Never … I repeat never, leave the reservation:
Andy [Revkin NYT]:
Copenhagen prostitutes?
Climate prostitutes?
Shame on you for this gutter reportage. This is the second time this week I have written you thereon, the first about giving space in your blog to the Pielkes.
The vibe that I am getting from here, there and everywhere is that your reportage is very worrisome to most climate scientists. Of course, your blog is your blog. But, I sense that you are about to experience the ‘Big Cutoff’ from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.
Copenhagen prostitutes?
Unbelievable and unacceptable.
What are you doing and why?
Michael
… the details.
(Update from Kate – Mark Steyn explains…)
You must be an extremist too – then look at you reaction.
“Never get off the boat!”
— “Chef” Hicks
O’Peaceniks meet for an AGW Fraud prep/coaching session.
John Dean: This White House is bugged, Mr. President.
P: No, I’m running a tape recorder.
…-
“Obama to meet Gore on climate
WASHINGTON (AFP) – US President Barack Obama will Monday meet former vice president and international environmental crusader Al Gore, as he prepares to travel next week to the Copenhagen climate conference.
The closed-door meeting is designed to help brief Obama before he meets business and environmental leaders at the White House on Wednesday, the White House said.
Obama on Friday announced a change to his schedule and decided to visit the UN-sponsored climate talks in Copenhagen at their critical final stage on December 18, rather than this week, just after the event opens.
Gore is also a Nobel peace laureate, and will be meeting Obama two days before the president leaves for Oslo to accept his own Nobel peace prize.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091207/pl_afp/unclimatewarmingobamagore_20091207171546
Will there be a carbon tax on prostitution?
Clap and Trade.
every time you plank a prostitute a little polar bear cub is born……
..isn’t that a beautiful way of looking at it ?
This has to be some kind of a fake.
Delegates must craft a blueprint for tackling manmade “greenhouse” gases blamed for trapping solar heat and disrupting Earth’s fragile climate system.
They must also put together a funding mechanism able to channel hundreds of billions of dollars to poor nations most exposed to climate change.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/091207/world/un_climate_warming
Tim @2:26
Maybe, but unlikely. It is all too common that anyone who leaves an emotional movement gets an emotional reaction, think church, islam, communism, the carbonistas…always the same, an amotional/angry/psychotic reaction because it is in effect telling those that are left that they are wrong to FEEL the way they do.
Try that line in an argument, any argument, and see the reaction you get.
I think it was “never get outta the boat”. You need to be accurate, when quoting the greatest movie of all time.
What about the supermodel striptease story?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ceriradford/100019114/copenhagen-supermodels-take-it-off-for-climate-change-restore-ice-caps-through-power-of-striptease/
Michael must be pretty naive if he thinks that the delegates to Copenhagen are not going to fool around when they are away from the wifey for a few days. This is, after all, primarily a paid luxury holiday at the taxpayers expense for most of them. Why else does one get involved in a project like this except for the perqs?
Funny video:
http://www.breitbart.tv/videomakers-document-copenhagen-delegates-arriving-in-limousines/
is Tiger Woods going ?
http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=5125
Climate Summit Christmas Tree Ban: The UN’s PC Stance On Christmas
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/lorrie_goldstein/2009/12/07/12062686-sun.html
The 12 Days of “Glow Ball Warming” sans Christmas trees!
“As we prepare to endure 12 days of misleading rhetoric, painful self-righteousness and Canada-bashing in Copenhagen, remember this.
The biggest corporate backer of Kyoto in the U.S., which lobbied incessantly in favour of carbon-trading because it saw an easy way to make a killing was … Enron.
Ring any bells?”
Nope, no Christmas bells either!
Get prepared for an epic fraud and BS snowjob.
Cheers
Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Gee if the reports are right there’s enough wood now in Copenhagen to suck every carbon footprint away.
The heats rising, just not outdoors.
Just remember you pay for every Hooker they use.
JMO
Perhaps the sensitivity to being confronted by the two words “Copenhagen” and “Prostitute” involves a suspicion that there are several levels of meaning implied not all of which refer to sex workers.
“Is Tiger Woods going ?
No. Just his girl friends.
“But, I sense that you are about to experience the ‘Big Cutoff’ from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.”
What is that expression about never waging war with someone who buys ink by the barrel?
Mikey had better be careful.
Ghost of Ed:
Thats getting pretty naughty about Christmas time!
The more I think about it, the more the moniker “Gropenhagen” just seems to fit:
Prostitutes for free, strippers for Climate pocket change, and the “COP a feel 15” rifling your trousers for any funds you might have.
