WUWT “One Of The Most Radical Climate-Denier Blogs” …Their Purpose: “Permanently Produce Fake News”

Here’s a good example of how climate alarmists and leftists in Germany react when confronted with different opinions or the truth. It just illustrates the brand of radicalism we’re up against.

Last week on August 8 Germany’s top climate alarmism propaganda site Klimaretter (Climate Rescuers) here reported on the “explosive” US government climate report that was “leaked” to the New York Times.

Supposedly the Trump Administration was suppressing the “leaked” report and fighting to keep it out of the public’s view. And now that it was out, the Trump government found itself “under pressure”.

Then a couple of days later, it emerged in the US media that the report had in truth not been kept away from public view after all, and that the New York Times really hadn’t broken any “explosive” story. The report had in fact long been available to anyone for months.

The New York Times even had to issue a humiliating correction and clarification for the “large screw-up“.

On  August 11, reader Reinhard Lange left a comment at Klimaretter pointing out that their story was faulty and needed to be urgently corrected. Lange provided a link to WUWT for Klimaretter, so that they could get the details.

The blunder of course was highly embarrassing for the extremely devout Klimaretter site, and one of their attack dogs, reader Martok, immediately responded (above):

Watts Up with That is one of the most radical climate-denier blogs that exists in the entire Internet. This site has only one purpose, namely to permanently produce fake news and to write exactly the opposite of what the latest research tells us. ‘Information’ from there has no value whatsoever because this site is a pure propaganda platform that only wishes to spread disinformation.”

This is a typical reaction one often gets from radical alarmists in Germany. Contrary information gets immediately regarded as blasphemy. Denial mode gets immediately activated.

Undeterred, Lange persisted, first wondering why such an aggressive attitude on the part of Martok, and then pointed out to Klimaretter that the report draft had long since been available, and that even the NYT itself issued a (half-hearted) correction.

Next Klimaretter lapdog Regim responded next, insisting that the US government never officially released the report, and then accused Lange of copying from the WUWT “climate denier blog”. She demanded of Lange:

Why wasn’t the report published on a government site and presented to the public? Why was only a draft published?

A disbelieving Lange in turn replied, “Are you really that clueless?“, and then explained where to find the report and that there was nothing unusual with anything.

Not good enough. Regim demanded an address to the government site containing the draft report.

So Lange instructed her to try using a tool called “a search engine”. Again Regim demanded a direct address:

and warned (marked yellow) above:

If you again answer in this way for a third time, then I’m going to ask Moderation to ban you.”

Lange replied that they should feel free to ban him, and again told her where to get the information on the story, adding that details could be found among other places at an article by the Daily Caller before wishing her luck.

Still not good enough for Regim. The Daily Caller too is a “right-extremist” paper, she insisted.

By now Klimaretter’s embarrassment was becoming full-scale humiliation, as it was clear that the original NYT article was seriously flawed.

At this point a normal outlet would have long since issued a correction. But not Klimaretter. Rather than thanking Lange for pointing out the story’s major flaw, correcting it and apologizing, Klimaretter banned Lange:

In English:

User banned (multiple disparaging  comments, ‘trolling’)

That’s the reward one gets in Germany for bringing out the truth – you get banned because insisting on the truth that demolishes the narrative is “trolling”. As far as I know, Klimaretter continues to stand by its story, even though the NYT issued a correction.

Is it possible to engage in a discussion with the likes of Klimaretter? Obviously the answer is no. An open discussion is the last thing they seek. What they want is a discussion shut-down.

In case Klimaretter may still be interested, they can refer to the Washington Post here. Yes, the NYT piece was crap. Time to stop hiding.

Thanks, Reinhard Lange. You exposed how these people really work.

 

60 responses to “WUWT “One Of The Most Radical Climate-Denier Blogs” …Their Purpose: “Permanently Produce Fake News””

  1. Kenneth Richard

    “That’s the reward one gets in Germany for bringing out the truth – you get banned because insisting on the truth that demolishes the narrative is ‘trolling’.”

    Pretty sure it’s that way on just about every catastrophic anthropogenic global warming advocacy blog anywhere, not just in Germany. Try posting a response on John Cook’s SkepticalScience site (Australia), or on RealClimate (US). Any disagreement with the narrative is removed, banned.

  2. SebastianH

    I guess a thank you is in order. Thank you for allowing commenters to expose the denier crowd in the comment section of this blog to the idea that they might be wrong.

    At least you guys are confident in your belief and that’s admirable. Even though it sometimes gets out of hand and discussions a little bit circular 😉

    1. yonason

      Chatbot SebH writes..

