by frog
General debate, November 23, 2009
Published: November 23, 2009
Comment via Facebook
131 Comments
Hide comments with a score of
or less
Hide comments with a score of or less
Leave a Reply
Please use 
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Thank you, Good Frog.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
The Ngai Tahu Hui a Tau was all but blown off the face of Aotearoa at the weekend. Ferocious winds demolished the huge marque erected for the hui at Oraka, on the south coast near Riverton/Aparima.
On the political scene, Ngai Tahu look to face storms of a different nature, but are expecting a huge windfall from the National Government.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Arise, Sir Rodney Bjelke-Petersen.
Rodders seems to have managed to gerrymander Auckland almost as effectively as Joh did in Queensland back in the ’70s and ’80s.
Like or Dislike:
4 
2 (+2)
It’s just a test case Toad – wait til they start wearing black uniforms….
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
a well-deserved denunnciation of noddy..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/even-before-i-was-able-to-read-noddy-i-disliked-the-bland-little-rent-boy-and-his-%e2%80%9cfriend%e2%80%9d-big-ears-who-was-plainly-grooming-him-for-something-or-other/
(don’t ya just love the smell of a fresh gd thread..?..early in the morning..?..)
Like or Dislike:
3 
4 (-1)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
9 
27 (-18)
Cripes Blue! She’s blown wide open now!
Evil, evil climatologists!
Hounding, gloating and fudging !
Cripes!!!
Like or Dislike:
7 
5 (+2)
BluePeter, what is the nature of the response by affected scientists?
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
Since you’ve had the answers made available to you relating “tricks” and the rest of that, I can only assume that your use of this language means that you intend to continue to ignore inconvenient facts, like the complete lack of any evidence of any collusion to alter data or fake trends, or pretty much anything else of which you’ve just accused the scientists. The only bad thing in 16 years of e-mails is a still unverified request by Jones, to delete e-mails related to AR4 which may have been subject to a FOIA request… and there is no indication that it was acted on.
Thanks for proving that you are as biased as you ever were.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
11 
4 (+7)
BluePeter, what is the nature of the response by affected scientists?
So he’d already seen them?
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
11 
24 (-13)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
11 
24 (-13)
Good link that I saw on the standard
Newtongate?
http://carbonfixated.com/newtongate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-renaissance-and-enlightenment-thinking/
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
BP
I pointed you at the answers. The database is of scant interest because I already downloaded the original zip and spent numerous hours using my own resources to set up search patterns in it. I am quite confident as well, based on the few e-mails highlighted on other denialist sites, that my characterization of the archive is correct. Except for Jones’ ill advised (if it is real) e-mail telling his colleagues to delete the AR4 related mail (even though that appears still in the archive itself) there is nothing there that suggests any sort of scientific malfeasance at all. In other words, there IS nothing there. No conspiracy, no data manipulation, just pretty ordinary university politicking and scientific discussions.
Maybe you’d like to try some specific question. Most of them have been answered in the past 48 hours already.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
6 
5 (+1)
AgResearch hopes to show dairy farmers how to reduce carbon emissions on their farms by experimenting with farm inputs on its new $6.5 million dairy research farm at Tokanui.
Fonterra chairman Sir Henry van der Heyden cut the ribbon at an open day on Friday, on the 200ha farm, south of Te Awamutu.
Stewart Ledgard, from AgResearch’s climate, land and environment section, said the farm’s greenhouse gas footprint was expected to be 20 per cent lower than that of the average New Zealand dairy farm.
He estimated the Tokanui footprint, of 700 cows on 200ha, would be about 740g of carbon dioxide per litre of milk compared to the 900g average.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/farming/3088613/Research-farm-aims-to-lower-carbon-emissions
Would be super-lovely if they’d mentioned how they’re thinking about going about this reduction.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
Excerpts; – ‘Help! I was Blinded by the Baubles of Office!’
‘Help – I got the whole History of the World mixed up with my resentments.Your Culture is Valid too – sorry I called you all Honky mofo’s…I love cars and Sky….can I still be PM?
‘The “Destiny” was Mine – not yours – so sorry’
“What are the poor people doing???”
“Well whatever it is, it’s far too good for ‘em!!!”
“BooHoo – if only THEY would give US the Manawatu/Rangitikei back, we be happy for a week…”
“Help – we were convinced that Frogblog needed our malevolent advice”
They are all safely back under their Bridges now (traditional home of Trolls).
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
Gnash their teeth? Twist their own words (in the absence of others)?
Mumble into their beards?
I’ll go under-cover and report back.
Like or Dislike:
9 
2 (+7)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
10 
43 (-33)
Time to sell all those Green energy share. Jeanette and co have just realized their first HUGE financial loss.
Oh dear, never mind.
Signed global warming sceptic (NOT denier)
Like or Dislike:
9 
9 (0)
You’re welcome.
Like or Dislike:
10 
7 (+3)
What are we gonna do now?
Try to contain the AGM septicism and stop it spreading, same as before.
Like or Dislike:
11 
6 (+5)
BB
I take it you mean the con that WUWT and Wishart have been running, that it is all a big conspiracy.
You really need to read and understand the context of the e-mail to realize the (remarkable to you I am sure) fact with over 15 years of archive, not one instance of people conspiring to alter the data or fudge the science is actually present in that archive. The worst is a p!ssed off scientist wanting to delete some FOIA e-mails after receiving a FOIA request pretty much every other week for two years?
Maybe you ARE coming around.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
9 
8 (+1)
Hallejulah!!
Welcome aboard Bro!
Your “I Heart Sue” poster is in the mail.
Like or Dislike:
10 
6 (+4)
Aw Gee – straight into Moderation Frog?
