Blog powered by Typepad

« More moussaka, sir? | Main | Off to see SoD! »

Thursday, 11 February 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

And as you probably know, the Canadians are having to truck the stuff in so they can host the Winter Olympics.

Meanwhile from Arizona through Arkansas and on to our side of "the common pond" we in Middle America and weighed down under tons of the stuff. Perhaps ironically, I read a headline the other day, "Washington Is Paralyzed By Record Snow."

Finally. Finally, a satisfactory explanation. I don't know how the Canadians feel about it.

Washington paralysed! So not all bad, then?

Here on the east coast, we define Global Warming as "flaky white stuff falling from the sky."

Quite right, as in, cooling is warming and, er, warming is cooling!

Not too sure how to reconcile record warmth in the satellite record with record snows in the US. Maybe the US doesn't cover the whole world?

PS weather events neither prove nor disprove climate hypotheses on either side. Unless you consider them all over a long period of time... at which point they become, by defition, climate. How confusing.

Duff, you vile little cretin, I am in absolute raptures to share this with you:

Oh- and as for you and your denier ilk, and your current smug weather observations. They are exactly that: Weather observations.

Perhaps you should research the difference between weather and climate.

'Stu', welcome to D&N, and of course you are right that individual weather events do not prove or disprove climate which was my point in the post above in which I wondered why the 'warmers' were insisting that this winter's snowfall was a 'proof' of global warming?

Now, with some reluctance and a hankie clutched to my mouth and nose, I turn to Dr. 'Little Willy', the self-styled 'Punk Scientist'. With the sort of blind stupidity that we have all grown to know and, er, love, he misses the point that on this occasion it is the 'warmers' who are using a weather event as a 'proof' of global warming.

As to his main point concerning The Guardian report of a scientific paper defending the US weather stations used to formulate global temperatures, I will make this the subject of a seperate post up above. In the meantime, I would ask all of my readers to try and work out what goes through the vacant space between Dr. 'Little Willy's' ears when he posts here, safe in the knowledge that ugly swear words apart his comments will be left alone, whilst on his own site he always wihtout exception deletes my comments. Is it autism? Frankly I have never understood what autism means but if it is allied to irrationality then Dr. 'Little Willy' qualifies.

You could try typing "autism" into a search engine. Then you would have some references and perhaps avoid making stupid comments.

'Weggis', welcome to D&N but can I warn you in a friendly way that that I do the superiority bit here!

Actually I could go to the American Psychological Association (if I was really potty) which, even as I write, is in the process of giving names to all sorts of conditions. When I can't be arsed to look for the TV 'do-flicker-thingie' I am, apparently, suffering from "sluggish cognitive tempo disorder. Also, as I am prone to almost terminal grumbling, as readers of this blog know all too well, I may be suffering with "negativistic personality disorder" - no I'm bloody well not! My complaint concerning autism is that everyone and his uncle claim to be suffering from it and there appears to be no definition strict enough to exclude loonies like me who are simply eccentric.

For details of the APA story:

I am beginning to understand the problem that Dr PS has with you. You are prone to making idiotic statements on subjects you know fuck all about.
Given that Dr PS has no expertise in this particular field, I find his diagnosis remarkably accurate.

Dr. 'Little Willy' has no problem with me, all of his problems lay within himself; perhaps he, too, has autism!

I detect no signs of Autism in Dr PS’s public writings although it is common in those with PhDs and in academia. There may be a case for the keyboard equivalent of Tourette’s, or more precisely Coprolalia, but it is not conclusive. In any case that condition does not affect the ability to reason, which is clearly something you are having some considerable difficulty with.

Really, 'Weggis'? And would you care to point to an example from above in which I display this inability to reason?

Incidentally, I once had a drill sergeant who swore all the time but if you had accused him of suffering with coprolalia he'd have given you a right mouthful! (Er, that's irony, which I mention because I suspect you may have an inability to appreciate it!)

Since you have failed to comprehend any of the numerous examples already provided by Dr PS, albeit between expletives, there seems little point in providing any more.

The comments to this entry are closed.