We can call it the “Gropenhagen SHAGDOWN”…all under the guise of “loving the planet”.
All flash but no substance.
Cheers
Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Maybe Vitruvius could do “Shaft” for SDA Late Night Radio. Kinda fits the theme of Copenhagen n’est pas?
Free prostitutes for the politicians? Wow, the prostitutes will be pretty tired after this thing is over. The politicians? Heck, this will be just like back home, except the taxpayers pay for it there.
Is “The Green Shaft” something you can catch in Copenhagen this week?
There -is- a reason that Climatequiddic isn’t being covered by the MSM. Centralized control of the MSM showing its hand.
Once again I’m astounded that you Canadian yahoos entirely miss the point.
The Copenhagen prostitutes are members of one of the most prestigious and orthodox communities dedicated to the promulgation of cross-connubial research.
In fact, they bring to our attention that the explusion of CO2 during connubial relations increases multi-fold with no additional carbon credits being levied.
They are simply calling for meticulous research funded by global taxpayers to the additional CO2 that occurs during oral connubial relations, genital connubial relations, and ‘other’ connubial relations.
A wide range of thermometers and other heat-measuring devices need to be procured and instrumented in such a way to make certain that every conjugal act can be taxed by the appropriate carbon footprint.
Personally, I believe we owe a tremendous debt to the venerable institution of Copenhagen prostitutes, and I specifically want to give a shout-out to Cherry, Bambi, Cristalle, and Fawn, for helping me to understand the need for this vital research.
Not saying anything on this one, I rememeber telling Kate years ago that I would not post while under the influence.
,
Sad the biggest “Whore of all”,Al Gore the Climate Whore cancelled his appearance. Been to Copenhagen a couple of times, the downtown is so full of misfits and whores of both genders how would you tell the difference between a climate whore and a whore whore. Hope they all get Clap for trade and take it home to their partners. This insanity will break the western world, which is what the enviroMENTALists want, they are self hating useless idiots and should be treated as such. Jail them all, right Mr. Suzuker.
“That ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it, Get your money for nothin’ get your chicks for free”
Mark Steyn made an astute observation. These warm-mongers appear to be a completely cheerless lot, devoid of any sense of humor.
Reminds me of the late Ayatollah Khomeini. He is famous for having stated, “there is no humor in Islam.”
Well, there seems to be no humor amongst AGW proponents, either. Can I suggest we call them “Climatollahs”?
Re: Steyn
Is “hooker crack” a pun?
This is all very strange for me, because I’ve spent my life doing climate and weather research … and I’ve known for most of that time what a bunch of weenies populate the atmospheric sciences … but for most of that time, it has been like choosing beekeeping or marine biology as your field, nobody outside the field would really care about the “culture” of the profession.
But in the past ten years the psychology of the atmospheric sciences has become crystal clear to the general public — unscientific, ideological, borderline crazy in many cases. Of course, as a conservative, I was never welcome in the field and ostracized almost before global warming even started (which was Dec 2, 1982 in case you’re wondering, that was the start of a 35F temp anomaly in eastern North America that lasted about three days and shook up the “coming ice age” mentality big time … but the public didn’t hear about it much until around 1987).
So now I get to read all these blog articles and say “no kidding, Einstein” about three hundred times a day, as the whole world finds out what I’ve known for thirty years, that my ostracism was performed by mental midgets who have gone on to do much worse things than I ever imagined (I thought they might pocket a bit of loose change, not try to bring on a world communist society).
The irony is, this will all develop into some sort of public firestorm that will go on and on for years like teenagers feuding with their parents, because the “parents” (main scientific community) will never “get” what the “teenagers” (blogosphere) is really saying, and will just go on endlessly shifting the paradigms until one of two things happens, either an ice age begins and puts this whole sham out of its misery, or China takes over the world and no further action is required.
The real question now is not to keep on “proving” the fraud over and over and over, but to start concentrating on a political response. Those people who have been enabling Harper to keep denying common sense on this issue have got to put more pressure on him and the party. We don’t have a conservative party in Canada until there is climate realism in the policy platform (and a repeal of Section 13 guaranteed). I don’t care how many Tim Hortons the man consumes at a Leafs game on his way to saluting the troops, this is all smoke-and-mirrors conservatism meant to fool the gullible.
I find it very ironic that people are “all over” this climate fraud issue (ten years late) and not even on page one of the conservative fraud issue. What’s the point? It’s like marching around in circles and firing into the centre, unless there’s a political action plan evolving.
Harper has to act on this issue to maintain any credibility as a conservative leader. Our media are so damned stupid on this issue that they need to be sent to their rooms and only invited back out when the adults are in charge. If Harper’s afraid of them, get someone who isn’t.