Sorry Fly – mercy dash to be done here…
Say Troll and the Bro turns up
Still can’t make it thru the
Chamber of Thumbs eh Bro?
Try thinking inside the Box – ooooh those baubles!
Who changed my Gravatar icon Froggo?
Not me.
Awful gossip about a Policeperson running over a cyclist for not wearing a helmet.
That can’t be right can it?
My friend says it wiz on the newz.
but is it true?
Like or Dislike:
4 
3 (+1)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
12 
27 (-15)
Mark – Chamber of Thumbs! Very Nice. Squish! Squish!
Little Blue and Yellow stains.
Just heard this ..
What do you call an owl with one leg shorter than the other?
Not even, ow!
(if you didn’t laugh, you’ve been away too long).
Like or Dislike:
6 
4 (+2)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
7 
34 (-27)
(lies) B (lies) I (lies) G (lies) B (lies) R (lies) O (lies)
*(read between the lies)
Like or Dislike:
7 
6 (+1)
“What about that global cooling aye Fly?”
Cool
Like or Dislike:
5 
4 (+1)
I laughed….say I discovered the cause of the Economic Crisis:
Cost of War in Iraq
$702,389,303,953
Cost of War in Afghanistan
$232,180,507,122
The Poor People are paying fer that too eh?
An Owl with one leg indeed
hmm…
Like or Dislike:
5 
4 (+1)
(For the poster)
Like or Dislike:
8 
5 (+3)
There’s a few Globes around need to cool off for sure
What; He’s telling Rodney’s Fly?
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
6 
32 (-26)
Doubtless it’ll recover, but Rodney’s toast!
Like or Dislike:
11 
7 (+4)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
7 
31 (-24)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
8 
31 (-23)
Is everyone else experiencing a heat wave? We’re roasting down here! I’m off to the beach with a car-full of family. I’ll sweep up Bro’s droppings when I get back.
Like or Dislike:
6 
6 (0)
Bro; So you know who moved the Gold reserves out of the WTC @ 2am on Sept 11th?
Go on – share your wisdom
Put a sock on your forefinger
and speak from the Heart of the ACT Party!
Happy about the New Auckland City Bro?
Good Old Banksie?
Like or Dislike:
3 
4 (-1)
I’m boiling – the Mayors Brains are about toasted….
is it Friday already?
Like or Dislike:
3 
5 (-2)
“Is everyone else experiencing a heat wave?”
no. I’m in the North Island.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0 (+6)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
6 
29 (-23)
Te Grande Bro’s buccan ears aint buccin workin.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
BB,
Yes, the current ETS is a transfer of wealth away from households who consume. Pity it won’t achieve much environmental good either. It’s now fairer between manufacturing and farming; they both pay about 10% of their costs.
Like or Dislike:
4 
4 (0)
We know all about the criminal behaviour and arrogance of National around their new ETS. The fact that they’ve turned it into non market driven wealth transfer from taxpayers directly to business make a mockery of their purported principles. Here in the swamp we know that they have no principles whatsoever, so our surprise isn’t exactly total.
Who is “Penny Bright”?
BJ
Like or Dislike:
7 
2 (+5)
Like or Dislike:
9 
1 (+8)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/us-china-in-race-to-pollu_b_358070.html
I think the article writer forgot to add that the NACTional govt and Fonterra are planning to send up a rocket full of cow manure so that NZ can do its part to help the lunar environment
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
Easy Fly; – Fodney is our best chance of Air Tickets I think. I’m catching up with you Kiwi’s….Dr Pita only buys you air tickets if you black hey? – well I’m gettin a suntan Pierre – an’ if you don’ wan’ yo flowert garden stepped on you’ll,blow a few baubles my way
ps; i hef un gang …?…
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Roddy will over-look my indiscretion, provided I get to him before Bro starts his fawning, mewling and picking lint off the shoulder of the Fabled Yellow Jacket.
You are right to cross Pita off your Kirihimete card list – he’s too rich for our diet – poi e!
Best bad note I ever did get from a disgruntled punter:
“You sux”.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Kahi – 9:33 and it’s still toasty here.
A kind of mini-Medieval Warming period, I suppose.
Or sun spots.
Perhaps a misplaced urban-hot-spot.
All perfectly natural.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Terrible hot in Tasmania as well, I hear.
Terrible hot!!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
yer the kaitangata water’s hot – don’t want to dip anyone greasy in – ruin everything…
God Get those poor greens out of Politics
Make em sick – mixing with corruption.
Te Grandee is strictly a one trick pony
We’ll have to examine Pork Pie’s expenxes further
I’m backin 11 seconds of straight up missionary filth
Followed by three days of Biblical Guilt
That’s where the Brethren Snips em eh?
Wonder where Phil is?
Are yoo stoned mother?
There is no freedom anymore
“No man survives when freedom fails, The best men rot in filthy jails, And those who cry ‘appease, appease’ Are hanged by those they tried to please.”: Hiram Mann
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Shocking misrepresentation of reality with reports in the news about shrinking NZ glaciers. As a kid I loved going to South Westland to see the Franz Josef glacier in particular, and it is currently bigger than I can ever remember.
Like or Dislike:
3 
7 (-4)
Like or Dislike:
7 
1 (+6)
As global warming is no longer allowed to be querstioned, and doing so will draw scorn and name calling upon the perpetrator, does this mean that it has now transgressed over a line to become a religion?
Like or Dislike:
1 
8 (-7)
Your mission is to find ONE peer reviewed scientific paper that has actually been published and survived post publication review, that in any way shows the basic theory of anthropogenic climate change to be false, and in particular shows the human influence on warming since 1850 to be absent.