      “Even though it sometimes gets out of hand and discussions a little bit circular”

      The only thing that’s circular is chatbot “reasoning.”

    2. Kenneth Richard

      “expose the denier crowd…confident in your belief”

      What truth about catastrophic global warming caused by humans (i.e., up to 6 C of warming by 2100, 10 feet of sea level rise by 2065, 1 million species extinctions by 2050) is it that you are exposing the deniers for not believing in?

      1. SebastianH

        [-snip….all nonsense you’ve written here. The point here is that Klimaretter was wrong and refuses to acknowledge it…even though totally caught red-handed. With your comment you only do the same as Klimaretter. Even when proven wrong, you insist you’re still right. This is mentally unhealthy. -PG]

        1. SebastianH

          I replied to Kenneth, not whatever the Klimaretter site did wrong …

    3. Josh

      @SebH

      ‘Thank you for allowing commenters to expose the denier crowd…’

      Thanks again for showing once again that you and your ilk are totally lacking in class and substance with your denial slime remarks etc. Since the warmist crowd are into trends, I have noticed one myself. You and your co-thinkers (?) are free to express your views on sites such as these, however we skeptics become the victims of censorship when attempting do the same on sites that hold AGW views. This has to stop. GROW UP SEBH!!!

      ‘ Even though it sometimes gets out of hand and discussions a little bit circular 😉’

      You have had the problems with your arguments and reasoning drawn to your attention so many times, more than I care to remember. Yet you persist?

      1. Kenneth Richard

        Thanks again for showing once again that you and your ilk are totally lacking in class and substance with your denial slime remarks etc.

        Using the d-word is anathema to me considering its association with bigotry (Holocaust-denying anti-Semites). SebastianH knows this, and yet he continues to use that word anyway…after even saying he would refrain from using it about a month ago. Yes, this it does come down to classlessness…and civility.

        1. Josh

          Hi Mr Richard!

          I enjoy reading your comments and posts on this site. Do AGWers realise that their behaviour could potentially shunt fence-sitters over to the skeptical/lukewarm side? Then again if this is the case, should the rest of us be worried?

          1. Kenneth Richard

            Thanks, Josh. I wouldn’t be surprised if SebastianH’s behavior has been noted by fence-sitters…and that they have come to the conclusion that name-calling and concocting straw men isn’t persuasive.

          2. SebastianH

            I hope fence-sitters are smart enough to recognize when Kenneth and especially AndyG55 are wrong and don’t seem to understand their mistakes when explained in detail what is wrong with their argument. I hope fence-sitters also notice how skeptics on this blog (apart from Kenneth) are using very colorful adjectives and act like they act (insults, rants, etc).

          3. ClimateOtter

            Seb has a job? Outside of smearing and denigrating skeptics, that is.

          4. SebastianH

            Any565 is not a fence sitter.

            He definitely isn’t … did I suggest that he is?

            @ClimateOtter:
            No, I get paid to alert you to your mistakes in reasoning against AGW /sark

          5. ClimateOtter

            sebH~ what mistakes?

        2. Colorado Wellington

          There is no doubt that Sebastian and his comrades are using the word on purpose to dehumanize their adversaries and tie them to Nazis and other haters of Jews.

          “We have Holocaust deniers; we have climate change deniers. And to be honest, I don’t think there’s a great deal of difference.”

          – Bill McGuire, University College London (2006)

          “Would the media insist on having a Holocaust-denier to balance any report about the Second Word War?”

          – Caroline Lucas, U.K. Green Party MP (2007)

          “The obvious reductio ad absurdum is Holocaust deniers: Should their perspective be provided, for “balance,” any time someone writes about the Holocaust?”

          – Chris Mooney, The Intersection (2006)

          ———-
          h/t JoNova
          http://joannenova.com.au/2014/03/climate-change-denial-and-the-holocaust-allusion

          1. Colorado Wellington

            The paragraph formatting in the [blockquote] section doesn’t see to work too well …

          2. Kenneth Richard

            I’ve told SebastianH not to use that offensive word for this very reason (the connection to hate and bigotry) before. He doesn’t listen; he even defends the use of the term, saying well, that’s what we are.

            If SebastianH was told to stop calling women at his workplace “babes” because it’s offensive to them, he’d probably retort the same way: “Why should I stop calling you that? You are a babe.”

          3. SebastianH

            If SebastianH was told to stop calling women at his workplace “babes” because it’s offensive to them, he’d probably retort the same way: “Why should I stop calling you that? You are a babe.”

            It’s interesting that you regularly complain that I would be making up things you never said … what exactly are you doing in this paragraph? Is that some kind of revenge?

