# I hereby pit the gang of hypocritical deniers "debating" GIGObuster **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 5, 2011, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281 "2011-09-05T16:32:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**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:** [September 16, 2011, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/501 "2011-09-16T22:02:17Z")
> [@pikey\_pete](#): > > Ummmmm, GIGO…I was just going to point out that you can almost never take science paid for by politics seriously. its kind of an extension of Occam’s razor. politics requires too many assumptions to be made. Indeed, the political connections he was involved did not take too long to come out: > **[Ivar Giaever's links to Exxon Mobil, Heartland, Cato etc...](https://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/257775_Ivar_Giaevers_links_to_Exxon_M)** > > Earlier today, I wrote that Ivar Giaever was either a sell out or senile with his recent very public exit from the American Physical Society over AGW. I argued that for a man of his scientific stature to say the ... > [@](#): > > Here he is on the Heartland Institute’s list of experts. > > Heartland Experts > > The Heartland Institute is a front for creating and legitimatising right wing propaganda paid for by people like Exxon Mobil and Phillip Morris. They have a tremendous history of denying all sorts of science, like the notion that cigarettes cause cancer. You can also see him listed by them here: > > If you continue looking down that list you can find well known “cigarettes are OK” activist and professional climate denier, Richard Lindzen, and Bjorn Lomborg as well. Amongst some of Heartland’s and co group Heritage Foundation’s more interesting stances, in addition to the usual climate denial and false ecological data has been a defence of US business use of overseas child and slave labor. > > Gaiever also appeared on a full page ad denying climate change funded by the Cato institute. > > The Cato Institute is funded by ExxonMobil, Phillip Morris the American Petroleum Institute (API) and Koch Family Foundations. ---
**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:** [September 16, 2011, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/502 "2011-09-16T22:11:09Z")
> [@pikey\_pete](#): > > all I have to say about science deniers is that I love it when the name for a scientific concept gets changed because the evidence shows that we were on the right track, but lacked all the information (i.e. global warming becoming global climate change,) and all the science deniers suddenly start pointing to it and screaming about how science is just making shit up. Best show out there. Why? because these are the same people who figured that changing Creationism to Intelligent Design would suddenly give creationism a respectable air of science. If this is what science believers are doing…at least they havent had a ‘cdesign proponentist’ fiasco. Well, on second reading I think you are not quite there, no, science “believers” are not changing the concept, that idea came from Frank Luntz as a talking point for conservatives to use, they decided to use climate change alone as global warming was worrisome to test audiences. > **[Global warming vs climate change](https://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.htm)** > > \There have long been claims that some unspecificed > [@](#): > > So to sum up, although the terms are used interchangeably because they are causally related, ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ refer to different physical phenomena. The term ‘climate change’ has been used frequently in the scientific literature for many decades, and the usage of both terms has increased over the past 40 years. Moreover, since the planet continues to warm, there is no reason to change the terminology. Perhaps the only individual to advocate the change was Frank Luntz, a Republican political strategist and global warming skeptic, who used focus group results to determine that the term ‘climate change’ is less frightening to the general public than ‘global warming’. There is simply no factual basis whatsoever to the myth “they changed the name from global warming to climate change”. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/503 "2011-09-16T22:42:24Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > I’m asking what amount of warming he’s predicting. > > Is he predicting a rise in temperature (of a certain number of degrees, or tenths of a degree) over a given span of years (or decades)? Can he specify a length of time during which a lack of warming (or, perhaps, cooling) would falsify his predictions? It’s a simple thing to answer. That he floods the topic with multiple replies, none of them answering, it’s quite telling. It’s a fucking Gish Gallup > **[Gish Gallop](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop)** > > The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. It's essentially a conveyor belt-fed version of... The gallop is often used as an indirect [argument from authority](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority), as it appears to paint the “galloper” as an expert in a broad range of subjects and the opponent as an incompetent bumbler who didn’t do their homework before the debate. Such emphasis on [style over substance](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Style_over_substance) is the reason many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating opinions. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/504 "2011-09-16T23:25:24Z")
Oh horseshit. :rolleyes: Who do you think you are fooling here? You basically stick to posting a bunch of bullshit links (half the time in freaking Japanese), make a bunch of idiotic and baseless pronouncements, and of course limit yourself to mainly posting in the Pit. Man up you fucking pussy…if you think you have something real to say about global warming then build an OP in GD and see where it gets you. -XT ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/505 "2011-09-16T23:58:29Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And you are missing the point of the piece, **Ivar should know better**. > > Nope, first we have to figure out if Ivar did any science on this, as his expertise was not on atmospheric physics, you are relying on the good old argument by authority. Nope. I’m not using his expertise in physics as a proof point for the veracity of his opinion on climate change. But I am using his world-recognized expertise as a scientist as a proof point for his rational position on whether the evidence, overwhelming as it may be, rises to the level of certitude. Quite frankly, I’m surprised any scientist dealing with such complexity wold argue \*for \*certitude on anything near as complex. And again, he doesn’t need to do any science on anything. He’s not questioning the evidence. He’s accepting the same evidence that his opponents are using. He’s simply objecting to the level of certitude the evidence supports. So, he doesn’t need to do any science, as he doesn’t disagree with the evidence. