action.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:04pm
Johnboy

I married her nasska and after a few years started drinking! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:07pm
Reid

I am more than comfortable with the Greens collecting signatures. I consider it democracy in action.

So just to be clear you’re comfortable using taxpayer’s money intended for other purposes being used by the Gweens.

But the real question Hamnida which please in your reply address directly without obfuscation, was whether you’d be comfortable with the conservatives doing the same thing on a policy the Gweens or Liarbore had already campaigned on in a general election. Yes, or no?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:10pm
nasska

It takes the pain away JB. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:11pm
Hamnida

Kia ora Komata

I hope you are enjoying the big game. I am.

I have a family and live with in my means. I do, however, have a mortgage. The bank owns about 70% of the house and I own 30% to put it in simple terms. I purchased a house using borrowing because I didn’t want to be a tenant, lending rates were reasonable, and I believe house prices will rise over time. I also hate moving house, so being in one place is good for my stress levels.

I think Government should act in a similar manner. Is the investment worth borrowing for? With transport, key infrastructure, and education the answer might be “yes”, because of the future worth these items create. Other projects you might say no.

Back to a personal example – I wouldn’t borrow money to buy a car or TV. Unlike my house, I believe these items will depreciate.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:13pm
chiz

Teenager in Bali forced to marry cow after caught having sex with it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:16pm
Hamnida

Reid – I don’t think the Conservatives get funding like the Greens because they are not in parliament.

If they were in Parliament and received funding, I would be comfortable with them using it to collect signatures for a referendum.

I would like to see binding referendums. I have a soft spot for Swiss style direct democracy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:16pm
Johnboy

Jeeze Hamnida. What will you do when the lefties take your house to give to the poor people cause you are a bloody rich bastard?

I’m shattered. Hard to believe a man of you convictions could get sucked into the capitalist money-go-round! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:19pm
Johnboy

No worries chiz. That’s how I married my first six wives.

Now I wait till dark! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:21pm
Griff

Wat
1 there is a thread on climate change use it. Cimate debate may be important to you and I however some dont find it all consuming
2 you are repeating the myths from the blogs and opinions of the denialists The hockey stick graph with 10 reconstructions using millions of data points is published in scientific journals has undergone many peer reviews to not believe them steps out side of science and enters realms were only faith and conspiracy can go see reid not me
3 The reputations of the scientist involved in the research into climate science have not been sullied despite many attempts by the denial lobby
your post consists of unfounded allegations that have failed to be upheld by repeated reviews and inquiries so again I am left with see reid for conspiracy and faith
4 Temperatures continue to rise we are discussing climate not weather the decade we are in is significantly warmer then the preceding one which was warmer then the one before denial of this calls for the fevered imagination only faith and conspiracy supply’s ie see reid

If you do not accept the peer review process the result of reviews and inquiries or the findings published in scientific journals how can you debate science? You can only discuss faith and opinion. As that is all you have to work with in your crusade against science I really don’t find much point in playing science vs faith and opinion with you endlessly Sooner or later I give up and go back to fuck of nutters 😆
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:24pm
Hamnida

Johnboy – Many socialists own houses and doubt any “lefties” are about to give it to poor people.

I can assure you I’m not rich. I earn enough to get by.

I would like to pay more tax to improve equality and social services in New Zealand.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:25pm
Reid

Reid – I don’t think the Conservatives get funding like the Greens because they are not in parliament.

Hamnida I was using it as a collective noun which is why I didn’t capitalise it. If I meant the Conservative party I would have. But anyway, the question is, are you seriously comfortable with any party using taxpayer money intended for other purposes, to re-litigate things that were determined by the most recently previous general election? Because that’s what the Gweens are doing.

Update on Greece ructions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/sep/04/eurozone-six-day-week-greece

Jeeze Hamnida. What will you do when the lefties take your house to give to the poor people cause you are a bloody rich bastard?

I’m starting to think maybe Hamnida’s actually Bob Jones Johnboy. That would explain a lot.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:27pm
Hamnida

Reid – I don’t accept New Zealand’s debt levels can be compared to those of Greece.

Have a look at our debt level compared to other OECD nations – It’s very low.

I believe the Tory Party over-states our debt to create a false crisis.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:33pm
Reid

Hamnida can you answer the question, or not? Yes or no? If yes, please answer it.

Depending what your response is, I’ll address your comment about tories and debt levels.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:38pm
Griff

mouses smoking ones that’s it brilliant
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:39pm
Hamnida

Reid – I can’t answer the question, because I don’t think any “lefties” are coming to steal my house in the first place.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:43pm
Johnboy

“I would like to pay more tax to improve equality and social services in New Zealand.”

By jove Hamnida. What a bloody decent chap you are.

