I wouldn't want you to miss the up-date and link I have just tacked on the end of my post "HAF honesty" down below - it's a corker! 'By their words shall you know them'.
ADDITIONAL: Also, do not miss this site which appears to be scrupuously fair but ruthless in its analysis of HAF 'scientific' propoganda. It is not easy to pick up on all the abreviations they use but gradually you can begin to work out what they mean, but even if you 'skim-read' you will get the sense of it. The comments are always of interest, too, and I have picked up more than one reference to the apparent fact that several of the leading HAF 'scientists' are extremely reluctant to release the full details of their research, particularly the statistical basis of their hypothesis. Now why would they do that, I wonder!
I don't think Dr Patterson would thank you for putting him on your little 'HAF' black-list.
Google is your friend!
Posted by: N.I.B. | Tuesday, 13 February 2007 at 11:24
Point taken, 'NIB', and I apologise to Dr. Patterson if I inadvertantly placed him amongst the HAF fraternity. His Wikipedia entry makes interesting reading - you can reach it via:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tim_Patterson
I especially liked this: "Patterson has proven to be a difficult target for climate change alarmist activists [...]: 1) He is a well respected internationally known research scientist with 118 peer-reviewed research publications as of late 2006; 2) He is a research scientist who goes where the science takes him and not where climate change alarmist activists want him to go;..."
Well spotted, 'NIB', they also serve who only stand and nitpick!
Posted by: David Duff | Tuesday, 13 February 2007 at 12:21
It's all part of the service.
Posted by: N.I.B. | Tuesday, 13 February 2007 at 14:11
Well done, Duffers; it is a good site you've linked to. The demolition of the bullshit claim that climate models contain 200 years worth of tested physics is spot on.
Posted by: dearieme | Wednesday, 14 February 2007 at 23:24
Glad you liked it, 'Dearieme', and I have asked the hostess, if she can spare the time, to gloss some of the abbreviations they use on a fairly constant basis.
Posted by: David Duff | Wednesday, 14 February 2007 at 23:50
David
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070218-100445-1207r.htm>Thought you might enjoy Not all elected officials total idiots.
It's a new article so it might disapear fast.
Posted by: Hank_F_M | Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 00:36