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > Unbelievable that you are reaching for fallacies to make your point? Not strange on your case. Uh, fallacies coming from _you_. Most people try to avoid them, knowing that they undermine their points. But, but all means, continue to cling to them like a rosary all you want. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > Really. what the contributors to Little Green Footbals are finding is not reassuring, he is really a worse example to rally as a champion of your cause than the other skeptic that renounced a few years ago, even before this latest talking point appeared (because that is what it is, until his specific scientific research on the issue is published, he is just like any other person giving an opinion), more evidence has come to support what the physicists are telling us about the heat properties of CO2 and the increase of the human made one. What do you mean “champion [my] cause”? What is _my cause_, exactly? To have science be treated as science and have those adherents to a particular position not swoon over a position and treat it like a religionist turned evangelist? Well, if that’s the case, you certainly got me there. And, again, as far as I can tell, Ivar is not questioning the basic position, only the level of certitude that some claim is there. And what are they “finding”? Well, let me share what I found: > [@](#): > > Why exactly would a man who made great contributions to solid state theory some 50 years ago suddenly decide, after all these years, that all of his colleagues and all of their strong data were wrong? I very strongly suspect that if some digging is done, it will be found that this profound traitor to all the science he once stood for is getting a lot of money from the usual suspects. There’s so much wrong with this I don’t know where to begin. Well, let’s start with how you misrepresented the claim that the article you cited found anything whatsoever—except for an opinion stating that Ivar is on the take. :rolleyes: And with zero evidence. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Additionally, the author, the learned LudwigVanQuixote, states that Ivar is of the position that his colleagues and the data are wrong. when in reality the only thing he’s objecting to is the the degree to which all available data supports a conclusion of “incontrovertible”. ---
**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:** [September 16, 2011, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/506 "2011-09-16T23:59:04Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Oh horseshit. :rolleyes: Who do you think you are fooling here? You basically stick to posting a bunch of bullshit links (half the time in freaking Japanese), make a bunch of idiotic and baseless pronouncements, and of course limit yourself to mainly posting in the Pit. Man up you fucking pussy…if you think you have something real to say about global warming then build an OP in GD and see where it gets you. > > -XT Yep, he is also such a cherry picker that he refuses to see that a Gish Gallop\*\* is also made of “erroneous” points\*\* that is, false or misleading, nowhere our FX guy (you are not even an FX guy uh?) shows where I pointed or cited at erroneous or false information, clearly he is not capable of reading the information. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/507 "2011-09-17T00:09:15Z")
The emotional, self rightous rhetoric, the personal insults, the illogical and constant moving of whatever it is, it’s hard to tell, it’s like trying to make sense of a religion. Any scientific point made is just swept aside, and torrent of yet another something, along with a flood of words that make no sense. It’s ridiculous. ---
**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:** [September 17, 2011, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/508 "2011-09-17T00:36:15Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > He’s simply objecting to the level of certitude the evidence supports. So, he doesn’t need to do any science, as he doesn’t disagree with the evidence. Then there is no problem, he is as I said, not important then. > [@magellan01](#): > > There’s so much wrong with this I don’t know where to begin. Well, let’s start with how you misrepresented the claim that the article you cited found anything whatsoever—except for an opinion stating that Ivar is on the take. :rolleyes: And with zero evidence. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Obviously you did not roll up your eyes enough to notice that he came with the evidence. Again, there is no science involved on this, only an opinion. Until he comes with evidence to support his say so that most of the Physicists are wrong on this, I go with the majority of the experts on the field and currently active that say that the evidence is there. Because, unless you can provide a cite against, logic tells me that the experts agree with the statement and they \*\*do \*\*know the science. ---
**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:** [September 17, 2011, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/509 "2011-09-17T00:39:28Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > The emotional, self rightous rhetoric, the personal insults, the illogical and constant moving of whatever it is, it’s hard to tell, it’s like trying to make sense of a religion. > > Any scientific point made is just swept aside, and torrent of yet another something, along with a flood of words that make no sense. It’s ridiculous. No evidence of any cite being erroneous, your accusations are certifiably ridiculous, I prefer to have evidence to then tell it like it is, you are not even an FX guy. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/510 "2011-09-17T01:57:18Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Well at least he is sincere. 🙂 > > Give it up, your CO2 “science” was a stooge for the energy companies, the “luminaries” that they use are the same old discredited skeptics and now mostly deniers. As the cite I made just 2 posts after your swill cite shows, the CO2 “science” .org does not care that they misrepresent the paper that was actually peer reviewed. Still no answer to the simplest question about AGW. \*\*I hereby fully and without reservations concede all possible biases, ignorance, and complete disregard for deceny or truth from any and all of my sources. They only want death, suffering, and money for their greedy corporate master of death.