Thursday, 1 October 2009

The Yamal Fraud - I Have Found It


One of the most disquieting images ever presented at Denial Depot. If you are afraid of harrowing diagrams look away now.

I thought I better do a post about Yamel before the bandwagon skips town, so here it is.

What are the technical details of the Yamel issue? Simply put it doesn't matter, the devils in the details and he'll just utterly baffle us given half the chance. What's important is that Yamal is yet another nail in the coffin of AGW that can be cast into the faces of the believers.

Summary of Yamal

Team Science tried to "reconstruct" the past 1000 years of temperature by producing what is known as the Spaghetti graph, so named because it depends entirely on using fossilized Siberian spaghetti plants as a proxy for temperature. First of all temperature has been a well known unit of measurement in science for decades now, so I have no idea why Team Science thought they could even get away with re-constructing it from scratch. But anyway, it didn't take long for Blog Science to uncover the spaghetti graph to be a lie. Pasta and it's derivatives are not good proxies for temperature after all, as any good Blog Scientist could have told so-called "scientists" in the first place - Detailed Experiments have been done.

Fraud?

Yes this incident created a fantastic opening to allege Fraud.

But as far as I know I am the only Blog Scientist to have actually located and put a date to this fraud. I produced the opening diagram above by taking the fraudulent "Spaghetti graph" and overlaying a Good Reconstruction free of fraud over the top. Logically then the fraud must lie in the difference and I have circled that difference. It turns out the fraud is located in a small area just before 1000AD, about when the Vikings invaded Communist Greenland. This is possibly the earliest documented evidence of AGW fraud and I found it first.

Analysis

The difference between fraud and no fraud turns out to be about 0.4 degrees C ('C' means Cold, sometimes spoken in latin, 'Celcius'). No wonder Team Science wanted to utterly and completely annihilate this 0.4 degrees C. That 0.4C is the make or break of man-made global warming. Think about it, if temperature was 0.4C warmer than thought 1000 years ago, then how could the 3C alleged warming from man-made global warming over the next 100 years have any effect whatsoever?


75 comments:

  1. Dr Inferno,

    Your post contains some remarkable insights, as usual. The Yemel Collapse goes to the heart of the AGW fraud. However, I think there is an aspect that, with respect, even you have missed. Spaghetti plants are, so I have been told, ideally suited to the Tuscany region in Italy - this explains the widespread use of freshly picked spaghetti in Italian cooking.

    However, Yamel is in SIBERIA! Think about it! How was spaghetti ever going to flourish in Siberia unless the climate was much warmer in the past? So you don't have to worry about painstaking spaghettochronology - just the presence of the plants in the first place is ample evidence that Siberia once had a mild Tuscanesque climate in the recent past.

    Who would have thought that the entire climate science ivory tower edifice would have been brought to its knees by a humble spaghetti plant?

    Keep up the good work,
    Dirk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is your new blog post. Click here and start typing, or drag in elements from the top bar.

      Delete
    2. Film näitab meile kauni esteetilise tunnetusega kui läbipõimunud, haavatav ja salapärane on elu planeedil Maa.

      Delete
  2. Dr Inferno,

    It is worse than I thought. After my comment above I did some research on various blog sites, and it appears that the whole concept of a spaghetti plant may be a fraud! This blog science is really exciting. I'm going to do some more reading now.

    Dirk

    ReplyDelete
  3. Baron von Monckhofen2 October 2009 at 06:39

    The spaghetti fraud reaches into other areas of science as well: read here how dinosaur fossils have been FAKED using pasta!!! This is irrefutable evidence that dinosaurs NEVER existed, just like the Bible says!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good work people. This is exactly the kind of doubt needed to keep the wheels of denialism turning.

    I hereby grant you Blog Science Expert Reviewer status. It doesn't do anything, but you can use the title when you need to pump up your authority.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nice work Inferno, never liked pasta myself.

    Can I do a Caleb and simply pronounce myself to be an Blog Science Expert Reviewer because I'm 50?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "After my comment above I did some research on various blog sites, and it appears that the whole concept of a spaghetti plant may be a fraud! "

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news/uk/video/144000/bb/144567_16x9_bb.asx?ad=1&ct=50>Not at all, it's been filmed!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Eh, leave off the blog science and read a book by a drill baby drill heavy duty intellect/sociopath:

    http://wonkette.com/411426/look-at-all-of-the-funny-sarah-palin-book-cover-blingees

    ReplyDelete
  8. I knot my furrowed brow. Sphagetti does not have annual growth rings like Procyon lotor, the wiley raccoon, or the eggs it devours, does it?
    These have coevoluted on the Charlottes for dozins if not millions of years.

