Green Options › Forums › Climate Change › News & Policy › Which skeptic do you find the most and least tolerable?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Which skeptic do you find the most and least tolerable?

post #1 of 197
Thread Starter 

A few times I've seen people compliment Jim Z for the quality of the content of his answers on Yahoo Answers.  One person even suggested that it would be nice if he participated on our discussion forum here.  This puzzles me a bit, because Jim's answers basically consist of "global warming is a scam, and I'm a geologist so I know!".  In a recent question I asked about whether we should continue to rely on fossil fuels (specifically coal power plants), Jim's response was

 

"You don't like coal precisely because it is available to us. With leftists, it is more about limiting our economy. You people won't be happy until we are shooting bow and arrows at... Wait, you won't let us do that anymore. You won't be happy unless we are back in the woods picking berries....Wait, that isn't allowed either. We might interfere with the mating habits of the Western Arroyo Toad. Why don't we all agree that you won't be happy period.

No other country would willingly discard its available energy resources but that is precisely what the left wants us to do. It isn't about global warming. It is about leftists political nonsense."

 

I mean come on, not only can the guy not agree that we shouldn't continue our reliance on coal and other fossil fuels, but his answer is nothing more than a paranoid political rant!

 

I can't say he's the least tolerable - I'll give that to Jello for his combination of stupid answers, cheating the voting system, impersonating others, abusing the reporting system, and the fact that the other deniers worship him.

 

I think the most tolerable is probably Eric C.  Although his source is usually some biased site like ICECAP, at least he tries to make scientific arguments, and his political rants are usually pretty minimal.  Plus as far as I can tell, he doesn't play games like Jello and James E and other deniers do.

 

Who are your most and least tolerable "skeptics"?  For those who don't participate on Yahoo Answers, feel free to chime in with examples of people you know who are skeptical of man-made global warming.

post #2 of 197

I try to be a tolerable denier. Acknowkledging that burning fossil fuels does contribute to forcing significantly, but also acknowledging that we may be unable to control global warming merely by reducing emissions, and particularly expressing doubt that we will accomplish this if we wait to mid century before we have brought emissions down to 30% of 1990 levels.

 

I am aware that this is seen by many as demoralization of the troops, but very honestly, we all know that the longer we run with man made forcing, the greater the impact of feedback mechanisms that have the potential to take us down the road with or without our emissions. We can not say that we have not yet passed a tipping point. This is the very reason early action matters.  If we do not acknowledge this, we present  an assumption that we could wait forever and still succeed.

post #3 of 197

I'd say James E is the worst...have you ever been to any of his links he posts? They are complete and utter garbage... there's this one powerpoint presentation that he likes to use that made me cringe. I wish I could find it, I'm sure you'll see it soon...anyway most of the errors should be obvious to anyone who has taken intro college chem (which James apparently hasn't, since he often makes it clear that he learned the 'science' of his responses in grade school.) One thing in particular from that presentation is the conclusion that CO2 concentrations cannot in fact rise, since it turns into H2CO3 in the ocean, then goes eventually to CO3-2, where it is sequestered permanently as CaCO3, or something to that effect.

 

Jim z is annoying as well since I have never once seen him come up with an explanation for global warming, unlike most of the "it's the sun" folks. Maybe he has, but it seems his main argument is just that the climate is not static. I guess being that he is a geologist and spent a long time studying paleoclimate history I can understand that gut feeling, but on the other hand a geologist should recognize that every change had a cause.

 

I'd say "Michael is ninga" is the most tolerable since he is obviously a 16 year old kid who has no idea of the basic science. He's just fun to mess with.

 

Fun question, thanks for posting ^^


Edited by dawei - Wed, 31 Dec 2008 06:06:47 GMT
post #4 of 197
Thread Starter 

Yeah James E is right near the top because he really doesn't understand the science and thinks he really does.  I agree his links are utter garbage, and he always posts the same ones.

