2011-08-13 13:35:41One Confusedi Bastardi
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Let the thrasing of Bastardi continue!

One Confusedi Bastardi

2011-08-13 18:25:15
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.226.224

In the Gish Gallop you let him get away with this:

"Since 1978 we have been training satellites on the Earth so we can measure temperature without having to readjust things"

Can't get 'em all I suppose.

Are you sure about including the 'simpleton' reference by Tamino? You are essentially endorsing it. I know it's true, and I realize I get reminded to remove snark and inflammatory content, but maybe it'd be better without it.   

2011-08-13 19:32:59
MarkR
Mark Richardson
m.t.richardson2@gmail...
134.225.187.197

I'd cut this bit:

"There's nothing controversial or complicated about this - it's simple addition and subtraction.  Something you should really get straight before commenting on the blog of a statistics expert."

You don't mention the Tamino blog beforehand and the second sentence isn't really needed IMO.

 

 

I'd also point out how Bastardi's first law comment is the same as 'putting on a blanket won't warm you up because it can't create energy'. And in your list of his stupid comments, I'd add in the bit about how satellite data <i>are</i> adjusted, because a voltage from a satellite detector is just as useless as a volume of mercury in a thermometer: you need some model to convert to temperature.

 

For Bastardi's 'you can't measure it', I'd add the Harries, 2001 graph. You can measure it, with the satellites Bastardi loves.

 

 

Maybe just link to Tamino's comments and cut the last section? Tamino had a very satisfying rant, but SkS is about trying to educate...

2011-08-14 01:15:29thanks
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125
Good points guys. I thought about adding something on his satellite comments - you're right, I think it's worthwhile. I'll probably trim down those final tamino comments to keep it a bit more civil.
2011-08-14 01:17:03contradiction
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125
Actually now that I think about it, in his tamino comments he said something about using HadCRUT because it's not right-wing or something stupid like that, which contradicts his comments about satellites being the gold standard, since satellites show more recent warming than HadCRUT. That'll have to be a new section.
2011-08-14 03:04:34updated
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Okay, I made several changes, as suggested by Rob and Mark.

2011-08-14 06:04:48
MarkR
Mark Richardson
m.t.richardson2@gmail...
134.225.187.197

I'd still cut down the very last bit. Calling most Americans idiots doesn't seem like a great approach to me... I also think that you could still dial back a few of the comments you make throughout about how stupid Bastardi's being. Then again, maybe not because it does hammer home the point that he's an absolute incompetent or liar.

 

 

The science content is good. It's pretty punchy; helped in part by how Joe doesn't even bother to get anything right! Few minor errors:

"if temperatures are driving CO2 changes, and temperatures have "leveled off", as Bastardi claims, then why have CO2 emissions not leveled off as well?"

CO2 levels, surely? CO2 emissions could not level off, but if absorption increased then levels would, and they're what matter.

 

And under 'rewriting history' it has been argued that 'colder is worse, warmer is better' by skeptics. But Bastardi does argue that since America was warm, that means it was as bad as today. Hmmm :S

 

 

Overall I really like it :)

2011-08-14 06:11:01
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Thanks Mark.  Whoops yeah, that should be CO2 concentrations, not emissions.

I tried to be careful not to call Bastardi stupid.  Just confused and ignorant and ridiculously wrong :-)  It's definitely a fine line to walk.  I'll have another look at the ending.  My intent isn't to call people stupid, but it's a fact that most don't have a strong physical science background, so they just don't have the tools to see that Bastardi is being a moron.

And actually, you found another contradiction there.  Saying the climate is getting worse, yet "skeptics" are supposed to think warmer is better!  I'll add that.

2011-08-14 16:14:41
Andy S

skucea@telus...
74.198.150.143

This is very good

I assume that you're not going to run with the title as it is. It made me laugh but it's going to look like a cheap shot to people with a more kindly disposition than me, or you. Anyway, I prefer Bastardi-zation (although I can't take credit for the term).

Rather than say that human emissions are responsible for 100% of the additional atmospheric CO2 you could make that approximately 200% but that might be confusing to some readers.

{Edited)

2011-08-15 03:48:28Title
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Yeah, I was going to run with the title.  Just a bit of silly wordplay, I don't think anybody will make too much of a fuss about it.

2011-08-15 11:45:22
Andy S

skucea@telus...
66.183.179.249

Confusedi Bastardi is not a problem for me, I just thought that it wasn't quite in tune with the normal SkS etiquette. Mind you, Aussies use the tem "bastard" with a lot more ease than us Limeys. No doubt John would happily call me a "pommie bastard" even in front of his kids but I'd advise him not to if my dear old Welsh Mum were present.

2011-08-15 12:25:49
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

I just used this verbage in reply to Mr. Cotton:

Mr. Cotton, I simply cannot tell if you are being intentionally obtuse and evasive or merely relying upon natural ability and giftedness.

 

I suspect it would apply equally to Bastardi.

2011-08-15 13:18:32
Same Ordinary Fool

chicagoriverturning@gmail...
184.98.49.97

I personally like "Confusedi Bastardi" because its nasty (and I don't like him).  But I think it would be ill-received here in CONUS for that same reason.

Also, people who use "bastard" in daily conversation without a thought (or genealogical reference), would still think it an unkindness to use it in print, with someone who's been thusly christening-challenged all his life.

And, your title's Google entry would be followed by an entry for a WUWT title that includes the same two words.