    I can tell you that man!

    Us researchers must stick together.

    ReplyDelete
  9. That is a fascinating documentary, there, Anonymous. You know, I'd really never put much thought into where spaghetti comes from -- just goes to show how much even an avid blog-reader like me still has to learn from intelligent blog-commenters like the ones that hang out here.

    You know, though, that spaghetti graph does have me a bit concerned. I hope you guys are right that it's all fake, but it does seem it could also be the sign of a spaghetti monster, and with that possibility in mind I'm not sure it should be dismissed so lightly. What message He may be trying to send us with this graph, I don't know. Whether He demands more spaghetti in future graphs to honor Him, well, that probably goes without saying. Whether he even exists, I'm not entirely certain, but I would not want to risk his wrath by ignoring and ridiculing His plain messages for us. As Keaton might say, I don't necessarily believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but I fear the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Baron von Monckhofen3 October 2009 at 13:14

    There is simply no end to the Spaghetti conspiracy. LOOK here: the leaning tower of Pizza is actually made of PASTA!!! Does this mean that Italy does not exists? We must not be afraid to question anything - that is what skepticism is ALL about!

    Another NAIL in the COFFIN of global warming!!! This may be the most important post on this blog ever!!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. It's actually not that surprising that the fertile and fecund vineyards of sunny Greenland of times past would of course embrace and nurture pasta cultivation.

    If "Thule" isn't olde Norsewegian for "meet me for some out of this world pasta, together with a spirited and cheeky locally grown red wine then maybecome back to my place, sugar", well it damn well should be.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I must thank DenialDepot for bringing the Flying Spaghetti Monster to my attention. I might never have found my spiritual home if it weren't for that link. All these many godless years, from my earliest days brought up by lapsed Unitarian Universalists (is such a thing possible?) I have been denied the comfort of Belief. At last, my quest for meaning in life (only momentarily satisfied by Dr. Demento, Monty Python, Vogue Magazine erotic tricks, Animal House and a Prairie Home Companion) is at long last fulfilled.

    As a new Pastafarian supplicant I am humbly contemplating how best to prostrate myself at the tentacles of the sacred Spaghetti Monster, who I dare not approach, quite yet.

    ReplyDelete
  13. BTW you would do a great service to the cause were you to provide freely and openly all of the data you have used to construct your graph. I suggest we take the politics right out of this equation. For we have a higher calling. We must simply and categorically ensure the FAILURE of the coming copenBLAHgen talks. This blog and the rest of the denial-sphere MUST be made REQUIRED READING for all blah attendees for otherwise how can we, humble Citizens Of Planet Earth, express confidence in their pronouncements (yes you may read that as a DEMAND TEAM-AGW!). I have the latest Microsoft Vista fully installed on my equipment and I belive with access to jpeg encoded direct copies of the various layers superimposed to compile the damning evidence (ie 'Spagetti', reconstruction and annotation) it would be a relatively straightforward matter for myself and other of my ouvre to within say PaintShop Pro (and who could afford the Adobe (TM) equivalent let alone risk accusations of 'photoshopping') to reproduce your important work and add thenceforth an ever-growing weight of irrefutable, open and accesible reproducible real science to the virtual and very real world of blog science.

    Yah, I'm a diffrent anonymous, you may know me as Dr OilzMyWheelz if it suits your purposes.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi guys :-)

    I don't know if this helps but i showed my boyfreind the graph (hes feeling beter thanks) and he said thats not spageti and I said yes it is then he said well try to reproduce it then so i did try. First the spag just broke when I tried to do the curvs then he said it all has to be cooked. He larfed when he said COOKED I dont know why but trhen hes always larfing at me. I thort you only had to cook it if it was 4 dinner. So anyway i cooked it like it said on the packet then tried again on the kitcken floor. It didnt look anything like infernos nice pic. I got some wiggles like that but also got lots of loops and tangles. So i think my bf is write and its not spageti anyway.