          4. Kenneth Richard

            You’ve been asked to stop using the word “denier” many, many times because we consider it ethnically/religiously offensive due to its connections to anti-Semitism. At one time, you said you would stop using this word. You have continued to use this offensive language despite being asked to stop, justifying it by saying “Well, that’s what you are.” So, in a thought experiment, I provided an analogy of what using insensitive language might look like in another context: calling women “babes” at a workplace. Do I think you would really do that? No. (At least I hope not.) Did I use that example to provide you with yet another explanation as to why we do not like that particular word hurled at us? Yes.

            SebastianH, please stop calling people who disagree with your views “deniers”. We find it offensive. You are not welcome to keep on using this word to name-call here. Please be considerate and accommodate this request.

  3. Bitter&twisted

    Klimaretter’s hysterical response is typical of a fanatical religious cult when confronted with a fact that directly contradicts its core belief, or dogma.

    1. Jeff Wood

      B&T, I recall that soon after taking an interest in alleged AGW, around 2006 as I recall, I had to ask myself the question “Are these people fools or knaves?”

      I must have lived a sheltered life. For a long time it did not occur to me to wonder if they are cultists…

      1. sunsettommy

        Jeff and other readers, suggest you read the celebrated Science Fiction novel, The Marching Morons by Cyril Kornbluth.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons

        It is slowly becoming a reality.

    2. Josh

      Indeed. Cults all over the world claim to possess some kind of special knowledge.

      1. SebastianH

        It’s not special. Access to it is open and you can verify everything yourself.

        1. Robert Folkerts

          Not questioning the cult status Seb?

  4. Doug Proctor

    I just finished reading Vix Day’s Social Justice Warriors Always Lie. Rule #2 is that SJWs always double down when caught lying. He was so right!

    He also points out that they argue rhetorically, not dialectically, i.e. avoid logic and use emotion – all those hateful words – because the injustice is in what they “feel”, not in what “is”.
    Coulda cut and pasted this into his book.

    1. Newminster

      Allow me to support you on Vix Day.

      That book ought to be a “must read” for everyone concerned about the way that the left, especially in academia, is attempting to dictate what thought is permissible and shut down dissenting views by bullying “offenders” into submission or risk losing their livelihoods.

      His advice on how to recognise the SJWs and counteract their poison is first class.

      1. SebastianH

        I hope that “counteracting” doesn’t involve misinforming people by spreading imagined facts or fake news at it is called recently?

        1. Josh

          Projection much?

  5. Rud Istvan

    SOP for warmunists. Ban the truth.

  6. yonason

    Speaking of “fake news.”

    Writing about Merkel’s chances of winning the upcoming election, this article is primarily about her attitude toward the muslime invaders she has been, and wants to continue, letting in.
    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/08/13/merkel-un-european-union-take-more-migrants/

    In the last paragraph, they give us a few bits of [dis?]information, lie that she is allegedly ahead by about 14 points in the polls, and this claim which, if true, explains why someone with such destructive environmental ideas keeps getting elected…

    “[A] poll on German attitudes found that climate change is the greatest personal concern of 71 per cent of Germans – ahead of mass migration and terrorism.”

    71 percent? Really? That’s a LOT of chatbots!

    Are Germans REALLY more worried about a unicorn stubbing it’s toe than the very real and present danger of the invasion currently in progress?

    Also, when some activists tell you a website is “fake news,” do they try to show it is, or are they afraid that might draw too much attention to what they are saying, and show who the fake news REALLY is?

    1. Josh

      “[A] poll on German attitudes found that climate change is the greatest personal concern of 71 per cent of Germans – ahead of mass migration and terrorism.”

      Surely Germans are not this gullible? It’s sad to see a seemingly intelligent people fall prey to such an irrational ideology. Is a mass awakening on the horizon in Germany? Here’s hoping 🙂

    2. SebastianH

      Do you consider the daily caller website to be a source of truth? (honest question) Would you say there are no fake news on their website?

      1. Josh

        Do you consider Green sites to be a source of truth? If so you are an enemy of the truth.

      2. yonason

        Would anyone consider the Washington Post a source of accurate news?

        It’s not. More like outright slander.
        http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/wapo-liars-publish-horrible-fakenews-story-fred-trump-never-kkk-top-jewish-donor-supporter-new-york-city/

        They aren’t any more honest Than SebH about “climate change,” either.
        http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/wapo-liars-publish-horrible-fakenews-story-fred-trump-never-kkk-top-jewish-donor-supporter-new-york-city/

        I’ll take a few honest mistakes by fellow skeptics any day, over the all-out lies by warmist activist “scientists,” politicians and media.

