# Climate change deniers like Anthony Watts and the Republican leadership got a boot to the head. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 28, 2011, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041 "2011-10-28T05:00:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2011, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/41 "2011-10-30T14:38:31Z")
To understand better what is considered the best science, skepticism and denialism in climate research you need to listen to this entertaining lecture: > **[Richard Milne separates skepticism from denial](https://skepticalscience.com/Richard-Milne-separates-skepticism-from-denial.html)** > > Dr Richard Milne from the University of Edinburgh has published an entertaining and educational lecture 'Criticial Thinking on Climate Change'. He explores the nature of science and genuine scientific skepticism while managing to pack in more... > [@](#): > > Dr Richard Milne from the University of Edinburgh has published an entertaining and educational lecture ‘Criticial Thinking on Climate Change’. It is one hour long, but it shows the current state of the discussion among scientists, for them there is very little controversy, the analogy here is that one should see climate science like a tree, with all scientists **and skeptics** in agreement of what the trunk and roots are (Man-made CO2 increasing, CO2 and methane preventing heath from leaving earth, etc), skeptics (the ones that are really skeptics) criticize the current science that tries to answer questions like how bad and when and where the effects of that warming will hit us? And that is represented by the branches of the tree, as one can notice, cutting the small branches that are bad (glaciers in the Himalayas will not melt by 2030 that was supposed to say 2300 in the IPCC second part of the report that had less review) does not mean that the whole tree should be ignored or cut down… like deniers want to do. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/gh9kDCuPuU8/hqdefault.jpg "Dr Richard Milne - Critical Thinking on Climate Change: Separating Skepticism from Denial") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gh9kDCuPuU8) [link jumps directly to the metaphor that starts at minute 10, you just need to watch 8 minutes more to see also Rick Perry looking like an idiot] And Dr. Milne once again shows that one has to call the people that avoids, willfully ignores, cherry picks, and misrepresent the science what they are: deniers. They are not skeptics at all, they are only pushing bad science. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/gh9kDCuPuU8/hqdefault.jpg "Dr Richard Milne - Critical Thinking on Climate Change: Separating Skepticism from Denial") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gh9kDCuPuU8) ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2011, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/42 "2011-10-30T16:58:28Z")
[Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real.](http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html) The irony is that his studies were funded by a denier organization. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2011, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/43 "2011-10-30T17:56:33Z")
Boot to the head to Romney too!\* [http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544\_162-20127273-503544/mitt-romneys-shifting-views-on-climate-change/](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20127273-503544/mitt-romneys-shifting-views-on-climate-change/) > [@](#): > > “My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet.” > > … > > Romney spokesman Ryan Williams said Friday, “Governor Romney has been consistent in his statements on global warming.” Since early in the year he said that “I think humans contribute to that.” one has to say his views are consistent alright, as consistent as baby poop. - For anyone missing the reference, it is not intended to be a deadly thing: > **[Boot to the Head](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boot_to_the_Head)** > > Boot to the Head is a comedy album performed by the Canadian comedy troupe The Frantics. Originally released as an LP in 1987, it was re-issued in 1996 as a CD with the same track listing. The album features a number of skits from their radio show Frantic Times, as well as a few sketches that could not be aired to a general audience. The sketches were recorded over a three-day period in front of a live audience at the Toronto Free Theatre. > "Ti Kwan Leep" is the most famous skit from this album, ... ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/44 "2011-10-31T14:09:54Z")
> [@Folacin](#): > > The question as I see it is there is an X% chance of catastrophic climate change, relative to human civilization. As X approaches 100%, it seems like almost any cost would be worthwhile to avert it. > > The question becomes what is it worth spending for lower values of X. As long as there is no obviously direct effects (say New York City flooding), the general populace is gong to be loath to spend much. That is why there is so much effort to tie observable weather events to climate change. To give the problem a “face” so to speak. I completely support cleaning up energy production, shifting to renewables, and becoming more energy efficient. Every step of the way the results are obvious and quantifiable. Asking the general populace to contribute without any obvious benefit to them (remember these are the people that can’t fathom the long range implications), is like asking for donations for the starving children in Africa. You’ll get a few to get on board, but if you have pictures you’ll get a lot more willing contributors. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/45 "2011-10-31T17:47:38Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I especially like the “signs of global warming may include earlier snows and colder weather” type arguments. Because you don’t know the difference between climate and weather. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/46 "2011-10-31T18:06:10Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > I especially like the “signs of global warming may include earlier snows and colder weather” type arguments. > > Because you don’t know the difference between climate and weather. How cold for how long would reflect on climate rather than weather, in your opinion? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/47 "2011-10-31T18:16:22Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > How cold for how long would reflect on climate rather than weather, in your opinion? I am not a climate scientist; but those who are, typically use [30 year averaging to determine climate](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html). ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/48 "2011-10-31T20:33:39Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I am not a climate scientist; but those who are, typically use [30 year averaging to determine climate](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html). Oh, it is just **Waldo** , still playing in the branches of the tree I see. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/49 "2011-10-31T20:42:02Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Oh, it is just **Waldo** , still playing in the branches of the tree I see. 🙂 Well, in that _“skeptics (the ones that are really skeptics) criticize the current science that tries to answer questions like how bad and when and where the effects of that warming will hit us? And that is represented by the branches of the tree”_. I naturally asked a question about “how bad and when”; **Fear Itself** gave a satisfactory answer, without hemming and hawing for the better part of a month; you could learn a lot from FI’s example. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/50 "2011-10-31T20:43:47Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Well, in that _“skeptics (the ones that are really skeptics) criticize the current science that tries to answer questions like how bad and when and where the effects of that warming will hit us? And that is represented by the branches of the tree”_. I naturally asked a question about “how bad and when”; **Fear Itself** gave a satisfactory answer, without hemming and hawing for the better part of a month; you could learn a lot from FI’s example. Nope, the question does remains: have you learned anything? One huge item that was avoided by you (and that was one of the big reasons why I was not playing along,) was that you never admitted where you got your peculiar ideas, really, it was very insulting to claim that you got them them on your own when it was really stretch to claim you actually looked on your own for obscure UN reports. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/51 "2011-10-31T20:58:57Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Nope, the question does remains: have you learned? I’m still asking the same questions as before, and I’m still getting answers I like; I’ve learned that other folks lack your reticence and so get to the same place a lot sooner. Why, what have you learned? > [@](#): > > One huge item that was avoided by you (and that was one of the big reasons why I was not playing along,) was that you never admitted where you got your peculiar ideas, really, it was very insulting to claim that you got them them on your own when it was really stretch to claim you actually looked on your own for obscure UN reports. Not sure why you think that report is obscure; I’ve routinely checked it every year since I first saw it mentioned on the front page of Google News. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/52 "2011-10-31T21:02:17Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > I’m still asking the same questions as before, and I’m still getting answers I like; I’ve learned that other folks lack your reticence and so get to the same place a lot sooner. Why, what have you learned? > > Not sure why you think that report is obscure; I’ve routinely checked it every year since I first saw it mentioned on the front page of Google News. And I noticed that the other reports from the same UN site clarified that the quote you made was hopelessly taken out of contest, the lead secretary of the group reported that the earth was warming and disparaged the “skeptics” that said otherwise, period. The peculiar spin you reported about that quote was found by me on denialists sites, so who do you think are you kidding? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/53 "2011-10-31T21:15:55Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > The peculiar spin you reported about that quote was found by me on denialists sites, so who do you think are you kidding? What spin? You originally set a goalpost, and I mundanely noted the data for each year thereafter; you later moved the goalpost, though it took you the better part of a month to name a new one. I copy-and-pasted a number of word-for-word quotes from that report about various years being in a statistical tie within the margin of error, but remember that I _ **already** _ had a perfectly good reason to go looking for that quote; you _ **gave** _ it to me. > [@](#): > > I noticed that the other reports from the same UN site clarified that the quote you made was hopelessly taken out of contest Your original goalpost said nothing about context. I invited you to supply a better goalpost that would take context into account – but until you’d done so, why would I bother with the stuff? I’m neither the guy who supplies goalposts, nor the one who moves 'em; that’s your job. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/54 "2011-10-31T21:22:29Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > What spin? That the UN guy had reported that there was no warming just because he compared the three warmest years on record, as anyone that had bothered to read the other preliminary press reports (with a warning that they not to be used until the official reports were out), the UN was still telling anyone that did read the other reports the earth continues to warm. Of curse that also shows that maybe you did look at them, **but you did not read them**. The best explanation still remains, someone pointed at that quote and that peculiar spin. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/55 "2011-10-31T21:27:24Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That the UN guy had reported that there was no warming just because he compared the tree warmest years on record, as anyone that had bothered to read the other preliminary press reports (with a warning that they not to be used until the official reports were out) the UN was still telling anyone that did read the reports in context that they still reported the earth continues to warm. The official report unsurprisingly wound up including the exact same language as the press report, and, again, your original goalpost was scrupulously devoid of contextual requirements. Surely you haven’t seen me cite that statistical tie as out-of-context evidence against your position since you set the new goalpost? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/56 "2011-10-31T21:46:16Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > The official report unsurprisingly wound up including the exact same language as the press report, and, again, your original goalpost was scrupulously devoid of contextual requirements. Surely you haven’t seen me cite that statistical tie as out-of-context evidence against your position since you set the new goalpost? Translation: “I can not deny that I goofed”. The point still remains, there was no good reason for your original questioning, it was an idiotic reason as per the UN secretary, and that was one reason why we did go long on the previous threads, the bulk of the science and the evidence was not going to fall just because there were \*\*unfounded \*\*doubts on the health of one of the twigs of the tree of science. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/57 "2011-10-31T21:57:03Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Translation: “I can not deny that I goofed”. Translation: you supplied a goalpost you later came to see as a goof; I responded accordingly until you corrected yourself. > [@](#): > > The point still remains, there was no good reason for your original questioning, it was an idiotic reason as per the UN secretary It was your goalpost of choice! To the precise extent you now see that goalpost as idiotic, I’m happy to agree. > [@](#): > > and that was one reason why we did go long on the previous threads The sole reason we went long on the previous threads was that it took you a remarkably long time to set a new goalpost; you backed away from the original one without naming a replacement, and then kept on keeping on for the better part of a month. You could’ve ended it in the better part of a minute. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/58 "2011-10-31T22:28:10Z")
Alert readers would notice that it would be silly to have the UN secretary telling everyone that “skeptics” were silly for claiming the earth was not warming, and then have people like Waldo tell others that the secretary actually mean to say that there has been no warming, consistency is not the forte of the deniers, but then I saw that coming miles away; as I said before, I do post not for him but for others. As I notice also, he is still not accepting that the option of claiming that there has been no warming since 1998 was also idiotic. One has to also notice in the end that he is also ignoring that the big official report from the UN \*\*is \*\*the IPCC, good luck on him finding that they reported that the earth is not warming. I would not be so hard on him if he had the fortitude of admitting that his peculiar ideas are not original, and also that they have been dealt with before to death. > **[Judith Curry Opens Mouth, Inserts Foot](https://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/10/30/judith-curry-opens-mouth-inserts-foot/)** > > NOTE: See the UPDATE at the end of this post. I didn’t expect Judith Curry to embarrass herself more than she did with her fawning over Murry Salby’s folly. But she’s topped (perh… > [@](#): > > I didn’t expect Judith Curry to embarrass herself more than she did with her fawning over Murry Salby’s folly. But she’s topped (perhaps I should say “bottomed”) herself by a huge margin. > > Anthony Watts was so excited he actually suspended his blog hiatus to report the story. He quotes the GWPF that “BEST Confirms Global Temperature Standstill,” and cites a story in the Daily Mail reporting that Judith Curry (a member of the Berkeley team) has roundly criticized Richard Muller (leader of the Berkeley team), on much the same basis. He quotes Curry herself, from the article: > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > As for the graph disseminated to the media, she said: ‘This is “hide the decline” stuff. Our data show the pause, just as the other sets of data do. Muller is hiding the decline. > > > > ``` > > With this statement, Curry reveals how little she understands the data created by the team of which she is a member, let alone the “other sets of data.” Which we might have anticipated, given that from what we’ve seen, she made little or no contribution to the actual Berkeley analysis. > > Judging by her comments, it’s a good thing for the Berkeley team that she didn’t. The Daily Mail quotes her thus: > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > ‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’ > > > > ``` > > That’s a pretty strong statement, Judith. Do you have a scientific basis to back it up? Have you actually analyzed the data from your own team? Do you even know? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/59 "2011-10-31T22:39:59Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Alert readers would notice that it would be silly to have the UN secretary telling everyone that “skeptics” were silly for claiming the earth was not warming, and then have people like Waldo tell others that the secretary actually mean to say that there has been no warming, consistency is not the forte of the deniers Alert readers will note that I merely responded to your chosen goalpost. It was an idiotic goalpost – you were silly to choose it in the first place and you’ve sensibly backed away from it since – but I can’t be faulted for answering accordingly so long as your original goalpost remained in effect. > [@](#): > > As I notice also, he is still not accepting that the option of claiming that there has been no warming since 1998 was also idiotic. I’m _ **entirely** _ accepting of that option; the instant you moved the goalpost to a new location, I dropped the previously-relevant point accordingly. > [@](#): > > One has to also notice in the end that he is also ignoring that the big official report from the UN \*\*is \*\*the IPCC, good luck on him finding that they reported that the earth is not warming. Reinstate the original goalpost and I will; don’t, and I won’t. > [@](#): > > I would not be so hard on him if he had the fortitude of admitting that his peculiar ideas are not original Well, (a) you’re not hard on me at all; I asked for a new goalpost when you dropped the original one, and you eventually supplied one; that’s the definition of obliging. And (b) that’s why they’re not _ **my** _ peculiar ideas; it was my response so long as that was your idiotic goalpost, and ceased being my response once you swapped in a different goalpost. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2011, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041/60 "2011-10-31T23:24:50Z")
Meh, I guess that was supposed to show something, but is not much relevant to what we are discussing, another point does remain, no matter how much you complain about it, your points are not original, and they already have been replied to. And it is still really silly to claim you looked at all the UN reports just for shits and googles, 🙂 if you had read them, you would not had arrived to your original line of questioning, meaning that it is still more likely that others gave you the idea of grabbing the words of the UN secretary in such peculiar manner. What is important, is that all get aware that many of our leaders have been taken by the denialist information out there and it is very important to be aware of that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/climate-change-deniers-like-anthony-watts-and-the-republican-leadership-got-a-boot-to-the-head/601041.md?page=4)