    HTH

    Summer x

    ReplyDelete
  15. The key to knowing whether spaghetti is "done" is to throw some at the wall - when it sticks, it's done. We at the Heartthrob Institute have been throwing half-cooked spaghetti at climate science for 20 years; we don't care if any specific spaghetti is "true" or "done" - we just keep hoping something will stick. Those whacky Alarmists shore look funni with spaghetti all over 'em.

    Signed,
    Monckhausen-by-Proxy

    ReplyDelete
  16. The warning wasn't prominent enough. One of my children saw that diagram and burst into tears.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "It didnt look anything like infernos nice pic. I got some wiggles like that but also got lots of loops and tangles."

    Of course, it didn't, SF! Dishonest climate "scientists" would lose their grants if their models produced silly loops and tangles. They "adjust" their pasta accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oh no, this is all wrong.
    Actually, Jamaahl was originally the site for the relocation of trees by two different teams competing on who could grow trees faster in this harsh environment by the sea which freezes every winter. Imagine how the winters there affect their growth! The other team relied on the aerial fertilization while the other team went on location to do what they could for the trees, that had seriously suffered during previous attemps. Some of them had in fact died.

    This large scale ecological experiment would've probably ended in a draw had the first team located the area correctly. Due the freak weakening of the solar flux during their fertilization flight, their gyrocompasses went haywire and they ended up slightly misplaced when they unloaded their shit. Of course, the accusations flied both ways, the other team saying "you've dropped your shit upwind of our trees, do you know how unpleasant working is in this kind of conditions?" , while the other team accused the first one of peeing on their trees, so the overabundance of nitrogen would have induced the limitation of growth.

    In the end, the arbiter of this match, a reporter in the local newspaper "Jammed times", declared the macth undecided since the rules, which had not been written in his local language of Jammadyah, had not been read by him.

    I'm writing anonymous since I'm afraid how this revelation might effect my future reputation as a referee in such dirty issues.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Sledgehammer for the truth7 October 2009 at 06:39

    BASTARD TREE HUGGING (and coring) LIARS!!!

    That is all.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sledgehammer for the truth said...
    "BASTARD TREE HUGGING (and coring) LIARS!!!

    That is all".


    Now THAT's what I call blog science, in all it's robust glory.

    ReplyDelete
  21. That must be the most disturbing graph you have ever posted, Inferno. The implications are so earth-shattering that they do not need to be spelt out. I bet you hardly knew where to begin in terms of commentary on this difference. You are to be commended for your bravery, can you honestly think of anyone in this field who is subjected to more criticism than you are? Or someone who has more eyes on their work looking for some fatal error? I can't. You can be sure that any younger dendorochronologists with a remaining shred of integrity will be astonished and appalled at the procedure. They will be wincing and some of them will probably be bit shell-shocked at this news.

    No wonder Dr Briffa Stonewalled when politely badgered for the raw data. This is the last nail in the coffin for AGW and no mistake. About the only thing that could spoil this would be if some dendrochronologists stood up for Briffa's methodology, or it turns out that Briffa had pointed out that the raw data was not his to share, or if an up to date study from a local dendrochronologist with more trees reproduces the hockey stick.

    But that is so unlikely, we can open the champagne now......

    Phil Clarke, IPCC Expert Reviewer. (Provisional, I've sent the form off).

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anyhow, some exciting new Blog Science has appeared on WUWT. A new way of calculating a ten year trend to give the correct answer, here it is...

    ok, so plotting a ten year period from 2000-2010

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/last:111/plot/uah/last:111/plot/rss/last:111/plot/gistemp/last:111/plot/hadcrut3vgl/last:111/trend/plot/uah/last:111/trend/plot/rss/last:111/trend/plot/gistemp/last:111/trend

    shows that temperatures have been flat for the last 10 years


    You see the elegance? To get the correct 10-year trend you must include months that haven't happened yet.

    You can be sure I shall be using this exciting new technique when explaining to the alarmist bedwetters who infest my local hostelry that the Earth has not been warming in the slightest for a decade now....

    ReplyDelete
  23. No wonder Dr Briffa Stonewalled when politely badgered for the raw data.