I’ll get my accountants to forward my tax bill to you straight away.

Who said that generosity was dead in New Zealand eh? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:45pm
Hamnida

Reid – saw another question mark – I am happy with parties of any ilk collecting signatures for a referendum even if the matter was debated in the general election.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 8:45pm
Manolo

I would like to pay more tax to improve equality and social services in New Zealand.

What’s stopping you, moron?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 9:46pm
Hamnida

The current tax rates.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 9:55pm
Johnboy

Hamnida must be Gareth Morgan in disguise I suspect.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 10:01pm
Reid

I believe the Tory Party over-states our debt to create a false crisis.

Hamnida have you no idea what’s really happened over the last twenty years over the globe and consequently in NZ? Firstly coming out of the 1980’s boom and bust from which we suffered more than other western nations thanks to Hulun’s anti-nuke policies, we had a powerful dynamic which replaced Keynesian economics with Heyeckian worldwide.

Heyeck did not require light regulation he requires appropriate regulation but the politicians and the banks and the market interpreted that to mean light. That was not Hayeck’s fault it was Thatcher’s, Reagan’s, Douglas etc fault. But Hayeck’s policies created a tremendous uplifting of market freedom which created exuberance. Combined with this nascent industry called ICT the entire world went nuts, which eventually created the dot-bomb phenomena, under your lefty hero Clinton. NZ wasn’t much affected by that because we were just climbing out of the mess created by the CIA in the 1987 crash. But what happened in the financial markets was that Greenspan dropped interest rates so low that the losses from dot-bomb weren’t worked out but which formed the seed which eventually became the property bubble. Which is what the markets turned to, since interest rates were low, which created the real estate boom, which was in full flight during Hulun’s time over here, and this was the only, repeat only reason NZ prospered during Hulun’s years. Contrary to what some think, she nor Cullen had anything to do with the most prosperous time NZ has ever seen, it was all generated overseas, by demand for everything, including NZ’s exports. That’s why things were so good for so long.

A chimp could have run the NZ economy during those years and produced surpluses but in contrast to Australia, which paid off its entire public debt during those incredible years, Hulun and Cullen decided to do selfish evil things like WFF for rich people and interest-free student loans not because people needed them but because THEY needed them to get themselves re-elected. Consequently we STILL had significant public debt when National took the reigns. Then ChCH happened.

Those are the facts Hamnida. It might be history you haven’t heard from your lefty sources who prefer to pretend it was all the fault of the selfish bankers and the conservatives, but those are the facts.

It was in fact Bush 43 who bears a great deal of responsibility for the sub-prime mess, because he did various things such as suppressing Eliot Spitzer who wanted to form a coalition of State Attorneys-General to stop this bullshit way back in 2004-5, but he didn’t. But as you may know if you’ve followed me, I’ve never had time for conservatives overseas, anymore than I have time for conservatives here, if they don’t do the right thing. So unlike brainwashed morons who munt on about their team right or wrong, I’m not bound by that and never have been and you’ll see that, if you read my posts from years ago.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 10:03pm
RF

Reid

I am stocking up on popcorn waiting for the response from Hamnida.

He / she is up a creek without a paddle.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 10:29pm
Johnboy

I’d have said exactly what you said Reid if I’d thought of it first, whatever it was! 🙂

I’ve already got my popcorn.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 8, 2012 10:38pm
Hamnida

Reid – There are two things you Neolibs will never be able to demonstrate on this bolg: 1: New Zealand has a debt problem, because we do not. New Zealand’s debt is hugely low by OECD standards and we could borrow a little more for important projects. 2: Bet against Obama winning a second term.

Helen and Michael were simply of a Left-leaning political view, so they had policies such as a higher top tax rate, working for families, and later on interest free student loans. There is nothing sinister about such polices, they are simply to designed to close the gaps between the haves and have nots.

And I have never completely blamed the Tory Party, having acknowledged on many occasions neoliberalsim was started in New Zealand by the Fourth Labour Government.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
September 9, 2012 7:47am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« The enemies of Labour

ACC doctors »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

COP 29: "The entire event was a monument to the contradictions of modern climate policy."
Not PC
Woman of the day
Hompaddock
Marsden Fund goes even more woke
Utopia
Justified outrage
The Standard
GUEST BLOG: Professor Jane Kelsey – Trump’s tariffs are nothing new – NZ’s real problem is the failing free trade system itself
The Daily Blog
A Near Riot, No Surprises.
No Minister
The h?koi organisers already lost the argument
Point of Order
D-day for the government
No Right Turn
A NEW DEGREE COURSE FOR MASSEY
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
“Trans & Pregnant” – Biology trumps gender ideology
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d