Comments on: Herald shows what to avoid in climate debate

By: Geoffrey Mason

Geoffrey Mason — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:40:06 +0000

When Tom says in his letter that 10,000 years ago temperatures fell and rose almost 100 times faster than they did in the twentieth century, he implies that present day climate change is so small that it is insignificant compared to what we will have to adapt to in future glacial periods.
While the costs of geoengineering to prevent warming are enormous and these technologies are undeveloped, geoengineering to prevent global cooling would be relatively inexpensive. There are some chemicals which are not ozone damaging, but which have very strong IR bands and have very high global warming potentials and long lifetimes. These chemicals could be used to balance the very weak forcings that cause glacial and interglacial periods. This temperature drop and rise happened in the transition from the last glacial period to the present interglacial period. It could be prevented from happening again.

By: Geoffrey Mason

Geoffrey Mason — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 10:46:52 +0000

There was no significant temperature decline associated with the Younger Dryas in New Zealand.
Evidence Against a Significant Younger Dryas Cooling Event in New …
http://www.sciencemag.org › 7 August 1998Share

By: Rob Taylor

Rob Taylor — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:15:08 +0000

Unlike yourself, Andy, I actually knew Owen and regularly debated these issues directly with him. Of course I am sorry for his untimely death, but his views on AGW were both toxic and wrong, and he was paid to disseminate them.

Five-year-old email from Taylor deleted. Bloody hell, Rob Taylor! This accusation has no possibility of rebuttal, and the man’s dead, for God’s sake! This comment is off-topic. It just isn’t our cup of tea, nor is your method of conversation. Please go away. – RT

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 01:52:29 +0000

The key difference is that Michael Mann is still alive. Owen McShane is no longer with us, yet you and your fellow travelers at Hot Topic were publicly celebrating Owen’s passing with glee before he’d even been buried.

GR did actually delete your initial comment along these lines, which I thought was wise of him. However, you continued to rub it in.

Language and feelings may get strong on these blogs, but at least I’d hope that I would feel some compassion for a man who had recently died, even if I disagreed with everything he said.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 01:25:11 +0000

Rob,

I haven’t the slightest idea what you’re talking about. I guess some kind of reference is called for?

I see no connection between the two men, and by all accounts Mann was exonerated in incompetent investigations by committees hopelessly compromised by self-interest.

By: Rob Taylor

Rob Taylor — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 00:32:23 +0000

“an odious description of an honest man.”

Oh, the irony!

Owen was a serial plagiarist who, unlike Michael Mann, was never exonerated by multiple enquiries.

Of the two, I wonder who you lot continually slander for being “dishonest” and “fraudulent”??

By: Bob D

Bob D — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:05:00 +0000

Sad that people like Rob can say this sort of thing. Complete rubbish of course, but they have no respect.

A trip to a conference was funded, and they’re all trying to fabricate a conspiracy, like breathless adolescents thinking they’ve “found something”. In comparison, we have the climate change cabal wasting millions of taxpayer dollars annually on reports like the recent Kapiti Coast garbage. This year’s allocation for 2013: over $20m, just in direct research grants.

Fine, they can make fools of themselves, but they should leave Owen out of it, he can’t defend himself against this nonsense.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:02:41 +0000

It’s perfectly tasteless to say that of a man who passed away only in March, and an odious description of an honest man.

It’s interesting that Renowden’s poison-pen article, while casting aspersions on all manner of innocent business with weasel words, unconsciously highlights the huge discrepancy in funding between so-called “fossil-fuel-funded” sceptics and Greenpeace, WWF, etc., who spend billions each year. He makes me laugh.

By: Rob Taylor

Rob Taylor — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 21:31:40 +0000

That depends, Andrew, on your definition of “reputable”….

http://hot-topic.co.nz/put-it-there-pal/

By: Rob Taylor

Rob Taylor — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 15:55:25 +0000

Actually, Owen McShane was the bagman for Exxon cash laundered through the Heartland Foundation:

http://hot-topic.co.nz/puppets-on-a-string-us-think-tank-funds-nz-sceptics/