I know of NONE people. Not one. Everything that has actually reached publication has been shredded in post-publication review. You can go on, and on, and on, about how some detail might be incorrect, or how shabbily McIntyre is treated for his abuse of Jones et.al… but you’ve had 15 years of effort and you’ve got nothing.
The CO2 is still up, the temperature is still rising, and you will yammer until hell freezes and the heavens burn. I’m so fed up with the cr@p that passes for critical thought by deniers in this regard that I can barely keep a civil tongue in my head.
What AILS you people. Seriously.
I am going to borrow from a response on Realclimate here:
” The scientists wanted to use the term they defined to mean, essentially, zero doubt. The US gov’t, among others, objected and the next lower one was used.
I’d go get the sources, but what’s the point? 90% certainty for you people means, “Stop! Do nothing!!!” while for the rational it means, “90%? OH MY FREAKIN’ DEITY!”
An analogy (or two): 90% chance a car will hit you if you don’t move out of the road: you move.
90% it will rain: you take an umbrella.
90% you will die if you eat a poorly-cleaned puffer fish: you don’t eat it.
90% chance you will be in an accident and go to the hospital: you change your underwear.
A, what? 10%, or much less, chance you’ll be in a car accident in the next 5 years: you keep insurance.
A, what? 1% chance your house will burn down in the next 5 years: you keep insurance.
But, for you folk, a 90% chance of the increases in CO2/CO2e being human-caused, and dangerous to our current civilization and global sustainability? Party on, Dude!! That that chance is actually 100%, but scientists have been politically prevented from saying so in a documented form makes it that much more absurd.”
That’s the deal.
So you go ahead and find proof that the theory is wrong. It predicts things, they happen. It explains things that HAVE happened. You’ve got nothing. You can come up with an alternative theory, but you haven’t proved AGW wrong just by doing that, and the best of the skeptical papers either don’t touch the theory or get shredded once they are published.
Now you’ve just had the inner workings of the CRU dragged through the mud and there isn’t any data manipulation, isn’t any data fudging or fitting of data to warming assumptions in any of it. There isn’t any conspiracy with the communists at the UN to take over the world. There isn’t any funding from George Soros. Nothing to lead anyone with 3 working brain cells to question the science at all.
Worse, the planet is giving your ideas a one-big-finger salute.
So you guys worship people with this attitude and indeed they are running THIS country (into the ground). Yet in the long run WHEN you discover you were wrong, or your kids do, it will be impossible to fix by simply unelecting the morons in power.
No mistake. On current form we will drive the climate back to a condition where there is no ice at either pole and no civilized people anywhere on the planet… assuming we’re lucky enough to have ANY people anywhere on the planet.
“There is no planet B”
BJ
Like or Dislike:
7 
2 (+5)
No Valis, just exposing a blind and blinkered media only to happy to jump on the band wagon.
The glacier is huge compared to what it was 20 years ago end of story.
Like or Dislike:
2 
6 (-4)
Serious questions about global warming are still welcome. Most greens would dearly love proof that AGW isn’t going to happen. Unfortunately what is being offered from the deniers’ quarter is anything but proof.
Franz Joseph is not evidence on its own that AGW is not occuring. The AGW theories predict changes to existing weather patterns so some areas will experience less rain or snow while others will experience more rain or MORE SNOW.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
BJ the interpretation the media gave to the condition of NZs glaciers is wildly and outrageously incorrect.
If AGW is true there’s no need to lie.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
bj – I think your rant has just proved my point. No criticism allowed – gobal warming has become a new fully fledged religion.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
This is for Shunda
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/graph-jam/
and on the hack… another district heard from.
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/hack/
__________
At the moment Realclimate is handling the load. I suggest going there if you have a specific question about a specific e-mail’s context. Just search the thread for some key words and you’ll likely find that someone has already asked it.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Photon
All I asked was for you to give me ONE good goddammed reason to doubt it. I am asserting, for you to disprove, that you cannot. That in 15 years of trying all the skeptical science funded and supported and trumpeted by the disinformation machine has provided nothing… except that it has confused… you.
I’m tired and p!ssed off mate. I know what the SCIENCE looks like. I know what the odds are that deniers are betting my kids future on. That hand doesn’t have a pair of deuces and we’re betting the fncking planet that we can keep on partying.
Does that make it a religion? C’mon. Fair go, SHOW ME. It isn’t like it should be that hard if it is all a con… but no, and even when you’ve gone back into 16 years of the private correspondence of the CRU you haven’t got evidence of a con… and given the amount of time the number of e-mails this criminal selected is pretty telling. This is quite clearly the worst he/she could find… in 16 years… and there isn’t a damned thing there to let you doubt the science.
BJ
This is coming back to bite the denialsphere on the a55.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Shunda
The media…. there’s a thing I am surely not going to defend in this country
The neat thing about NZ is it is in the middle of the southern ocean. It is in the roaring 40′s. It is a relatively small Island. That means that OUR temperature changes will be minimal and our rainfall and snowfall will likely both increase. Particularly on South Island. This is just a WAG but I’d expect NZ glaciers to buck the global trends for a long time. Warming puts more water vapor in the air and the mountains still cool the winds that have to climb over them.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“Having retreated several kilometres between the 1940s and 1980s, the glacier entered an advancing phase in 1984 and at times has advanced at the phenomenal (by glacial standards) rate of 70 cm a day. The flow rate is about 10 times that of typical glaciers. Over the longer term, the glacier has retreated since the last ice age, and it is believed that it extended into the sea some 10,000 to 15,000 years ago.
This cyclic behaviour is well illustrated by a postage stamp issued in 1946, depicting the view from St James Anglican Church. The church was built in 1931, with a panoramic altar window to take advantage of its location. By 1954, the glacier had disappeared from view from the church, but it reappeared in 1997. This is due to the highly variable conditions on the snowfield, which take around 5-6 years before they result in changes in the terminus location.”