 

Ninga kid bugs me because I hate to see a young person so utterly closed-minded.  It's obvious he just sees it as an 'us vs. them' underdog kind of game.  And he worships idiots like Jello and James.  And his hypothetical questions like "would you wear a mask if it would stop global warming?" are just freaking stupid.  He's nowhere near the worst and certainly harmless, but also bugs me.

 

Jim z's whole argument is "we don't understand the science" and "climate has changed in the past".  He completely ignores the physics of the issue, and thinks he's allowed to because he's a geologist.  Apparently the laws of physics don't apply in the world of geology.

post #5 of 197

Just curious, do you know anything about Jello? Has he ever mentioned that he has a degree in anything?

 

I'm blocked from his questions, but most of his answers don't seem much better than others like peterjungman or Sam. I don't really get why he gets as much respect as he does among the deniers; is it only because he's top answerer? I've never seen him debate anything with anyone, but maybe he was more active before I joined...

post #6 of 197

Of course Jello has a $50 PhD.  The source is here www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/dm0.html

post #7 of 197
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteshell001:

Of course Jello has a $50 PhD.  The source is here www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/dm0.html


 

Haha nice.

 

Jello's username used to be "Mr. Jello".  Then one day out of the blue he changed it to "Dr. Jello", which is why I changed mine from  "Dana1981" to "Dana1981, Master of Science".  I figured if he was going to incorporate a fake doctorate into his username, I might as well incorporate my real degree into mine.

 

His answers have always been garbage.  He mostly relies on the argument that scientific predictions are no better than random guesses.  In terms of quality, his answers are among the worst in the denier camp.  Always have been (now that you mention peter.jungman, he's near the top of my worst denier list too).

 

However, he successfully cheated the voting system with multiple accounts to give himself a ton of best answers and become the 'top answerer' in global warming.  There were many questions where he had 20 best answer votes and nobody else had more than 2.  It was quite transparent.

 

The only reason the other deniers think so highly of him is because Jello is a fellow denier who's become the 'top answerer' in the section.  They don't really care how he did it, and they don't care how stupid his answers are.  To them it's all just a game.

 

The funny thing is he slowed down for a while and I think he stopped manipulating the voting system - at least as much as he had been.  It's quite possible that I've become the top answerer in the section, but YA hasn't updated the top 10 listing in probably almost a year now.  I don't know what the deal is with that.


Edited by dana1981 - Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:26:01 UTC
post #8 of 197

What happened to Randall?  He had a ubiquitous presense then seemed to drop off the face of the Earth.  He was pretty annoying.  Jello is intolerable because of the sheer effort he applies toward thwarting the spread of accurate information.  But he and his denialist brethren only fool the casual poster, and probably then not for very long, as what is presented now in the real world contradicts what Jello and Co. say.  I think our best tactic in dealing with deniers, tolerable or not, is posting good questions on Yahoo and then making sure some good answers are available for all to see. 

post #9 of 197
Thread Starter 

Oh yeah Randall.  I don't know, he did just suddenly vanish.  Definitely don't miss him - especially since he was another of those who blocked everyone with a different perspective than his.  And to call his understanding of the science lacking would be a major understatement.

post #10 of 197
Thread Starter 

Oh I'd also like to add that Poncho Pete is emerging as a candidate for the worst denier award.  Not only does he constantly ask the same "question" about global warming being a myth because it's cold in freaking Winnipeg in the freaking winter (imagine that!), but it's also been explained to him that the temperatures he's citing are actually slightly above average, and that Winnipeg has a long-term warming trend.  So he

 

  1. Doesn't understand the difference between weather and climate.
  2. Refuses to learn the difference.
  3. Asks the same "question" over and over again.
  4. Denies the data which disproves his point anyway.

 

It doesn't get much worse than that.

post #11 of 197

aww don, i dont mind you, or the few other true skeptics, at all! thats debate, we need it.