    New plot twists have been revealed, and apparently it's even worse than this. Instead of simply refusing outright to provide his data, apparently Briffa decided to send McIntyre on a wild goose chase by referring him to the dendrochronologists who collected the data in the first place! Further stonewalling from Briffa left Steve to spend five years wondering if the data set he had obtained was really the same data that Briffa had used.

    Unbelievable how weaselly these guys are. Steve explains:

    [I]n fact, I already had a version of the data from the Russians, one that I'd had since 2004. What I didn't know until a couple of weeks ago was that this was the actual version that Briffa had used.

    This is not a small point. In climate science, there can be different versions of an unarchived data set in circulation. For example, there have been a number of different versions of Thompson's Dunde ice core data in circulation, not all of which can be reconciled.

    ...

    Without certainty on the version that Briffa used - eventually provided in Sept 2008 - I wasn't going to comment on the low replication. Nor was I going to spend time on potentially time-consuming analysis until I was sure that I had the data that was actually used.

    In this case, it seemed pretty clear that the issue was entirely with Briffa and not with the Russians. The Russians themselves seemed not to troubled about providing the data and thus Briffa's refusal to provide the data was not based on an inability to get consent from the Russians to provide the data, but simply his own unwillingness to provide the data.


    Should be interesting to watch as more details drip out as Steve releases selections from his email exchanges.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Awesome blog. I enjoyed reading your articles. This is truly a great read for me. I have bookmarked it and I am looking forward to reading new articles. Keep up the good work!

      Delete
  24. Just to correct a minor misunderstanding, the hero and genius who we know as Steve McIntyre (known henceforth as AuditMan) is actually the alter ego of a mild-mannered Usenet poster name of Nigel Persaud.

    Thus when Dr Keith Briffa wrote in response to a completely legitimate demand by Nigel for 100% forensic disclosure of any and all data

    'Steve these data were produced by Swedish and Russian colleagues - will pass on your message to them cheers, Keith'

    Nigel would have had no way of knowing that the 'Steve' referred to was in fact himself [Nigel] and the data being discussed was the data he [Nigel] actually had sitting on his hard drive since 2004. A completely understandable mistake.

    The fake tone of civility and reasonableness by the alleged expert dendrochronologist who is in fact concealing the castiron evidence of the greatest scam ever perpetrated on the God-fearing and tax-paying citizens of God's own country makes me want to puke.

    Puke with me, fellow realists. This may help - http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3690

    ReplyDelete
  25. I've never heard of these people before and suddenly they're all over the news.

    But I'm pretty sure that most reasonable folk readily believe a dandruffcolonogist helps Algore talk with his head up his arse.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Given that the IPCC is prepared to accept that:

    "There is evidence for very high concentrations (>3000 ppm) between 600 and 400 Myr BP [million years before present] and between 200 and 150 Myr BP"

    And:

    ‘The net effect of slight imbalances in the carbon cycle over tens to hundreds of millions of years has been to reduce atmospheric CO2.’

    And:

    ‘Primary production is carbon limited in terrestrial ecosystems in part because of (geologically speaking) low CO2 concentrations.’

    Isn't the whole debate about small differences pretty irrelevent?

    The truth is has never been any lower than about 200 ppm and thus carbon dioxide levels are hovering just above a critical limit for non C4 plants, not just below a critical level for the destruction of Earth.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Fishsnorkel, welcome to the discussion. While you're a bit off topic for this thread, it is nice to have someone to remind everyone of the bigger picture:

    When you realise that 15 million years represents just 0.4% of the history life life on Earth, information like this does nothing more than confirm that life on Earth will be just fine. Humans on Earth is another matter of course, but, whatever we might think, we are not the centre of the Universe and I will leave the anthropocentric natural history to the conservationists. This is about life’s magnificent, and pragmatically ruthless, brilliance, not some peoples belief in a happy smiley fantasy land.

    It seems clear that, no matter what we do, there will still be life of some sort on Earth a million years from now, and there won't be in a few billion, so why get so hung up on the next century or millenium as if it is an important period in the grand scheme of things? It isn't.

    I highly recommend your insightful blog to other readers of this site, and we all eagerly await your book!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Heh - I see the warministas are all over this, so far.

    'Pants-on-fire' McIntyre said he didn't have the data when he did,
    and
    'too incompetent to even know he had the data' and
    'wouldn't know what to do with it if he did' (not sure if that was a sciencey type quote or an embittered ex-ladyfriend),
    and
    Blunderin' Stevie,
    and even 'Climate Fraudit',
    and similar juvenile ad homophones.

