Yahoo Clever wird am 4. Mai 2021 (Eastern Time, Zeitzone US-Ostküste) eingestellt. Ab dem 20. April 2021 (Eastern Time) ist die Website von Yahoo Clever nur noch im reinen Lesemodus verfügbar. Andere Yahoo Produkte oder Dienste oder Ihr Yahoo Account sind von diesen Änderungen nicht betroffen. Auf dieser Hilfeseite finden Sie weitere Informationen zur Einstellung von Yahoo Clever und dazu, wie Sie Ihre Daten herunterladen.

All Black fragte in EnvironmentClimate Change · vor 1 Jahrzehnt

Can we trust anything from RealClimate.org?

"Scientists, Data Challenge Real Climate Touted Antarctic 'Warming' Study - 'It is hard to make data where none exist' - January 21, 2009

Schmidt Admits Defeat in Climate Debate! Tough New York City crowd reverses view on man-made warming and converts to skepticism following debate featuring RealClimate.org's Schmidt– March 2007

RealClimate.org's Michael Mann incorrectly Cites Mt. Kilimanjaro as evidence of man-made global warming - Providence Journal - September 25, 2008

Reality Check: Mann's using years old Mt. Kilimanjaro talking points. Mann's “facts” on Kilimanjaro are outdated.

UK Spectator: 'Hysterical' Real Climate's Michael Mann's Hockey Stick 'most discredited study in history of Science – February 7, 2009 – By Melanie Phillips

Pielke Jr.: Details RealClimate.org's & Others Engage in 'Character Assassination' of Skeptical Scientists'

Real Climate 'has clearly aligned itself squarely with one political position on climate change' - January 14, 2005 - Excerpt: The site's focus has been exclusively on attacking those who invoke science as the basis for their opposition to action on climate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myron Ebell. Whether intended or not, the site has clearly aligned itself squarely with one political position on climate change."

Why would anyone quote from this warmist propaganda blog as "evidence" of global warming? It's like proving the truth about Stalin's USSR by quoting from Pravda!

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3661

Update:

Antarcticice:

Ad Hominem attacks are not much of a rebuttal either. Getting back to the point: Perhaps this will help:

"RealClimate.ORG is run by Environmental Media Services and by Betsy Ensley.

EMS is primarily an organization to pay for junk science about food and beverages, often hired by food companies to damage their competitors.

RealClimate.ORG has several sisters founded by the same Betsy Ensley, including WomenAgainstBush.ORG and BushGreenWatch.ORG. When Ensley was campaigning against Ashcroft, her secretary was Kalee Kreider who is now Al Gore's spokesperson. Al Gore's former press secretary, Arlie Schardt, is on the EMS's board of directors, too."

Update 2:

Bob326 - since you didn't understand the sentence I'll paraphrase it for you.

RealClimate.org is known for ad hominem attacks and false straw man arguments "refuting" skeptic arguments without answering them.

On my Miskolczi question there is no reference to "a realclimate link" so everything else you say is false. the link was actually to http://pathstoknowledge.net/2010/01/13/ferenc-misk... Finally you say "I'm not going to even argue realclimate.org's merit!" Well, that was the question.

4 Antworten

Relevanz
  • Anonym
    vor 1 Jahrzehnt
    Beste Antwort

    No, Realclimate.org is a front for global warming propaganda which serves many of the activists currently pushing the doomsday scenarios.

    There are far better sources of information out there than some PR front. I would recommend steering well clear.

  • bob326
    Lv 5
    vor 1 Jahrzehnt

    I'm not sure why anyone would quote from climaterealist.com, cimatedepot.org, SPPI.com, or wattsup either.

    "The site's focus has been exclusively on attacking those who invoke science as the basis for their opposition to action on climate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myron Ebell."

    I know these are words, and they seem to be in a rough sentence-like structure, but I can't seem to parse such idiocy. In fact, it's perhaps the dumbest sentence I've ever read here.

    On your Miskolczi question, a realclimate link was referenced. In it contained a simple overview of why Miskolczi doesn't know what he's talking about. BUT, you were so blinded by the fact that the URL contained the word "realclimate", that you didn't even check to see that it was a wiki, that the person who wrote it is not a contributor to realclimate, and that the arguments made could largely be found in undergrad physics and atmos texts.

    I'm not going to even argue realclimate.org's merit -- you couldn't care less if a source was reliable or not. If you did, you wouldn't read wattsup, SPPI and climaterealist.com.

  • vor 1 Jahrzehnt

    "The site's focus has been exclusively on attacking those who invoke science as the basis for their opposition to action on climate change, folks such as George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myron Ebell."

    WOW so they have called idiots, idiots, good for them.

    I still remember a denier that not so long ago posted a video of an Obama speech to Congress, saying "look how they all laugh when climate is mentioned" the sad thing was that the "laugh" was well into the speech as was clearly linked to the mention of Senator Inhofe.

    Deniers hear what they want to hear like the video of Danny Glover linking Haiti to GW, one small problem nowhere in the video did Glover say any such thing, of course only a denier would think Glover was reliable source of information in the first place.

    And Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. (long known as a denier) and linked to many denier organizations is not really much of a rebuttal.

  • vor 1 Jahrzehnt

    The asker should have also pointed out to Google "realclimate censorship" as well. That should help formulate your answer.

Haben Sie noch Fragen? Jetzt beantworten lassen.