2011-06-16 17:21:16Skeptical Science is the closest I have come to pure evil of any website I have yet encountered.
John Cook


Interesting comment at http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2010/03/25/embarrassing-skeptical-science-or-the-return-of-the-aristotelians/:

I too attempted to present material that is contrary to the mission. if they don’t like the material is is “unscientific”, If they can edit your message to change it to the opposite of what you said, they will.

Skeptical Science is the closest I have come to pure evil of any website I have yet encountered.

Tell us what you really think, Bruce!

2011-06-16 18:28:52


Had a look, read the article and looked at his site, found it so frustrating that I could not leave a comment.. I guess this is another example of where arrogance shines above ignorance....

2011-06-16 19:27:32
John Mason


It's a bit of a pointess blog-post as well - as several other commentators indicate!

PM has it about right.

Cheers - John

2011-06-17 01:35:03
Rob Honeycutt


Wow!  This guy is a hoot!  You just have to got to his Why AGW is Logically Impossible page.  Oh man!!  Basically I think he's saying that it is too coincidental.  Too many things throughout time have needed to come together to create such an unlikely confluence of events and therefore it's "logically impossible" for AGW to be real.  

I love this line the best:  "AGW is logically fallacious as it has providential undertones."

If you look into the guy a little further he also says that Atheism is logically impossible because in order to not believe in a deity they would then be required to believe in "luck"(???)... 


"The ancient Greeks themselves recognized the power of Luck, and they worshiped Her as the Goddess Thyke. 
And so Atheists have to believe in something: they have to believe in Luck."
So, again, Atheism is a logical fallacy.  I believe I see a theme here.


2011-06-17 02:07:31
Alex C


Well if an atheist was as an ancient Greek and thought that luck was actually some sort of power or attribute that was related causally to unlikely and beneficial events, then at most that person would have some explaining to do in order to support such an idea, though it's still not directly related to a belief in a deity (deities) at all.  If however luck is only the name one gives to such streaks, and not a presumption of their continuation ("Winning ten straight rounds of black jack was lucky" v. "I'm lucky so I'll win ten more"), then there's hardly any sort of fallacy at all, relating to atheist/theism or not.

Anyways, I also had a short look at the page you referenced Rob.  Apparently he has a difficult time differentiating between coincidence and human-induced, and also drawing connections between mankind's ability to industrialize and further both our impact of the environment AND the capability to understand these impacts.  Knowing what I do of how quickly humans innovate, I would have been SHOCKED if we had developed mass energy production, global transportation, and all of industry without somehow developing our knowledge in areas to understand our climate, especially when understanding our climate can be integral to many of these processes.  This guy's unbelievably obtuse.

2011-06-17 04:57:18
Paul D


He spent a long time attacking Greenfyre over a year ago, maybe two years ago.
Then Greenfyre went on a very long holiday.

The two maybe unconnected.