“Mark Steyn made an astute observation. These warm-mongers appear to be a completely cheerless lot, devoid of any sense of humor.”
The greens, the Muslims, the Left, the feminists all seem to be members of some puritan belief system. Nothing is funny to them and they do their best to suppress laughter and enforce misery on everyone around them.
Well said,Mr. O’Donnell,and I have e-mailed my thoughts to those who should know better…Now back to the hookers. I live in a neighbourhood that has an assortment of ladies for hire. The best looking ones obviously charge the most. I cannot imagine what a free one would resemble.Possibly a mish-mash of Whoopi,Rosie and Hilary?
How timely! I’ve been having an e-mail discussion with the good Dr. Schlesinger, which I’m offering for your enjoyment. I’ll identify who wrote what by preceding it with either my nom de guerre, or that of Dr. Schlesinger.
_________________________________________
NO GUFF: Dr. Schlesinger, a climate scientist, has responded to my e-mail in which I queried his threat that he and his colleagues would boycott Andrew Rivkin, science writer for the New York Times, because they could “no longer trust” him.
However, neither this nor a couple of subsequent replies came anywhere near addressing what I and millions of others are concerned about – the questionable conduct and conclusions arising from the Hadley CRU. The series of communications shown below, begins with his first response (it was apparently sent to a D. McCoy and cc’d to me with attachments to a scientific paper) and then our subsequent communications.
The last piece is my current missive to him, again asking that he address the problem of a lapse in scientific rigour.
________________________________________
DR. SCHLESINGER:
—-Original Message—–
From: Michael Schlesinger [mailto:schlesin@illinois.edu]
Sent: December 6, 2009 10:04 PM
To: Dirk McCoy
Cc: Michael Schlesinger
Subject: Re: Big Cutoff
Dear Mr. McCoy:
Thank you for your communication below. Please see the following 2000 paper for the relative roles of the sun and people in the observed global warming.
NO GUFF: Dear Dr. Schlesinger:
I repeat: despite their university degrees, climate scientists really aren’t very bright. Your response was not an answer, but a deflection.
My e-mail to you was not in regard to the science. It was about the tactics. The fact that you and your collegues are prepared to threaten and browbeat those who either question the science or who are the ‘gatekeepers’ of knowledge is what is so worrisome. They are reminiscent of what took place in the former Soviet Union and other totalitarian states where the message was always controlled and the means (radio, magazines, periodicals) to infomring the ‘masses’ were threatened in order to maintain their system.
I also find the personal attacks very disturbing and again, reminiscent of that regime. You may be familiar with Dr. Andrew Weaver of the U. of Victoria. He is currently on a local radio station and when asked why he will not publically debate Dr. Timothy Ball, he immediately resorts to a stealth ad hominem attack, saying “Well, I don’t want to disparage Tim Ball but”. He then immediately deflects to the fact that he did have a debate with another scientist in 1992 and that this scientist essentially agreed with him. And at the Munk Debates in Toronto a few days ago, Elizabeth May of the Green Party resorted to questioning the morality and honesty of Bjorn Lomborg, rather than addressing points Mr. Lomborg raised with her.
This is why science is losing the battle. We great unwashed masses are not as stupid as our betters like to think. We understand the issues – both scientific and economic – and understand that good science, real science, does not circle the wagons, form a ‘consensus’ and then attack those who rightfully, want to test and poke at the data.
Respectfully
*****
DR. SCHLESINGER
Mr. *****
Science has known for over 100 years now that burning fossil fuels – Nature’s gift to humanity, without which we would have been in a perpetual dark age – would cause global warming/climate change.
The physics underpinning this is irrefutable.
The physical evidence of human-caused global warming/climate change is all around us.
We can either choose to: (1) ignore this physics and physical evidence of global warming/climate change and, thereby, risk the irreversible outcome therefrom; or (2) face the problem squarely and begin the very difficult task of transitioning ourselves this century from the fossil-fuel age to the post fossil-fuel age.
In my public lectures and debates (my most recent debate was a month ago in Chicago), I advise the world to choose option 2.
You can read more about this in the attached 2-page paper, published in Science magazine in 2004.
___________________________________________
NO GUFF:
Dear Dr. Schlesinger;
Thank you for your response. The issue at hand is not the science, for this can and will be debated at length. The issue is the behavior of scientists which has brought the discipline into some disrepute.
As a layman, I will concede that you are better equipped than I to argue the science. This does not however, suggest that your position is infallible. In fact I would suggest that the behaviors being exhibited indicate an underlying desperation to enact political and economic change before the public widely challenges the science.
