Comments for Climate Sanity

Comment on Why I am not worried about Japan’s nuclear reactors – From MIT’s Dr. Josef Oehmen by rudraksha

rudraksha — Sun, 12 May 2013 06:24:44 +0000

good

Comment on Why I am not worried about Japan’s nuclear reactors – From MIT’s Dr. Josef Oehmen by RUDRAKSHA

RUDRAKSHA — Sun, 12 May 2013 06:23:38 +0000

ver good

Comment on The Thermohaline Circulation Only Stops for Extreme, Unrealistic Models by tommoriarty

tommoriarty — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:20:17 +0000

I am not addressing Al Gore’s politics outside of the politics of global warming. I really don’t care what his views are concerning other issues. (Although I would take an interest if he were to run for President again.)

However, if you understood “his reasonings clearly” about global warming, then you would know he is wrong.

Comment on The Thermohaline Circulation Only Stops for Extreme, Unrealistic Models by Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:55:21 +0000

I personally can’t stand Al Gore’s politics, however I can see his point of view, and I understand his reasonings clearly. He makes a very good point of the consequences that could happen if global wharming continues. Personally, I find Gore easy to listen to.

Comment on Computer simulations said “Yes,” Reality said “No” by tommoriarty

tommoriarty — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 01:47:07 +0000

TailOfTheOx,

Thanks for the comment.

I noticed that your IP address and Don’s IP address are nearly identical.

Don’s: ###.###.##.148
TailOfTheOx’s: ###.###.##.151

Best Regards,
Tom Moriarty
ClimateSanity

Comment on Computer simulations said “Yes,” Reality said “No” by tommoriarty

tommoriarty — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 01:33:53 +0000

Don,

In your first comment you implied that I use WattsUpWithThat as my sole source of information because you read a single post in which I quoted WUWT. Face it, that is a non-sequitor, and there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

In your second comment you lectured me about the courtesies of scientific discourse. This, coming after the limp insult of your first comment,. If you want courtesy, don’t open by insulting.

Now, if you want to comment here again, bring forth some useful and/or interesting information and leave the insults and condescending lectures at home. If you have data, cough it up. You are a professor at a major university, try to act like one. If not, you will become only the second person I have ever blocked from commenting on this blog.

Tom Moriarty
ClimateSanity

Comment on Computer simulations said “Yes,” Reality said “No” by tailoftheox

tailoftheox — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:51:31 +0000

Wow. That question from Don was reasonable and you totally blew up and did a personal attack.

Comment on Computer simulations said “Yes,” Reality said “No” by Don

Don — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:39:49 +0000

Your reply indicates that you would not look beyond WUWT. It does not follow, it is a non-sequitur, for you to suggest otherwise when you have not looked beyond WUWT. Why are you not interested in an objective investigation of what Hansen 1988 says? Instead, you attack me as being illogical. Nothing about my question is illogical. Climate science is science, and all science has standards, norms, and values that promote interaction and dialogue. Among those values are good faith and respect. Do your initial post or your response to me display respect or good faith? Yet more in the line of scientific values is to hue to the science and stay away from the personal comments. Have you hued to the science and stayed away from personal comments? Many have looked back on Hansen 1988, including Hansen himself. Were you interested in an honest assessment of these issues, why would you not look at the range of material?

Comment on Computer simulations said “Yes,” Reality said “No” by tommoriarty

tommoriarty — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 05:26:56 +0000

Hey Don,

I see you are at UC Davis.

Do they still teach anything about logic there?

If so, how can you conclude that because I referenced WUWT that I am not able to look beyond WUWT. That is a non-sequitor, is it not?

If you would like to refute the graph in this post with some facts, well then, speak up.

Comment on Criticisms of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” by tommoriarty

tommoriarty — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 05:18:58 +0000

Nonsense. Gore implies rapid sea level rise. He even employs the idea of rapid melting of Greenland glaciers to stop the thermohaline circulation. The melt rate required to stop the thermohaline circulation would also yeild an extraordinary sea level rise rate.

Stop trying to make excuses “An Inconvenient Truth.” It was a comic book scientific travesty.