Harsh but unfair.
posted by Unknown at 7:01 PM |
BeckAre you out of you mind. He's a flaming loon and totally dishonest. He's not a conservative. He's bullshitting.He gets hell over a Catallaxy for being a douchbag.
"And on a political note: the use of a levy to raise money to repair flood damage is probably a good idea from the point of view of reminding people that there is a specific cost to events that are linked to climate change."http://opiniondominion.blogspot.com/2011/02/nature-articles-on-floods-snow-and.htmlMate, he pulls all his "opinion" on everything from Catastrophic Man-Mad Global Warming to Joooooos from the Guardian and the Age.He agrees with the Left that ordinary Australian working families need to be hurt in order to get it through their obviously-thicker-than-his skulls that Catastrophic! Man! Made! Glowball! Warming! is REAL!!!11!!!!Come on mate.
Well, this was a endorsement that was a bit out of the blue, but thank you very much.
He agrees with Chuck Johnson that the American Right are dangerous insane extremists, is a Tim Lambert Deltoid fanboi, calls Bolt a "smear merchant" for calling attention to the ClimateGate emails, is a dedicated Warmy who believes we thick-headed "deniers" NEED to be "hurt" in order to get it through to us that Catastrophic! Man! Made! Global! Warming! is REAL!!!!111!!!, hates Tony Abbott, thinks the LNP needs to "purge itself" of "climate deniers", conflates CAGW skeptics with One Nation supporters......have you even LOOKED at his blog, Beck?
Beck:This is perhaps the worst post you've ever done.Take some deep breaths and try again.Steve is despised over at Catallaxy for being a dishonest, deceitful douche
Beck,you need to get out of the sun.
BeckHas the definition of "conservative" changed overnight?
Jeez, that's a rather strident reaction to a simple suggestion that people take a look at Opinion Dominion. As you've no doubt noticed, I have endorsed nothing written at OD.If Steve is regarded as a douche by the Catallaxy crew that might just be a badge of honour. I was once on the Catallaxy blogroll but the link was removed and I was savaged by Jason Soon for daring to write factual posts about one of the site's then bloggers.
You've been had, Becky.
BeckTake it easy. Jason's a good guy and he doesn't own the site anymore.The stuff people are saying about Steve is only known to them because he's de-camped at Catallaxy and posts drivel, sometimes quite disturbing obsessive drivel.He's highly dishonest posing as a conservative when he's anything but.
People equate his conservatism to“ Hi Alan, I’m Steve from B and would like to talk you about why I dislike Tony Abbott”In other words he poses as a conservative but is really a partisan leftwing rat with few scruples. In the past few years since he’s been posting comments at Catallaxy he has never once criticized the ALP or Greens and is always highly partisan against the conservatives who he claims to support. Don’t believe a word he says. Ever!
Can all you anonymous posters click the "Name/URL" option below the comment form and pick a pseudonym?It's very easy.
Although Steve can sometimes be a bit nutty at The Cat, I also find his blog to be quite interesting. I'm not sure about the "conservative" bit, but I will pay "thoughtful".I realised you weren't talking about me when you said "doesn't go over the top" and "measured". What's the fun in blogging if you can't occasionally cut loose?
Ironic that Beck is using my name in vain when I am one of the few Catallaxy commenters who actually likes steve and his blog. Yes he is thoughtful. Is he conservative? I guess in a sort of school-marmish way
Anonymous:I agree with you 100% re Opinion Dominion. He can hand out all the sly barbs , but he can’t take criticism. He didn’t post the following questions I asked: [ I find it absolutely impossible to believe that you’re ‘conservatively-minded’ as you claim. Your snide remarks about Andrew Bolt, and your hostility towards Tony Abbott says the opposite. Yours are the weasel words. Have you noted the challenges to the climate science over recent years? Have you seen the facts give the lie to the models and the dogma? The whole house of cards is built on the Hockey Stick graph , and the scientists who put it out. Have you read the [unrefuted---by science, anyway ] claims that the algorithm used by that team is designed to always produce the hockey stick shape, and always expunge the Medieval Warm Period, no matter what the input data? Have you not seen the fudged graph that deliberately hides the fact that from 1960, tree rings proved unreliable as proxies for temperature, and therefore could not be relied upon for past temperatures---making the warming trend on which the whole CO2-induced warming alarmism depends--- itself unreliable? No starting point---no trend. We don’t know if it’s significantly warmer now, because we don’t know how warm it was back then. Have you not seen the NASA research that finds that 50% of the Arctic warming [ and much of the glacier melt as well] is from black carbon---soot---not CO2? Why do you think your alarmists are not going all out to do what that science urged---to deal with the burning of wood, forests etc---to stop or slow down the Arctic melt ---- their icon for CO2-induced global warming [ polar bears and all that ]. The warming in the Arctic is said to have a great effect on other systems far from the Arctic, so why is mitigation of that not an alarmist’s imperative? Could it be that to do so might be too successful---thereby showing the world that CO2 is a minor part of the problem? Have you seen the recent research by the top scientists in the field, that shows that the ocean heat content is not increasing---the oceans are not warming ? For the globe to be warming significantly, the oceans must be warming, as the lower troposphere must ---and neither are---there’s no hotspot. Sea level rise is also not accelerating, as it would have to be if the earth was warming , and causing thermal expansion of the oceans. So why do you not take these developments into account---why do you think Australian ‘journalists’ except for a few, deliberately keep this information from the Australian people? Why are you still a true believer in the high priests of CO2-induced GW, when they have been shown to have destroyed raw data, rather than give other scientists a chance to replicate their research ---when they refuse to comply with FOI requests, when the law requires them to do so---and when inquiries established to look into their methods etc, are such that even a 12 year old child would recognise them as shams. Are you in favour of feeding only propaganda that fits the alarmist view to Australians?]
Post a Comment