Why else would scientists such as yourself and Phil Jones attempt to blockade publication of contrary opinion by other credentialed scientists?
Why else would you send a threatening e-mail to a nationally recognized climate writer suggesting they will be excluded from sources, except to exert pressure and close off debate? I quote: “I sense that you are about to experience the ‘Big Cutoff’ from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.”
Why else would Phil Joans stonewall requests for raw data information over a period of several years and then when threatened with an official FOI request, declare that the source data had been ‘lost’?
Why would he colllude with others to have the ‘definition of peer reviewed papers re-defined’?
Your statement that “The physics underpinning this is irrefutable” does not allow the conclusion that we face “irreversible outcome”. In a system as vast and complex as earth’s – and it’s relationship to our sun – it is ludicrous to draw such a conclusion and posit it as “irrefutable”.
Over the ages, concensus scientists at various times declared many things “irrefutable” and were subsequently proven in error. Yet you would have us completely change the social, economic and political future of millions or even billions of people in order to validate your strongly held beliefs.
I’m prepared to re-evaluate the science, but it must be done without the social and political influence that has contaminated the current climate (pun intended).
It must be done by scientists able to leave their personal bias at the lab door and it must be done by scientists untainted by falsification and suppression of data and who are not prone to threaten and browbeat open inquiry of their methods and results. Let’s put it all on the table before we implement measures that will keep the poor in poverty and curtail the advancement of western and developing economies.
Should you suggest that we don’t have time, that the situation is just too critical to warrant such a re-evaluation, I would have to conclude that your overriding motive force is not science, but political ideology.
Respectfully
******
At a tree ring circus do climate-johns get tiger woodies?
Worst case scenario; Lizzie May in spandex,even a BJ would be out of the question.
Revnant Dream – your comment is frickin funny.
“Gee if the reports are right there’s enough wood now in Copenhagen to suck every carbon footprint away……”
Posted by: Revnant Dream at December 7, 2009 3:09 PM
“But, I sense that you are about to experience the ‘Big Cutoff’ from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.”?
It’s a shame to see them fight but maybe the make up sex will be worth it.
How to make amends?
Show up with a bouquet of carbon credits and whisper ‘hide the decline’ in their ears?
Ooooh Baby!
Will the AGWarmites label Lindzen as an heretic, scapegoat him, mark his forehead with the letter M, and run him outta the AGW Circus?
…-
“Lindzen and others ask APS to put their policy statment on ice due to Climategate
7 12 2009
While Copenhagen and its excesses rage, a quiet revolution is starting.
I’d show you the APS logo, but they are so [insert your own adjective here] that they demanded (in writing) the last time I used it that I not show it to anyone here.
So I’ll use this one:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/The_three_monkeys.png
Image from Wikimedia
A small group of scientists, spearheaded by Richard Lindzen of MIT and including several prominent physicists, are asking the American Physical Society to rescind its political statement on climate change:
Dear fellow member of the American Physical Society:
This is a matter of great importance to the integrity of the Society. It is being sent to a random fraction of the membership, so we hope you will pass it on.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/
My fear is this will be swept away by the raging frustrated last vestiges of the MSM.
So far their News embargo on climate gate is succeeding. With a few exceptions that will be remembered.
If not for Kate & others this would have been lost in the noise of Copenhagen.
As it is the denial continues unabated.
JMO
No Guff, thanks for that.
Phantom asks “Is “The Green Shaft” something you can catch in Copenhagen this week?” If it is, hopefully Harper doesn’t catch it.
“Ghost of Ed:
….. “Gropenhagen” just seems to fit:
Prostitutes for free, strippers for Climate pocket change, and the “COP a feel 15” rifling your trousers for any funds you might have.
We can call it the “Gropenhagen SHAGDOWN”…all under the guise of “loving the planet”.”
Guess you could say things are …………starting off with a bang!
As a gay Christian conservative, I find it amusing how the remarks about prostitutes are all about women prostitutes.
What about the men who love men?
The most difficult thing about being a gay Christian conservative in Canada today is choosing which leader is the hottest:
the aggressive and mysterious Harper- i’ll keep your poll rising
the fit silver fox Layton- cycling to work in spandex=hot
the hot professor Iggy= don’t worry Prof, I don’t need an extension…
what’s a gay Christian conservative to do?
Re; Free prostitutes.
A friend of mine is in Copenhagen on Wind-Turbine related business. He had to pay because he could not show that he was a climate campaigner.
iqbal asks: “What about the men who love men?”
Buzzkill.