 

personal attacks aside, my pet hate is all this political conspiracy stuff, as it taps straight into many people's distrust of authority. i think james does some real damage, as he manages to look authoritative at a glance to an uneducated person, and gives awful links, but they are there looking like backup for what he says.....


Edited by gerda - Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:35:09 GMT
post #12 of 197
Thread Starter 

Yeah so few deniers actually provide links.  James' are terrible, but he provides a bunch of them, which probably makes people less likely to click each one, but also makes it seem as though he's well-informed.  It's a clever tactic.  If people click the links, they're misinformed.  If they don't click the links, it still seems like he's speaking from an informed position.  And all he has to do is copy and paste the same links in each answer.

post #13 of 197
Thread Starter 

Oh so by the way, it appears that Randall's account has been suspended.  So perhaps he's given up, or perhaps he's still around under another ID.

post #14 of 197

I believe James E is the worst because all his links utter garbage. (dawei is right)

While Jello is fond of cheating in the system and also post garbage links. Jim Z always believes that Global warming has ended without even supporting his belief.

 

I really think Jello is not really a scientist or expert in science because he hides his Q & A.

 

And yes, i noticed that Randall disappeared, maybe he just realized that Global Warming is really man-made. lol :)

 

Look at this question Jello answered, he really is a cheater!:

 

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvnzPzuQAlgou2x2GYQNWLAjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20080924083922AA0TbYW

 

Also, what happened to other great GW believers like Bob, Trevor, etc.? I noticed that the believers are lessening!

post #15 of 197
Thread Starter 

Trevor left about a year ago.  I think he moved and was working on his new house out in the country or something like that, and just never came back to YA.

 

Bob last posted about a month ago.  He was using the Politics section a lot during the presidential election, but I think he got tired of the Global Warming section.

post #16 of 197

i think we all have out 'burn out' point on yahoo. i nearly reached it recently, but having this site for 'r&r' has revitalised me! dana seems to have lasted a lot longer than average - yo get a life geezer ;-)

 

 

post #17 of 197
Thread Starter 

Hah yeah, I'm going on something like 2 years on YA now.  Back when I started I remember thinking 'these guys know so much more than me about the subject', but I learned a lot from guys like Trevor.  He was the best because he was actually doing climate science research and really good at explaining the science.  Very polite and patient too.  I miss having him around.

 

I've almost reached a burn out point on several occasions (especially when my account has been suspended), but I'm stubborn.  I don't want to let the deniers turn YA global warming into a propaganda misinformation site.  I agree having this site really helps, because it allows for real discussion when it's not possible on YA. 


Edited by dana1981 - Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:01:04 GMT
post #18 of 197

Ha ha....none of you would know my least tolerable skeptic because he is a columnist for a local paper here.  He is absolutely obnoxious with his opinions not only that Global Warming does not exist...but that "if" it did it would not be due to human action.

 

He even goes as far as to post pictures of Polar Bear cubs with sarcastic captions like "Save the Polar Bears...stop driving you car".  Luckily he is usually more interested in politics so we only get his ramblings on Global Warming and Environmental Concern once in a while.

 

Funniest part about it is that after despising him for a long time he is now my son's soccer coach!


Edited by pureshop - Fri, 02 Jan 2009 01:18:21 GMT
post #19 of 197
Thread Starter 

Oh man that's rough because a columnist has a forum to say whatever he wants and you can't argue or do anything about it.  And a lot of people think it must be right because they read it in the newspaper!

 

I think when I was at one of those soccer games I'd have to demonstrate how to correctly kick a soccer ball and 'accidentally' kick the guy in the groin.

post #20 of 197

'He has a blog too!  Ack!

 

Yeah, I have to be nice for the "communities" sake :)

post #21 of 197

Well, at least you have the opportunity to write a "Letter to the Editor" when he gives you a wide enough opening.  If you notice your son being benched afterwards that would be awkward, though, wouldn't it?