    I expect Steve's leading them into a fantastic trap we foot soldiers of the blog hinterlands haven't or couldn't conceive of, and they'll soon be laughing on the other side of their globally warmed faces.

    ReplyDelete
  29. fishsnorkel said:
    "The truth is has never been any lower than about 200 ppm and thus carbon dioxide levels are hovering just above a critical limit for non C4 plants, not just below a critical level for the destruction of Earth."

    Reading this on the day mankind struck our first blow against the moon (a display of strength can only be a good thing) and otherwise thinking wise and otherworldly thoughts, I laterally thought about your observation and concluded that it is almost sheer cosmic accident that mankind and plant life co-existed at all!

    Just imagine - an entire Kingdom dependent on a trace gas (only 0.0383% of atmosphere). At least we humans had the good sense to choose breathing oxygen, although nitrogen would have been an even safer bet.

    But a million or two years either way and your wife could never complain about never being given flowers because she wouldn't generally know they had even existed!

    I'm sure we can all think of other examples (grass cutting, trees blocking roads, birds in trees pooping on your car, etc. etc.) where it's obvious we'd have been better off without plants.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The razor-straight handle on the hockey stick is absolutely retarded. The continuation to the “projected” values is nothing short of laughable.

    This is not Science. Not even remotely close. It’s nothing more than propaganda and fear mongering for political purposes. I sincerely hope that at some point, SOON, this sort of dishonesty is both criminalized AND prosecuted.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Dear Inferno,

    The word on the blogosphere is that the Warmists are fighting back with opprobrium and are subjecting your findings to claims of vituperative malfeasance.

    How they can do this in the light of the abysmal modern replication of the Yamal chronology seems highly questionable and vituperative. Surely they realize that opprobrium is not appropiate, and you can't be blamed for repudiating the low-replication corridor standardization data set for Hanntemirov and Shiyatov 2002, and assorted references obtained passim. It is unreasonable to expect you to have allowed for negative exponential, Hugershoff and splines of varying stiffness, despite the emulation function returning a null "remarkably similar" chronology vector.

    Clearly, the arguments in the above paragraph shows that you are beyond raproach in this matter, and that any vituperative opprobrium is misplaced.

    Yours,
    Dirk

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dear Dr Inferno (my apologies for leaving out your title in my last post),

    An issue that could be more thoroughly explored is the withholding of data by the Team.

    The Team is adept at withholding one or more of the data, metadata, database, or datasets. Sure, they sometimes provide the data, but that is useless without the metadata. And when they archive data and metadata, but withhold access to the database, they are clearly trying to hide something. Furthermore, without all the datasets, and verification that they were derived from the original databases, and are consistent with the metadata, we have the possibility of claims of malfeasance.

    Clearly what is needed is a single global point of contact for all scientific papers where all the data, metadata, databases and datasets for each and every paper can be obtained with a simple request. And to avoid the risk of multiple conflicting copies of the data circulating, we need a statement held in escrow signed by all the coauthors attesting to the version and subversion of each item of data and metadata.

    This is a simple request. The failure of the Team to act on this is telling.

    Dirk

    ReplyDelete
  33. This comment says absolutely nothing about their likely responses to different factors or what factors might be limiting.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Dirk says: "The word on the blogosphere is that the Warmists are fighting back with opprobrium and are subjecting your findings to claims of vituperative malfeasance."

    Of course the warmists are fighting back, they fear my methods and have always attempted to discredit me.

    In fact even as far back as high school the powers that be deemed it necessary to have me "removed from the system". Their chosen excuse was "poor attendance record and failing grades", but looking back I realize they saw the skeptic in me and feared that if I went on to college I would discover where they kept the climate models and expose so-called climate "science" to the world.

    Their one mistake was to not foresee the emergence of Blog Science.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Dear Dr Inferno,

    Looking back at my own education, I can see examples where I too was showing early signs of skepticism that would have alerted the authorities!

    It is extraordinary the depths to which the science establishment will sink to protect the "consensus". Being unable to mount a convincing argument on the science, they resort to hiding their data (and metadata, databases, datasets, etc) to avoid scrutiny. Now we discover that for years the Team has been orchestrating the systematic "removal from the system" of generations of skeptics.