This glacier could be very important in understanding how precipitation in the form of snowfall could mitigate some of the polar melting AGW believers are so concerned about.
If the little ice age was in fact global then NZ’s largest glaciers will still be responding to natural global warming. The media spin is just aimed at the fact that most people are ignorant of the natural process involved, it is dishonest and only further damages the cause that they are pushing.
Like or Dislike:
3 
5 (-2)
Besides… it was a good rant. I rather enjoyed turning loose a bit.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
bj – as I’ve said before, I think the majority os scientists are probably right.
However I don’t like the way that anybody who questions anything gets attacked and name called (like you’ve just been doing).
For me and many others, that sort of religious fanatacism makes me MORE questioning – not less questioning. It’s just a bit too cult-like.
Scientists can come up with perfectly legitimate and factual research that goes against the grain, and they are labelled deniers etc. Research that shows the change as worse than ever is heralded, – anything else(factual or otherwise) is shouted down.
I would expect in anything as complicated as a global climate, there would be a body of work that shows one thing, but there would always be a number of studies that show the opposite.
In your words there isn’t a single accepted study that shows the opposite – I find that very extraordinary. And highly suspicious.
The problem is that now the results have become self selecting. You only have to wonder about recent historical record low temperatures to start to be called names. However historic hot temperatures are “proof” of warming.
There’s many similarities with the disgusting campaign by Sue Bradford to label anyone who dissagreed with her s59 bill a child beater. It’s no wonder the more she campaigned that way, the more poeple were against her bill.
If you gave 100 scientists $10 million each to prove NZ was clean and green, I bet they’d come up with overwhelming evidence. If you gave them the same money to prove NZ was dirty and polluting, I bet they’d come up with an equally convincing case.
However in this new religion, the worst possible outcomes are heralded with the loudest voices.
Like or Dislike:
6 
5 (+1)
The problem is that I have already and ad-nauseum shown people where to look for the science that answers their questions, what the actual data looks like, what the timescales mean in terms of weather vs climate vs climate CHANGE… and after I explain, they pop back up with “but what about” and it is some other spurious or irrelevant point that I am quite certain I went over 4-6 months ago. I haven’t seen a new argument in 3 years. The last new one was Galactic Cosmic Rays IIRC, and that hasn’t gone anywhere.
The problem is, at this point, to get a contrary result you’d almost have to be making a mistake. There are two ways that this condition can occur (not making mistakes, but the inability to get a contrary result without one). The first is that God is playing with your head. The second is that the theory is solidifying.
In other words, it is getting more like evolution and less like theories of origins.
You can question evolution if you like, but only a religion based CHALLENGE is possible. Evolution isn’t a religion… it only appears so because its only opposition is religion.
Which is a point that you have to examine for yourself. When I debate I find myself talking to people who have only two agendas… that is cannot be the CO2 and it cannot be us. They shift from one argument to the next, as fast as I can knock them down. Arguments that often contradict each other, or are unrelated to any science at all.
Warming isn’t based on one bit of work. It is understood through multiple lines of evidence. Again I borrow:
Scientists are scared sh!tless Photon. I am scared sh!tless. The data is overwhelming, the consequences catastrophic for human civilization. How should I explain this? Should I lie and tell people it isn’t going to be that bad because the politicians don’t think the people can handle the truth? That is what happens to the IPCC.
The point is that it doesn’t matter WHAT I do. There are people involved in this who simply want the problem to go away… sometimes they are otherwise intelligent people who simply don’t want to see change. Far too often though, they are driven by an ideological mindset that says “government intervention bad”, This problem will clearly require government intervention to fix. Therefore we cannot allow this problem to exist. But Canute could not stop the tide and neither can Wishart.
Which doesn’t even go half far enough to condemn the new ETS deal, but that’s a whole ‘nother level of bad.
And this is enough for the night.
Continue in the AM if I can. Work calls.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
Nobody is handing scientists 10 million each to prove anything. The majority work for salary, and get paid no matter whether we get global warming or a chance of oobleck. Really. The few who work for cash are not exactly reliable. If you got a 100 scientists I’d like to think that more than half would rather be paid a wage and find the truth… rather than take your money to find some way to fit your truth.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
Would you be so kind as to post your thoughts on just that passage? His point is one that I find critical to our reaction to the global climate ‘situation’.
Cheers Mr Barunda.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Photonz1 said:
I don’t like the way that anybody who questions anything gets attacked and name called .
In my experience of watching the debate’s progress, it seems to me that those who ‘question’ are not doing so in a way that says, ” Yes, Warming is clearly real but can somebody clarify this seemingly contradictory point?”, rather, I see, “Aha! Look! This point proves that AGW is WRONG and you are religious zealots to keep believing in it!!!”
This might explain the reaction you are describing. It might be interesting for you to think about your own approach, in light of my description.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
No, criticism is fine, as bj explicitly stated. But it needs to be evidence based, otherwise is just hot air.
– gobal warming has become a new fully fledged religion.
This is a worse fallacy. Religion is belief despite the facts. What bj offers is the exact opposite.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1 (+5)
Tonight, me and me greenie mates are going to take our hammers and go smash some looms!
Heh!
Greenfly, bringing a tear to gaia’s eye since forever.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Wingnuts Wishart and Whaleoil are wetting themselves – several times over.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
But its ok to hack into National party emails is it Toad? your logic is totally flawed and totally hypocritical.
Like or Dislike:
4 
3 (+1)
Would you be so kind as to post your thoughts on just that passage? His point is one that I find critical to our reaction to the global climate ’situation’.
Cheers Mr Barunda.”
Well aren’t you the definition of civility and respect today señor fly!