        1. yonason
  7. Josh

    It seems that the rest of the world view climate/energy issues through a much more sober lens. They mostly place so-called AGW far down the list of personal concerns. Perhaps because they know that AGW is a busted flush?

  8. John F. Hultquist

    One needs to know what was asked, how it was done, and who responded before trying to make sense of:
    … found that climate change is the greatest personal concern of 71 per cent of Germans …

    For example, my biggest concern is “what’s for dinner?”
    In an open-ended question ‘climate change’ would not enter my mind. However, I can construct a series of questions and do a survey in which ‘climate change’ would be on everyone’s mind.
    Most surveys are like dead carp, they stink.

  9. Manfred

    radical alarmists in Germany

    The Trojan Horse of hollow, unadulterated ideology coupled with a blow-hard devotion to the Globocult.

  10. Josh

    As I say, those who hold proAGW views should be free to express them. However those that feel it is ok to use aggressive terms such as ‘denier’ should also feel free to find themselves another platform on which to do so.

  11. If All You See… » Pirate's Cove

    […] blog of the day is NoTricksZone, with a post on how climate alarmists react to opposing […]

  12. yonason

    FAKE NEWS

    With so many of them lying leftists, and colluding with each other on stories, it’s pretty clear we aren’t going to get the truth from them, any more than we will from chatbot trolls who bottom-feed on their trash.

    All lies, all the time, with the exception of a few that aren’t controlled by globalist corporate fascists.
    http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/sheriff-clarke-fake-news-was-hatched-media-ferguson-false-hands-dont-shoot

    They are also angry with Trump for denouncing the Communist Antifa goons along with the neo-Nazis, when both are hate groups. It’s just that, at this time, the Communists are Democrats.

    The point is, as with CAGW, to create an echo-chamber of fiction to influence citizens to go along with favored political agendas, regardless of truth.

    1. SebastianH

      “very fine people” don’t go to something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I

      The point is, as with CAGW, to create an echo-chamber of fiction

      Are you self-aware enough to realize that you could be in such an echo-chamber? How would one recognize that from the inside? Any suggestions?

  13. yonason

    Chatbot babbles incoherently…

    “‘very fine people’ don’t go to something like this”

    Another strawman. I never said any of those idiots were “very fine people.” What I will say is that had the antifa goons not come there to make trouble, the LEGALLY SANCTIONED assembly would most likely have remained peaceful. Antifa is no more peaceful now than it was back in the 1930’s
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/42e76e0ee041a871e8f0d7e6bca3c00b125ba438f4d0972f5fd823f2d4e2d1a4.jpg

    Are you self-aware enough to realize that you could be in such an echo-chamber? How would one recognize that from the inside?

    If I weren’t sufficiently “self-aware” or honest self-critical, I never would have escaped, and would still be as hopelessly lost as you appear to be.

    Maybe you should have some milk and cookies and go for a nap. You sound a lot more confused than usual.

    1. SebastianH

      Another strawman. I never said any of those idiots were “very fine people.”

      No, Trump did. I brought him up, remember?

      Maybe you should have some milk and cookies and go for a nap. You sound a lot more confused than usual.

      Have a cookie yourself. It was a serious question: how would you recognize that you are in a filter bubble / echo chamber? Would you notice that some of the data you discuss with your peers is wrong when you constantly pad each other on the back for finding papers that support what you believe? Would you notice that the mechanisms you are using to explain observations don’t match the laws of physics or would you ignore that possibility because those explanations are published in “peer-reviews” papers?

      So how would you recognize it? An outsider telling you that you are wrong doesn’t seem to work. Presenting equations and calculations doesn’t work either because you have been trained to ignore what the other side says. You seem to even go so far as to claim that everyone telling you that you are wrong has the same problem you have (being in an echo chamber / filter bubble).

      What would change your mind? If we found a planet with a completely inert atmosphere and it matches what science says would happen in that case … would that do it?

  14. Annie

    Thank you Pierre for a very fine blog. I wish I had more time to read more.

  15. yonason

    “No, Trump did. I brought him up, remember?”

    – SebH
    Actually, no. I would have had to waste 20 minutes of my time watching that crappy video you linked to in order to know that to remember it.

    [And I’m guessing that from your frequent lack of recall about what I say that you watch few if any of the videos I post links to, as well. So we’re even, except for the fact that you post junk propaganda, and I don’t, or at least try a lot harder than you to avoid that.]

