IPCC scientist: “Is this microphone on” (Cartoon) #gallowshumour


About manchesterclimatemonthly

Was print format from 2012 to 13. Now web only. All things climate and resilience in (Greater) Manchester.
This entry was posted in humour. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to IPCC scientist: “Is this microphone on” (Cartoon) #gallowshumour

  1. ianbodgerbrown says:

    That about sums it up!

  2. Dave Bishop says:

    There was a good letter in the ‘Independent’ newspaper last week by Steve Edwards. He wrote:

    “What we are seeing is a new variation on science-versus-religion debate: the god of the new dogma is the free-market.
    The deniers are nearly always comfortably off, or supported by billionaires such as the Koch brothers. In their arguments they are wrong about almost every detail except the truth which really haunts them. It is that their free-market model, based on unfettered pillaging of our planet’s resources, has to end if climate change is to be checked.
    If not, we are heading for the greatest extinction of species (including our own) since the Permian era. However, like all religious fanatics, the deniers would no doubt consider that a small price to pay to protect the sanctity of their dogma.”

    And I would also add that they are, essentially, completely amoral sociopaths who demand limitless wealth NOW … and the future, the human race and life on earth can go f***k themselves!

  3. Tedious comment has been deleted but reposted here –

    “People within a mindset often wonder why those outside don’t have the same thoughts. If you want to know why people are ignoring the climate scientists, why don’t you ask them?”

    Don’t need to ask them – they are shouting about it all the time. Some of them at least funded by the Koch brothers, others doing it for free because are in the grip of ferocious ideology.
    And they are not “ignoring” the climate scientists. They are harrassing them, spamming them and even sending them death threats.
    You refer to the settled science as a “mindset”. It’s not a “mindset”, it’s a huge database of observations, brilliant empirical work and – yes, gasp – computer models. Computer models are what underpin a very large chunk of what we consider unremarkable – insurance policies, aviation, you name it. So I somehow doubt you’re opposed to all computer modelling everywhere.

    And as you are doubtless aware, I made a short film about denialism.


  4. More tedium!

    “Nice video and I agree it’s all about convincing the undecided. Dealing in a civil and open manner with ‘tedious’ comments would seem to be the mark of a confident communicator.”

    You’ve been posted, twice – I’d call that open. I’ve just put you in moderation, rather than allow you carte blanche to froth your tedious tedium.

    “Only Michael O’Leary can get away with offending those he ultimately needs and only then because people really want cheap flights.”

    What ARE you talking about? That’s rhetorical, btw. I really don’t care.

    “But you don’t care because the principle of not dealing with sceptics is more important than success in finding common ground.”

    Bwahahaha. Previously you wrote “If you want to know why people are ignoring the climate scientists, why don’t you ask them?” So one moment you are admitting that you are “ignoring the climate scientists” and the next comment you are offering your services as a go-between in the task of “finding common ground”?! Do make up your “mind”, son.
    Ah yes, playing the “wounded innocent” and tone-policing. [And concern-trolling]. Very novel.

    ” You stick to your guns! I’m sure it will be a great comfort to you, no matter what the climate does. I’m sure the thousands of silent undecided are most impressed with how well you’ve routed this mouth frothing, evil denier.”

    Thousands? There’s probably about 4 people reading this far. You have delusions of grandeur, I suspect.

    • gille liath says:

      Five now!

      It’s very simple isn’t it – people just don’t want to hear it. As your sceptic has proved, it would seem, if he has not offered any reason for his scepticism – any substantial grounds for doubting what the IPCC tell us. Still we all have the right to our opinions! Ignorant and verging on insane though they may be. And when you don’t have an actual argument, flippancy and sarcasm will generally pass as substitutes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s