To you good sir I say this.
The good mr bjchip has raised an interesting and fair point regarding my earlier post, however I would suggest that higher water vapour levels will not just dump more snow on the western Southern Alps. This phenomena could likely be repeated in other mountains subject to westerly weather and more importantly the interior of Antarctica. Could this be an important natural regulator of global climate and sea levels?
I thank you for your time Mister Fly and look forward to your response.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0 (+5)
Shunda, no it is not ok to hack into anyone’s emails.
But no-one has ever produced an allegation, let alone any evidence, that the Parliamentary mail server was hacked to get Brash’s emails. The allegation, as I understand it, is that they were supplied to Nicky Hager by someone who had legitimate access to them. Unethical, maybe. Misconduct as an employee, maybe. But illegal, no.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
no ‘fresh’ gen debate this morn..?..frog..?
(we have to pick the old stale/crumpled one out of the ashtray..?
and dust it off/flatten it out..?..)
wouldn’t it be easy to program..?..to automatically pop-up..?.
(this is from the washington post..)
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/support-for-legalizing-marijuana-gaining-ground-rapidly/
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
i’m waiting for owen to turn up..
given he is an expert on ‘false climate-science’ claims..
from the other side..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Well the problem is that pointing at “recent historical record low temperatures” is a lot like pointing at a Manticore. Both are fictional beasts. It is worse at this point as the assertion of these temperatures has been debunked repeatedly on this blog and elsewhere in many forms.
How one reacts when it is obvious that a questioner is not listening is a measure of patience… merely a human characteristic. Much as the hostility directed at McIntyre’s mob in the e-mails is an expression of human exasperation. The problem of course is that Jones did NOT make those contempt public, someone else did… and McIntyre makes insults and contempt a feature of his blog.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Phillip Ure said “i actually know not enough about the specifics/detail to make any comment ..”
on Kiwiblog this a.m. re GW
Now he is waiting for Owen to turn up. For a debate?
Out of your league I think phool.
I see that now bloggers have blocked you on Kiwiblog you have now taken to whoring your site on frogblog.
I wonder how long the Frog will allow that?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj – you prove my point again. We’ve just had a the coldest October on record, and because you say so – that’s dismissed as fiction.
When you get one set of facts, and say they are proof of warming, and get another set of fact – actual facts – that don fit, they are completely dismissed as not even happening.
I was here – it was freezing, and I’ve got the power bill to prove it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sorry Photon… you weren’t so specific and I was discussing the common (over the last 6 months) claim made about the declining temperatures of the past decade. I assumed that you know the difference between weather and climate… and I still believe you do… so I thought you were talking about those other claims.
I was not dismissing the record cold of October, it never crossed my mind to consider it… nor did I make any comment on the month of August which had record warmth. I too well know the difference.
There is reason to believe weather will become more variable as the climate warms… which might play to both, but I don’t claim that either. It would take more years of data than are contained in 60 days.
You notice I didn’t call you any names though, did I?
BJ
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
I think he’s wanting to get Owen and Me into it Pentwig. Phil is fine. He just knows that I don’t go to Kiwiblog much.
The idea of wallowing in sh!t wrestling with pigs just isn’t all that attractive.
Owen is welcome here anytime. He makes good arguments and he thinks about things and doesn’t drag the board into the gutter. Phil is ALSO welcome here, for much the same reason.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
“..pentwig
Posted November 24, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Phillip Ure said “i actually know not enough about the specifics/detail to make any comment ..”
on Kiwiblog this a.m. re GW..”
you really just outright lie..don’t you pentwig..?
that response was in reply to a request for a comment from me..on those leaked-emails..
as you well know..
why the lie..?
you grotty little troll..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
“Cannabis on trial”
Next month Dakta Green of NORML is going to court for cannabis related charges. Although he is facing up to 8 years behind bars, I have heard that he is confident of a permanent ‘stay’.
This could be a landmark case. His main defence is s9 of the Bill of Rights which gives us the right not to be subjected to disproportionately severe treatment or punishment.
http://thedaktory.org.nz/events/cannabis-to-go-on-trial/#more-206
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
– Like warmer temperatures can mean more evaporation from the Tasman Sea, meaning more snow on the main divide, meaning faster and growing glaciers.
- Like a move (at to high a speed) to bio fuels led to deforestation.
- Like the environmentalist who had a go at me at a party recently for all the dirty emissions I put out when riding dirt bikes. He was clean and green and regularly went tramping instead. However getting to just ONE of his regular tramps (a tank of petrol each way) used the same amount of fuel as goes through my bike in TWO YEARS.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Yea I guessed that as most of us do enjoy your intellectual and reasoned discussions.
Its just the phool interupts these discussions with inane links to his whore site or unintelligent rantings that even the most educated could not understand.
It denigrates and devalues the site.
Most discerning.
Regards
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Pentwig is from Kiwiblog Phil. There they ignore facts use obscenity and call people names. That’s their style and it triumphed over substance years ago. Hopefully he will prove to be a more thoughtful poster while here (our style will rub off on him).
No telling.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Pentwig
I think I owe you an apology for implying that you might be like the mob there. I jumped to a conclusion and shot my mouth off, and there you are in a cross-post complimenting me. Well that’s a size 10 (wide) to somehow extract from my mouth before lunch.
I just had the a post deleted there, for pointing out how rude DPF actually is. I am a trifle annoyed with DPF and his herd. It rubbed off.
Sorry.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
All that is true Photon…
…and I spend a lot of time explaining seeming contradictions.
The science isn’t contradictory though. They don’t discuss those two months EXCEPT in terms of a possible indication of increased variability… and they know they have to examine a LOT of data over a much longer time to even make that claim.
However, the AGW is there in the data. We have to respond to it or our civilization dies.