 

Perhaps after the soccer season you will have an opportunity to talk with him about this.  You won't necessarily change his mind, but perhaps you can give him something to chew on and material for a column or two.

post #22 of 197
Thread Starter 

I think eric c is trying to make me reconsider my opinion of him.  He asked 2 recent "questions" where he obviously learned nothing from the answers, and I'm sure had no intention of learning anything.  But at least he's still trying to make scientific arguments.  It's just that he doesn't recognize what's a valid argument and what's baloney, and he wants the baloney to be true, so he believes it.

 

It's kind of frustrating when someone seems like they're trying to learn and understand, but in reality are only interested in denial arguments.

post #23 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by dana1981:

I think eric c is trying to make me reconsider my opinion of him.  He asked 2 recent "questions" where he obviously learned nothing from the answers, and I'm sure had no intention of learning anything.  But at least he's still trying to make scientific arguments.  It's just that he doesn't recognize what's a valid argument and what's baloney, and he wants the baloney to be true, so he believes it.

 

It's kind of frustrating when someone seems like they're trying to learn and understand, but in reality are only interested in denial arguments.

There is no such thing as a climate skeptic who is trying to learn and understand.  They all just say that to appear objective and provide what is a very transparent cover for the fact that their minds are made up.  People who are actually trying to learn and understand don't make a big deal about it, they just go out and read things. 

 

post #24 of 197
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcnp58:

There is no such thing as a climate skeptic who is trying to learn and understand.  They all just say that to appear objective and provide what is a very transparent cover for the fact that their minds are made up.  People who are actually trying to learn and understand don't make a big deal about it, they just go out and read things. 

 

 

Well I think it's fairer to say there's no such thing as a long-term climate "skeptic" who's trying to learn and understand.  There are people who haven't researched much but read some "skeptic" garbage and start leaning toward being "skeptics", but are still willing to learn.

 

But those are true skeptics, whereas people like eric c are deniers.

 

And to be fair, there have been one or two deniers who have eventually changed their minds.  One I know of was named Sgt. Pepper I think, but later changed his username.  He was a denier, but never a very vehement one, and eventually came around to accept AGW and vanished from the YA global warming section.  Rare, but it happens every so often.

post #25 of 197
Thread Starter 

FYI, Mephistopheles, who claims to be Randall's friend, is likely Randall's new ID.

post #26 of 197

Dr Jello and James E have got to be the most annoying ones iv come across in my short time on YA.

Im looking forward to looking into this message board now iv got some free time (been revising a different module all day) as i have a feeling it is going to be alot more interesting than YA which has got very samey to me even though iv only been using it a week! How many times do people have to ask if something is a hoax? and mention Al Golore. Sigh.

post #27 of 197
Thread Starter 

Hah yeah YA gets very repetetive.  You can count on a ton of "where's global warming?" questions during the winter.  And there's always the "is global warming real or a hoax?" questions.  And the deniers always ask the same dumb rhetorical questions like "when will people realize that global warming is a hoax?".  The rest of us try to keep it intersting by asking better questions, but this is definitely a better site for interesting climate change discussions, by far.

post #28 of 197

I'm starting to find all of them annoying. I completely obliterate their aruments,  and they just drone on as before. Still not citing any sources to back up their twaddle.


Edited by quitenormal - Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:00:43 GMT
post #29 of 197
Thread Starter 

Are you on Yahoo Answers, quitenormal?

 

I still think eric c is the most tolerable, but he's been getting worse lately.  Though he did earn some brownie points because in an email, he mentioned that off the record, he thinks Jello is a joke.

post #30 of 197

Yes dana1981 I am on YA but I'm starting to find it all a bit tedious.

 

The problem is, that people can answer questions however they like, they're never held accountable for their BS. Eric C is a classic example, with his PDO theory, which both you and I have pointed is a total crock, but that doesn't stop him.

 

Are there any other forums where there is a mix of climate change proponents/contrarians?


Edited by quitenormal - Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:46:54 GMT
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: News & Policy
Green Options › Forums › Climate Change › News & Policy › Which skeptic do you find the most and least tolerable?