    Reading between the lines of the posts here at DenialDepot, it is now startlingly clear that many, if not most, of us have found that traditional educational paths have been blocked to us from a very early stage. It is a tragedy that good people such as Sledgehammer for the truth, birdbrainscan, and, most obviously, the delightful Summer Flower, have been denied the PhD that would have undoubtedly been theirs if they had only toed the line.

    Only now through your brave efforts, Dr Inferno, can we all now have the Blog PhDs that we deserve.

    How about we establish a Blog academic promotion scheme?! I'm thinking that perhaps after 1000 posts, a person could be awarded a Blog Professorship. Actually, make that 100 posts, 1000 would take too long.

    Yours,
    Dirk
    Blog Science Expert Reviewer

    ReplyDelete
  36. Baron von Monckhofen11 October 2009 at 01:39

    Our great hero and my highly esteemed colleague Lord Christopher Monckton is interviewed in the Winnipeg Sun, which seems to be a very fine newspaper and a bulwark against the bedwetting watermelon nazi-left. Monckton says:

    "Remember DDT, the pesticide used to kill mosquitoes that carried malaria. Jackie Kennedy read a book saying it was harmful, got her husband the president to bring pressure to have it banned and in 40 years 40 million people, mainly children, died. Now we've come to our senses and re-introduced it but only after the fashionable left did their damage.”

    But you should read the whole article.

    ReplyDelete
  37. That's what happens when people read books

    ReplyDelete
  38. Dirk Hartog (a fellow countryman, and hence gifted of a piecing intellect), noted:

    "Clearly what is needed is a single global point of contact for all scientific papers where all the data, metadata, databases and datasets for each and every paper can be obtained with a simple request."

    AN excellent thought, but just a little wide of the mark.

    The real answer is simple, and inevitable if we are to cut out the rot that is the Global Conspiracy of Scientific Elitism and Secrecy...

    When Sarah Palin is the next President of the World, she will make it mandatory that the Data from every scientific experiment, conducted anywhere, is fed via rss to every computer connected to the Intertubes, as soon as the Data are entered onto the scientists' computers.

    What a wonderful world it will be - then all Blog Science will publish the results before the Team Conspirators are able to themselves, and humanity will progress in leaps and bounds.

    I tremble with delight at the very anticipation!

    Bernard J.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Baron von Monckhofen11 October 2009 at 06:35

    That's what happens when women read books.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Hey blog-Scis, we better come to the defense of S. Mc’n’tyred, who is being pilloried by the elitist academic commies for not publishing in their greenie-controlled, peer-censored tabloids. We must list the myriad reasons for refusing to play into their self-serving charade.

    I’ll start with the Groucho Marx manifesto: I refuse to publish in any journal that would accept my paper.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ouch I hurt because I am female...last time I checked.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Baron von Monckhofen12 October 2009 at 00:04

    Fizzy water solution,

    The so-called "peer-reviewed scientific journals" did not manage to reveal the gigantic Briffa tree fraud. McIntyre's blog science did. Hence blogs are obviously superior to traditional bed-wetting journals. Why should McIntyre have to publish his findings in an inferior medium? He has already published were it counts!

    Blog science rules!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Baron von Monckhofen12 October 2009 at 00:30

    Ouch, our hero Lord Monckton admitted he had been lying...


    "I'm just showing you lies after lies,'' said Monckton, in a speech to 50 people at a luncheon meeting of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, held at the Delta Regina.

    But to admit such a thing really proves what great moral integrity the man has, so we can still safely believe in anything he says. And if he lies, it is only to compensate a tiny bit for all the massive lies spread by the cry-wolf bedwetters who want to enslave and wipe out humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Baron von Monckhofen12 October 2009 at 12:06

    Ouch, this time I am really disappointed by Lord Monckton. Here he sounds like some kind of bloody tree hugger.

    But at least he is still for coal.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Ragged Edge of Reality12 October 2009 at 17:21

    It was great to see how the noble mining engineer, blog scientist, and hockey stick wacker extraordinaire, Dr. Reba McIntyre, blew the warminst troll Tom P and the rest of the RealClimate LIARS out of the water as she meandered her way through one of her several dozen posts on the Yamal super-conspiracy. Compared 'em to that most famous of red commie outers John Cleese she did. Absolutely and utterly devastating, to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Proxy music.