The thing I work from is simply this. If the price of carbon reflects accurately through the economy, you won’t ride as much and he won’t drive as far and plastic toys from china will be more expensive and wood toys from NZ will be relatively speaking, cheaper…. and that is the one thing that National has made sure CANNOT happen under their new ETS. Removing the market forces is a blatant bid to make the ETS into a wealth transfer scheme- from the taxpayers to the emitters- without any chance that it will alter a single decision about consumption.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Friend Shunda – grateful, I am, for your response. I was especially interested in this line of bj’s,
“I’d expect NZ glaciers to buck the global trends for a long time”,
and wondered whether you agree, in terms of the several times you’ve cited the growing glacier to support your argument?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
bj – The problem I see with carbon trading, is that it relies on price to change peoples behaviour.
And while this will have an effect, I don’t think it will have as much an effect as people want.
Peoples decisions to purchase relies on many factors, only one of which is price. If price was so important, no one would be driving anything except Hyundis, Keas and Suzukis, and they would only be the small economical models. Why do people pay tens of thousands more for cars that do the same thing and are not necessarily any better – in fact in many aspects they’re worse.
Similarly all the shops would close down except the likes of The Warehouse.
So I belive some consumer habits will change a little, but I doubt it will be anything like enough to make much of a difference to emissions.
We need to be much more focused on other dirrections if we want to make a big difference.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Hey that’s okay BJChip
But hadn’t you noticed I do not even use the diminutive form of your name in case offence may be taken.
I am not arse licking but respect creates respect IMHO.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
respect creates respect
Exactly.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Photon
The reason price hasn’t affected things is simply that it isn’t actually high enough, and National is determined that it should not become high enough, to change behavior. For a party that believes in market forces, it sure is acting like a bunch of arrogant, rapacious thugs.
If petrol were suddenly to be $5-6 per liter, the changes would be profound and rapid. This is a shock and is to be avoided if possible, and not just in terms of petrol. Realistic Carbon prices make the National ETS setup completely untenable. Business plans made on the basis of their ETS will be in deep trouble as soon as CO2 goes over $50 and the taxpayer revolt against the effects of it kick in.
I am not asserting that price is the fastest or easiest way to implement CO2 reduction… it is however, the CORRECT way to do it. The problem with the economy in this respect has always been that there is no price on the commons. There never has been. It breaks business models across the board to put a price on it… and the economy has to adjust to the price freely and in its totality if we are to have an efficient implementation. Could we goose it along with regulations and specific laws? Certainly. However, such measures always create loopholes and unintended consequences. Not saying I won’t take them. Just that there is often difficulty in the implementation as the market adjusts to get around them to all that free stuff in the commons. It always does.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
bj – In the UK, petrol is over NZ$2.50 per litre, compulsory insurance is very expensive, as are cars, and there’s lots of public transport, yet STILL millions of people sit in their cars and turn the M25 into the world’s biggest parking lot every day.
People just get used to high prices for some things, and rather than changing behaviour, they often just pay the extra. We all used to pay $1000 for a microwave – and naearly everyone had one – which is $6400 in todays prices.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
“Friend Shunda – grateful, I am, for your response. I was especially interested in this line of bj’s,
“I’d expect NZ glaciers to buck the global trends for a long time”,
and wondered whether you agree, in terms of the several times you’ve cited the growing glacier to support your argument?”
Good morrow good sir! much I have to contemplate on your persistent musings!
Bucking trends, growing glacier, several times!, wondered whether!! many many good points to consider.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
“..respect creates respect ..”
shame yr a lying toe-rag then..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
3 
4 (-1)
Greenpeace’s anti-Fonterra protest – sacks marked ‘dirty coal’ and ‘PKE’, stacked on the steps of Parliament – effective.
Short, sharp protest.
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
Or rather, Fonterra’s doorstep.
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
any seinfeld fans out there..?
a new/modern episode has been made..
and here it is..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/a-new-seinfeld-episodeanyone/
(the story..?
george is not happy..
has has made millions from a ‘killer’ phone app. ..to do with public toilets..
and his ex-trophy-wife has half his millions..
and bernie madoff got the rest..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
Where a price on carbon means that every tonne of carbon emitted is accounted for with a tonne of carbon sequestered, as in any half-decent trading system, the behavior changes induced by pricing are not what makes the real difference in achieving the ultimate goal. Under such a scheme the reduction to zero NET emissions is only in part the result of decreased usage, the majority would most likely be from sequestration. In fact, we could increase usage so long as there was increased sequestration.
The matter of us having enough resources is what makes behaviour change pertinent to survival, the C02 is only relevant if not accounted for by sequestration.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
“Man bites Dog” story surely.
Even George Monbiot, one of the fiercest media propagandists of the warming faith, admits he should have been more sceptical and says the science now needs to be rechecked:
“It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.
Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.”
Sure, Monbiot claims the fudging of what he extremely optimistically puts as just “three or four” scientists doesn’t knock over the whole global warming edifice, yet…
“I apologise. I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed. I would have been a better journalist if I had investigated their claims more closely.”
Like or Dislike:
4 
5 (-1)
There’s nothing in the dump that justifies the science being discarded, but several things that speak to a lack of sense on the part of these two scientists. More to the point, nothing that they are in charge of, from now on, can be trusted. They could be useful in analytical or data collection arrangements, but only working for someone else who hasn’t got the defensiveness, siege mentality and ego problems. I would not want to see their names on any papers henceforth.
Which is what my comment on RealClimate says as well FWIW.
respectfully
BJ
*who is personally happy to have never (since Mann and McIntyre first erupted) defended Mann or Jones.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
During his last years my mentor and Professor at Berkeley, become more and more interested in the role of culture in decision making at all levels of society. He is generally regarded as the father of Public Policy and in these studies he was challenging the “rational man” model not by denying any role for reason but by emphasising that human behaviour is also determined by beliefs and traditions.