\*\*Now, can you stop talking about it? We all know it know, that debate is over, let it rest. You win that part completely. Will you answer the question now with your own answer? In case you forgot the question is: _What is in your opinion the total climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 concentration from pre-industrial-age levels?_ ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/511 "2011-09-17T02:47:55Z")
I wouldn’t hold my breath for an answer. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/512 "2011-09-17T03:08:02Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > I wouldn’t hold my breath for an answer. Lol, I wouldn’t either. I don’t think **GIGOBuster** does much in the way of independent thinking about these issues. He mainly does searches of blogs like realclimate and then cuts, pastes, and paraphrases. At least that’s my impression. I stopped engaging with him a long time ago after he repeatedly evaded a question I asked about whether (in his view) recent warming was outside the range of natural variation. Probably he couldn’t find the Official Party Line on this question; he’s too stupid to answer the question coherently himself; and he’s too arrogant to just admit he doesn’t know. Also, he probably doesn’t want to admit that he just regurgitates arguments from realclimate without really understanding them. There’s no shame in being stupid, but what’s so contempt-worthy in GIGOBuster is that he obviously thinks he’s really smart. Even his nickname discloses his arrogance. ---
**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:** [September 17, 2011, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/513 "2011-09-17T04:05:16Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Will you answer the question now with your own answer? > > In case you forgot the question is: _What is in your opinion the total climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 concentration from pre-industrial-age levels?_ So in the end you want me to reinvent the wheel? Piffle, I just go for more than an educated guess, you look for the science. > **[How sensitive is our climate?](https://skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-advanced.htm)** > > \Climate sensitivity can be calculated empirically by comparing past temperature change to natural forcings at the time. Various periods of Earth's past have been examined in this manner and find broad agreement of a climate sensitivity of around... > [@](#): > > The most likely warming is indicated for climate sensitivity 3°C (black solid). The likely range (dark grey) is for the climate sensitivity range 2 to 4.5°C. Selected key impacts (some delayed) for several sectors and different temperatures are indicated in the top part of the figure (Knutti and Hegerl 2008) And you want me to have a different opinion than that? On what basis? So keep living with disappointment, as I explained before my opinion is not important, what counts is the scientific publications and what they report to us. And just be on the lookout for sources that make you look like a chump Aji. ---
**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:** [September 17, 2011, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/514 "2011-09-17T04:06:43Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > I wouldn’t hold my breath for an answer. Well, we would not ever held our breath for you even understanding the answers given, so keep on showing others what a hypocritical denier you are. ---
**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:** [September 17, 2011, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/515 "2011-09-17T04:09:41Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Lol, I wouldn’t either. I don’t think **GIGOBuster** does much in the way of independent thinking about these issues. He mainly does searches of blogs like realclimate and then cuts, pastes, and paraphrases. At least that’s my impression. > > I stopped engaging with him a long time ago after he repeatedly evaded a question I asked about whether (in his view) recent warming was outside the range of natural variation. > > Probably he couldn’t find the Official Party Line on this question; he’s too stupid to answer the question coherently himself; and he’s too arrogant to just admit he doesn’t know. Also, he probably doesn’t want to admit that he just regurgitates arguments from realclimate without really understanding them. > > There’s no shame in being stupid, but what’s so contempt-worthy in GIGOBuster is that he obviously thinks he’s really smart. Even his nickname discloses his arrogance. As shown already brazil84 does not want to deal with the fact that evidence for the water vapor feedback is here already, and Brickmore already showed how much outside the range of natural variation we are. Science marches on, but \*\*useless \*\*deniers like him will continue to hold on to the same denials in blogs that are getting cobwebs. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/516 "2011-09-17T12:00:13Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Starting a thread in the Pit isn’t going to get you a debate, it’s going to earn you derision. I hear ya. But at least here I can tell somebody to fuck off. Which is the eventual end of most internet debates anyhow. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/517 "2011-09-17T12:01:37Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > There’s no shame in being stupid, but what’s so contempt-worthy in GIGOBuster is that he obviously thinks he’s really smart. Even his nickname discloses his arrogance. I don’t know, but I put his idiot ass on ignore, the first time I used that feature here. He just never shuts the fuck up, and constantly changes the tune, and refuses to answer simple questions. I’ve seen this kind of crazy before, and it never ends well. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/518 "2011-09-17T14:19:13Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Because, unless you can provide a cite against, logic tells me that the experts agree with the statement and they \*\*do \*\*know the science. Given the passion with which you embrace fallacies, I’m pretty sure you have no idea what “logic” tells you. You two just don’t speak the same language. Onward. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/519 "2011-09-17T14:51:53Z")
Oh lard, your quoting has bypassed my ignore feature. The stupid, it burns. Oh Mods who joined the threads, I curse you. ---
**Author:** ![WarmNPrickly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d78d45/32.png) [@WarmNPrickly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WarmNPrickly)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281/520 "2011-09-17T15:10:27Z")
The debate is going so well that you put him on ignore? That’s hilarious. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hereby-pit-the-gang-of-hypocritical-deniers-debating-gigobuster/595281.md?page=27)