    Prime Minister Harper isn't fooled by sphagetti graphs either.

    Let's follow Canada's example and not that of the G77 walkers.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Spaghetti is European, and therefore both un-American and fraudulent.

    Bravo to Harper for showing the loyalty and courage to stand beside Bush and the Republicans after the no-doubt fraudulent U.S. election.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Baron von Monckhofen21 October 2009 at 04:23

    This is maybe not about spagetti, but Rush Limbaugh is really a helluva guy.

    This guy from The New York Times, if he really thinks that humanity is destroying the planet, humanity is destroying the climate, that human beings in their natural existence are going to cause the extinction of life on Earth -- Andrew Revkin. Mr. Revkin, why don't you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Very exited! I think I've maybe worked out how they proberbly must of done the spag graph. Waht I did was I cooked it then I rapped each piece in cling film so it didnt stick then i cd do the wiggles witghout any loops and tangles.

    HTH

    Summer x

    ReplyDelete
  50. Bravo on persevering with your experiment SF.

    That's just the kind of practical research global fraud Algore hates to hear about.

    Btw, does anyone know Algore's first name?
    I need it to give a rebuttal I'm writing some extra punch.

    However are you aware that your innocently discarded cligfilm may end up being ingested by baby swans (ooops ... I originally typed injested ... but maybe it's not that funny. Still who's gonna know)? There's some horrific pictures on the internet I would link to, but wouldn't want to offend owners of disposable lighters with.

    No, a much better and safer bet is to save it all up until you have a big ball about 6 ft wide, then burn it (with any other dangerous household plastics)on a windy day. This helps blow any noxious, life-threatening smoke away.

    You'll be better able to tell if it's windy enough by picking a day that a lot of neighbours hang their washing out.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I see the posting rate here is dropping back to about one per month. To fill in the time while we're waiting for Inferno's muse to favour him, might I suggest some puzzles with a Denialist theme, say, a crossword?

    I'll contribute the first clue...

    'Mixed up website phat twat tush-wit run by friend of Viscount Monckton, the confused Hon Nasty Twat. '(16) and (7,5)

    ReplyDelete
  52. Baron von Monckhofen23 October 2009 at 10:45

    Yet more evidence for the suffocating oppression of the Al Gorian inquisition junta:

    An number of communist-run "scientific" organizations, which in reality are just front-groups for the New World Order, sign a letter to the Kenyan president dictator Obama.

    Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is
    occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the
    greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver.


    Who is stupid enough to believe this crap???? Just look at the names of some of the signers:
    Grove, Berenbaum, Quesenberry, Brown, Huelsenbeck. A bunch of loony treehuggers, the whole bunch of them!

    ReplyDelete
  53. This just reminded me that we need to ask another question: What was the exact software Yamal et al. were using for their warmist work?

    This is, of course, a very important question.

    -- bi

    ReplyDelete
  54. Baron,

    Rush can certainly be funny, as you note, but when you really think about it this is very serious. Not only is AGW just an excuse for population control as Revkin admits, population control is the one unifying theme of the entire leftist agenda. Note that they want schools to teach our kids to use birth control and encourage abortions, and don't like marriage unless it's between people of the same sex who can't produce children -- why do liberals hate children so much? And now they're trying to bring universal health care to America so the government can decide who gets life saving treatment based on their potential value to society and CO2 emissions like they do in England. And why would anyone oppose tax cuts when Ronald Reagan proved they increase government revenue? Perhaps because they want to make it too expensive to have children? And they want us to drive tiny cars that could never hold three kids, strollers, soccer gear, groceries, an entertainment system and cupholders and armrests for each seat, let alone a man's self-respect. I could go on like this.

    Only through the lens of population control does the whole agenda make sense. And it's just scary to contemplate what they'll come up with next if they decide all these measures aren't working.

    You know, Hitler had a population control program. Wonder how that turned out?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Speaking of petitions and polls, we are winning the propaganda war. The UK Science Museum is running an online poll/petition...

    ""I've seen the evidence. And I want the government to prove they're serious about climate change by negotiating a strong, effective, fair deal at Copenhagen." You can choose to Count Me In or Count Me Out, the resulting totals will be sent to the UK Government....