I suspect if he was still alive he would be setting a bunch of students onto this episode as a wonderful example of how a culture of belief can impact on even the most rational group of people.
This may be an early demonstration of one of the downsides of the internet. The rapid and prolific communication enabled by email may well promote the development of inwarding looking and intolerant culture which must undermine the tradition of the scientific method. Scientists have always been passionate.
BUt they have tended to be passionate in their own studies.
Twelve years ago I presented a paper to the Quest organisation on how the internet would promote Tribal Marketing. It seems we have seen the emergence of Tribal Science. Certainly the key players here were behaving lke members of a tribe – defending their territory, and expelling outsiders et.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
Is that paper online somewhere, Owen?
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
Not at present.
I shall post it on my web site once I get it into a modern programme.
Here are a few subsequent notes which “give the picture”
TRIBAL MARKETING – A NEW COUNTRY TO BE EXPLORED.
Some questions and some hypotheses in reply which need to be tested with some solid research.
Q. At what point does an amorphous collection of individuals, tastes, beliefs become a tribe? When did Apple Mac users become a tribe?
A. The general theory of Tribal Marketing suggests that an amorphous collection of individuals who use some product become a tribe when the signals the users send to each other become more important than the signals sent by the provider. For example Mac users begin to become a tribe when they form passionate Mac User Groups. When these groups call themselves MUGS and develop a private “language” their tribal status is confirmed.
Q. When is a tribe not a brand, or a brand not a tribe? i.e. what is the
difference? Does the fact that I like Apple Macs make me a purchaser of the Apple brand or a member of the Apple tribe?
A. Again the key difference lies in the flow of information. Tribal communication goes beyond normal “word-of-mouth” endorsement of a brand. When Harley Davidson owners meet for weekend conventions and get together for Harley tours they are doing much more than endorsing the Harley brand; they are living the Harley lifestyle. Their clothes, the tribal talk, their hair styles, tattoos and their special rituals confirm their membership of the Harley tribe. Most importantly their membership of this tribe has become a key to their personal identity. This happened briefly with the Italian Vespa motorscooter which became an important tribal icon for the swingers of the sixties.
Tribal marketing frequently moves the potency of the brand from the product to the venue, or even to another object of passion. It’s difficult to make people feel passionate about trainer shoes – but their passion for sporting icon Mike Jordon can be transferred to the Nike product. Similarly people don’t get passionate about soap but their passion for the environment can be transferred to the venue The Body Shop and thence to the products within it.
Needless to say all members of the Apple Tribe like their Apple Macs – but not all Apple Mac users become committed members of the Apple Tribe.
Q. Why did mainstream American marketing become too closely bound-up with brand management?
(This question may deserve an article of its own. I explained this in my original draft but had to cut it out because it became too long.)
A. As American’s became the first to formalise the teaching of business management within Universities they came under pressure to legitimise management as an academic discipline. (These pressures are familiar to social scientists who end up trivialising their work in the cause of being scientifically rigourous.) Marketing techniques associated with brand management were demonstrably based on “scientific surveys” and “statistical analysis” which created convincing academic papers with lots of regression analysis and calculations of standard deviations and Z tests and F tests. Within their limitations these proved to be powerful tools.
The end result of this pressure to be scientific and to exclude intuition, hunch and creativity generated course material and text books in which:
* The case studies focus on simple and proven consumer goods of the past such as soap powders and beer. The name of the game was to win another percentage point of market share.
* Extensive, expensive and highly analytical market research is promoted as the key to a product launch. The emphasis on analysis encourages marketing managers to sit at their desks and analyse reams of computer print-outs. No “scientific” marketing manager should would along Venice Beach and invent the Sony Walkman.
* The occasional chapter on innovation would focus on the high risks of innovation, and never mention the risk of failing to innovate.
* Product development case studies deal with changing the colour of the envelope – never about inventing the fax.
* Time has no value. Planning a new package for your detergent must take as long, and cost as much, as you need to get it absolutely right – because if you get it wrong you will end up as a case study in in an MBA course. (By contrast the Japanese developed a technique of rapid prototyping and market testing, modification or withdrawal. Failure is no great stigma.)
* Finally the last, and slimmest, chapter in the text might deal with International Marketing. It will focus on how to make sure that the brand name on your Soap Powder does not offend the Hong Kong housewife.
High level innovation is necessarily excluded because it is not succeptible to “scientific marketing”. The irony is that this psuedo science overlooks the fact that genuine scientific breakthroughs demand an act of creative intuition. No new theory can be deduced from existing information. They had never read their Karl Popper.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4 (-2)
Interesting Owen, thanks. Seth Godin may have read you work…..:)
Where do you think marketing is going on the internet from this point?
Like or Dislike:
0 
6 (-6)
there is an ets ‘development’..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/maori-party-revolt-threatens-ets/
(watch that space..)
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Pai rawa te mahi o nga taangata kei runga whenua!
Kaua e tautoko koutou i te mahi ke o te Pati Kikorangi!
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
translation plse..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Don’t support the nasty work of the National Party.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
It would be great, but I doubt they’ll pull their votes.
The entire ETS is a sham, based on science that now needs to be reinvestigated.
Like or Dislike:
2 
7 (-5)
“The question needs to be asked, do we want to be remembered as a party that gave future generations a horrendous debt, or do we want to be known as a party that took a principled stand against a terrible scheme?” the party source said.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
@phil u 10:44 AM
Haere mai koutou ki te Pati Kakariki.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
This is better. I shall let you know when the 1995 papers are up on my website.
