Comments on: Daily Telegraph

By: TCO

TCO — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:25:57 +0000

I’ve had problems at time with Spam Karma as well, but not as much as you. I wonder if some of the spanks that JohnA did on you (which I disagreed with…don’t think it crime of century…but disagreed with) lowered your rating so that now you get more auto-spankings. Maybe there is something they can do manually to qualify you as a poster? I have no problem with seeing all your posts. (I think they tend to be not that strong on the science and you admit that you can’t handle math, but still…you should have your say…and certainly you should respond to the brew crew here that Lynn-like blathers anti-GW).

By: Peter Hearnden

Peter Hearnden — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 15:15:47 +0000

Re #117, funny that, I though spam karma treated everyone the same? I’d say about a quarter of my posts to here have been ‘karmared’. As to RC, well I don’t post there much so can’t say.

While were on the topic, since posters like me also give a valid e mail why can’t we be identified by that and thus not ‘karmared’?

By: Tom Brogle

Tom Brogle — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 15:04:42 +0000

More than half my posts to RC get lost
All my posts to CA are published.

By: TCO

TCO — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:26:00 +0000

I thought you were talking about the Australian written article.

By: John Lish

John Lish — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 07:43:41 +0000

#113 – its a short radio interview. So Bob’s a bit naughty in his comments, so was Phil Jones. Tis the nature of the beast, soundbites rule over constructive argument. I wouldn’t place much value to either of their comments purely from such a limited medium.

#114 – the link to the programme was on CA. Hence I knew where the quotes came from.

By: Tim Lambert

Tim Lambert — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 05:08:16 +0000

TCO, you would have known where the Carter quote came from if CA wasn’t censoring comments.

Lee, if there is a difference between he said and what I transcribed, it’s because of my lousy transcription skills. Please let me know of any needed corrections.

By: Lee

Lee — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:41:07 +0000

This is the link to the quote I just posted (110)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today5_globalwarming_20060421.ram

It’s from a BBC radio interview with Bob Carter and Phil Jones. He uses those 8 years to explicitly dispute that warming is happening.

I just listened to it (as opposed to reading the quote I posted in 110) and find a few phrases are edited from what he said, in the quote as I posted it. They do not change the intent or meaning of what he said. He was clearly stating that warming stopped since 1998; not just in a formal sense that we havent reached temps equal to that outlier peak yet since then, but in the meaningful sense that this is evidence that warming has stopped.

IMO, it is hard to find a scientifically defensible interpretation of what he said, based on that “evidence.”

By: TCO

TCO — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:25:14 +0000

Lee read the whole article. That paragraph is extreme for the point of discussion and then is examined further. Go read it and you will see. Come back with the relevant quotes and I’ll give you a bone.

By: TCO

TCO — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:23:40 +0000

Upbraid you upside yo’ haid…

By: Lee

Lee — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:23:17 +0000

more re 93:

This is a quote from Carter. Assuming the quote is accurate, it is hard to interpret this any other way than that he is claiming that warming stopped in 1998, or at the very least that these 8 years disprove ‘deterministic models’, NOT that he is illustrating a point about time periods:

“We are at the top of a little temperature cycle. And as Professor Jones knows, since 1998, which was a peak and an extra peak because of an El Nino warm year, that since 1998 the temperature has not gone up at all. Now since 1998, in those seven years, we’ve been continuing to put out greenhouse gasses at the high industrial rate that we now do. All the computer models that is to say the deterministic ones have predicted that temperature would keep on going up from 1998 to 2005. Reality is that it hasn’t.”