    Now since our sister site WUWT featured the poll there has been a surge in the Count me Out numbers - three times as many apparently want to be counted out as counted in! So much for the so-called evidence of the so-called science museum...!

    Get over there now and Be Counted http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/proveit.aspx before the warmists censor this expression of REAL public opinion...

    ReplyDelete
  56. Ragged Edge of Reality24 October 2009 at 07:06

    Dittohead, you make great points. I hadn't considered "really thinking about it" until I heard from a reliable source, a guy I work with who talks to relatives of friends who liten to AM radio talk shows regularly, that the paramilitary wing of the IPCC has large stocks of nerve gas scattered about, and also has the pre-emptive right of control over all of Russia's nuclear weapons, should they need them. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what they might "need them" for, if you get my drift. This info has prompted me to really think about it a lot more now, and I am quite convinvced that what he says is utterly true.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Ragged Edge,

    Yeah, I've heard similar from this one guy who's a neighbour of a friend of a friend.
    He spends 8 to 10 hours a night on the internet, every day. Has done for years.

    If he doesn't know something, who does?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Thanks for the heads-up Phil.

    I just had a ball of a day thinking up every historical and Disney character I could think of, creating phoney free email accounts, and voting.

    There's 4 extra votes on our side they weren't expecting!

    ReplyDelete
  59. p.s. I did have to busk on Algore's first name since nobody's gotten back to me on my earlier question.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Baron von Monckhofen25 October 2009 at 02:35

    Chek wrote: I just had a ball of a day thinking up every historical and Disney character I could think of, creating phoney free email accounts, and voting.

    Oops, I hope you didn't think of Mickey Mouse and Napoleon, beacuse then there are two votes from each of those.

    ReplyDelete
  61. You guys are amateurs, check out this comment at Anthony's place

    anyone wanna bet the out votes are up by 1000 after a few minutes?

    Shortly after that post, in the space of 12 minutes, the 'count me outs' jump from 485 to 1496.

    Clearly this guy contacted 1,000 climate realists and got them all to vote contemperaneously! Awesome!

    ReplyDelete
  62. I made a misteak on that pole and voted count me in cuz i like to be counted in on things. My bf woz annoyd with me and did fifty count me out votes so i think its ok now. Sorry.

    Summer x

    ReplyDelete
  63. 3 piece suits is one of the best products of emensuits.com they are also the top seller and best suit supplier.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Thank you for showing this post, wonderful signifies concerning provide this type of subject style as a way to debate. Sustain excellent perform!

    ReplyDelete
  65. It is similar to very good under and possesses just about any quite a few opinion thank you for observing this unique website..

    ReplyDelete
  66. It is worse than I thought. After my comment above I did some research on various blog sites, and it appears that the whole concept of a spaghetti plant may be a fraud! This blog science is really exciting. I'm going to do some more reading now.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Thank you very much for you can share your post,the article content written very well, writes fluent,extremely is worth my study

    ReplyDelete
  68. i want to thank you for sharing this post code promo zalando belgique

    ReplyDelete
  69. Dr Inferno,

    Your post contains some remarkable insights, as usual. The Yemel Collapse goes to the heart of the AGW fraud. However, I think there is an aspect that, with respect, even you have missed. Spaghetti plants are, so I have been told, ideally suited to the Tuscany region in Italy - this explains the widespread use of freshly picked spaghetti in Italian cooking.

    However, Yamel is in SIBERIA! Think about it! How was spaghetti ever going to flourish in Siberia unless the climate was much warmer in the past? So you don't have to worry about painstaking spaghettochronology - just the presence of the plants in the first place is ample evidence that Siberia once had a mild Tuscanesque climate in the recent past.

    Who would have thought that the entire climate science ivory tower edifice would have been brought to its knees by a humble spaghetti plant?

    cheap GW2 Gold

    ReplyDelete
  70. Girls and boys can like on of those games. Of course, among them soccer, martial, including car games can say. With this in mind special game will take place only girls have created for the games for girls category. This category dress up games, makeover games, coloring games, etc.. by barbie games drawcard for'll keep you ladies. Sometimes I go into the kitchen while you're cooking, sometimes you can edit the game from the start to design your room to be greeted with. Carefully selected by our editors for girls games I 'u to follow.

    ReplyDelete