During his last years, the late Aaron Wildavsky, then Dean of the School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley, became more and more interested in the role of group ‘culture’ in shaping social behaviour. One of his observations was that the more the individual is incorporated into bonded unit, the more individual choice is subject to group determination.
Aaron was generally regarded as ‘the father of Public Policy’ and in this group of books and papers he was challenging the ‘rational man’ model of decision-making. He was not denying the importance of reason and scientific method, but was emphasising that human behaviour is also modified by strongly held beliefs and traditions, and in particular, by group loyalties.
I suspect if Aaron was still alive he would be setting a bunch of his graduate students onto this episode of the leaked Climate Research Unit emails as a textbook example of how a ‘culture of group belief’ can impact on the behaviour of the supposedly rational and impartial people who are presumed to occupy the scientific community.
These emails may be an early demonstration of one of the downsides of the internet, and of email in particular.
The rapid and prolific communication enabled by email certainly promotes the free and widespread sharing of information and knowhow.
But the same ease of communication may well promote the development of an inward-looking and intolerant tribal culture which can seriously undermine the established disciplines and traditions of the scientific method.
Scientists have always been passionate about their theories. Dawkins, Teller, Feynman, Pinker, Gould and Gliek are hardly famous for their lack of commitment to their beleifs.
But prior to the internet such scientists have tended to be passionate individuals working at their desks within their own studies, and sharing their ideas with suitably sceptical colleagues and graduate students.
Fifteen years ago I presented a paper to the Quest organisation’s 1995 AGM in Florida, on how the internet would promote Tribal Marketing.
The release of the CRU emails suggests suggest that sadly the internet has promoted the development of Tribal Science.
Certainly the key players, as revealed in this collection of leaked emails, have been behaving like members of a fervent and passionate tribe – defending their territory, shaping evidence to support their beliefs and waging war on outsiders.
Wildavsky would be the first to point out that there is no need to call on conspiracy theory, or financial incentives, to explain this tribal behaviour; just the power of the culture of the group.
The CRU team and their internet colleagues had taken on the intolerant behaviour and inemperate language of the fervent tribes that build up around extremist blogs on the Internet.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
BLue Peter.
Re marketing:
I wrote my essays in 1994 and presented them in 1995. Phil U seems to presume the oil companies paid me to write about Tribal Marketing because he assumes the only reason I have ideas is that the oil companies pay me to have them.
I find these essays prescient but I did not foresee the blog tribes etc. Those were such early times. But you can blame me for the ubiquity of “passion”. They all seemed to pick up on it.
Thanks for directing me to Seth Godin.
When I read the heading of his essay “BRand management is so 1999″ why does Whale Rider come to mind?
He seems to have generally regurgitated all my stuff and I find no attributions – at least on the web.
Maybe they are in the books.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
I think your essay on tribes was well ahead of its time, and rings true in my experience. Seth Godin wrote a book called “Tribes” recently, touching on many of the points you made.
Are your other articles on the web somewhere?
Like or Dislike:
1 
5 (-4)
Blue Peter
I am putting all three up on my web page today.
But I am sending out a Digest with them all in a few minutes.
If you send me your email address I can include you in the list.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Sent. Thanks Owen.
Like or Dislike:
4 
6 (-2)
Two down votes for:
“Sent. Thanks Owen.”
Man! Tough crowd!
One wonders if some on the left care not about the message, only about the person saying it.
Like or Dislike:
4 
7 (-3)
Tasers safer than batons and fists
Using a Taser to subdue a violent suspect is safer than police batons and fists. That is the surprising conclusion of a study of incidents in which US police used force to tackle a person who was resisting arrest.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18168-tasers-safer-than-batons-and-fists.html?DCMP=NLC-nletter&nsref=dn18168
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Negotiation is safer than batons, fists, tazers and guns.
My, not surprising conclusion.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
Greenfly have you established who the rightful and true users of “the garden party” are yet?
Can’t join if its not the real deal!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Jh Christ you promote war amonst classes – 17th century fool – scurvy to the notion…
What shall we use among our fellows – brutality
Or identification – jh has made his choice!!
Poo to a Goose
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Shunda – as promised, I followed up on your lead and found … a pretender to my throne, but not a bad bloke, by the sounds of it. I’m in discussion presently. By pure chance, I had visitors from the very hamlet the GP promoter is domiciled (way north of you and I)and filled in some other pieces of the puzzle. Hold your subscription for now (don’t fritter it away on the pokies Shunda!) and I’ll keep you in the loop as more details come through.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
“..One wonders if some on the left care not about the message, only about the person saying it..”
have you ever been to kiwiblog..?
bluepeter..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Well I have Terriers with a simlar tude. There it Is Mark – kill it! Kill the Beast!!!
(ref;lord of th Flies)
No Dogs, all life is sacred
so don’t fuck up
Anyone call you Vital yet?
Naw we got em sleepy again chief
for the best eh?
Sapient!!!!
Did you suscribe to eric francis?
Cos the late news is fascinatin…..
ah well another day, another
you know – i can semd you one more
but only in return for verbal paintings
take your time
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
kiwiblog? kiwiblog? The bite of the white-tailed spider can be nasty and fester badly, causing great discomfort and fear of daylight – kiwiblog.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
Doing some calibration.
Looks like whatever I post, I will be guaranteed -4 votes, based solely on the fact I’m making a post of any sort.
So the -4 becomes 0 once the “free speech hypocrite” vote is removed.
Like or Dislike:
2 
7 (-5)
You’ve got fans Blue!
The kind of fans that are used to expel bad air.
(It’s a joke, don’t feel bad).
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Ah but have you experimented with morning and afternoon posts – people tend to be less grumpy after lunch.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)