    Now, as to the “very fine people” comment, as usual you believe the fake news. Here’s a link debunking it:
    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/346878-the-media-couldnt-be-more-blatant-in-distorting-trumps-words

    President Trump made it very clear that his comment did not pertain to “neo-Nazis and the white nationalists.” When a reporter misinterpreted his very clear statement, Trump again made it clear that the bad people were the “neo-Nazis, white nationalists.”

    How much clearer could the president be?

    The media Hyenas have been twisting Trumps words, and putting words in his mouth (like you do here to us), ever since before he was elected. What they report isn’t news, it toxic sludge for brain-dead zombies.
    ==============================================

    And, yes, I did answer you. I wrote(with correction):

    “If I weren’t sufficiently “self-aware” or honest(ly) self-critical, I never would have escaped, and would still be as hopelessly lost as you appear to be.”

    You want more detail? OK.

    I used to be a luke-warm believer in AGW, until I found this website.
    https://www.john-daly.com/

    He was clear and cogent, something I had not noted in any of the warmist material.

    I then began comparing other warmist material with that of “deniers,” and found that the “deniers” made sense. They didn’t call names (mostly) or appeal to irrational fear of catastrophes in the distant future. The “deniers” presented data and gave clear explanations of it.

    The warmists rarely use data, and when they do it is heavily edited/adjusted. Having attended and done well in a demanding small engineering college, I learned what to expect from those who were trying to communicate scientific ideas to me. The “deniers” nearly always met the high standard my professors set. They don’t run from showing their data or explaining their methods. The warmists never do, and when pinned down they are evasive and contemptuous.

    They belittled Svensmark’s cosmic ray theory of cloud formation, but when they did the experiments, they found it could work. When the warmists make predictions, they are invariably wrong. No dramatic mainland Greenland or arctic melting, no accelerating warming anywhere, and no oceans rising faster than ever. So they concoct ad hoc scenarios to make those things appear to be happening.

    And their policies are causing enormous harm, bankrupting individuals and countries. Instead of making peoples lives better, they make them worse.

    Bottom line, much if not most of what the warmists have told me has proven to be false, and what I’ve learned from skeptics continues to hold up under scrutiny. I can’t think of a single catastrophic warmist I trust.

    If you aren’t satisfied with that, too bad.

    Now, I’ll go have my cookie, and get ready for my nap. Try it. It might do you some good. 🙂

    1. yonason

      The link I put in that defends Trump against the media liars isn’t working. Not sure why, but this should, at least for now.
      http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/346878-the-media-couldnt-be-more-blatant-in-distorting-trumps-words-on

    2. SebastianH

      “No, Trump did. I brought him up, remember?”

      – SebH
      Actually, no. I would have had to waste 20 minutes of my time watching that crappy video you linked to in order to know that to remember it.

      Oops, I meant to write “you brought him up, remember?”. Because you wrote “They are also angry with Trump for denouncing the Communist Antifa goons along with the neo-Nazis, when both are hate groups. It’s just that, at this time, the Communists are Democrats.”

      Regarding “very fine people” you could waste 22 minutes of your precious time and watch the press conference where he said that. Very fine people don’t associate with what can be seen in that vice report or would you disagree?

      Thank you for your description of why you went full skeptic. I don’t agree with most of what you accuse “warmists” are doing, but I appreciate your openness.

      They belittled Svensmark’s cosmic ray theory of cloud formation, but when they did the experiments, they found it could work.

      Hmm, I think there is no doubt that cosmic rays can influence cloud formation (it is mentioned in the IPCC report). It is also pretty clear that they are not driving climate change. There is simply no correlation between cosmic rays to climate change in the past. The CERN CLOUD experiment scientists write here: “The results also show that ionisation of the atmosphere by cosmic rays accounts for nearly one-third of all particles formed, although small changes in cosmic rays over the solar cycle do not affect aerosols enough to influence today’s polluted climate significantly.”

      When the warmists make predictions [about Greenland and Arctic melting and sea level rise], they are invariably wrong

      The models actually underestimated those things.

      The warmists rarely use data, and when they do it is heavily edited/adjusted.

      They do use data all the time, that’s what all the predictions are based on … hard data. And of course, sometimes data needs to be adjusted, especially if data comes from different sources and is collected by different measuring methods.

      My observation is quite the opposite: whenever I challenge a skeptic claim (with data and calculations) in the comments I get insulted and usually nothing substantial comes with those insults. Sometimes papers are used trying to support the skeptical viewpoint but most of the time they are either interpreted wrongly or are of low quality / come to conclusions that seemingly contradict the laws of physics. That has been the defense pattern on this blog. It could be that there are more convincing skeptics on other blogs. If so I’m very much interested in some links.

      Now, I’ll go have my cookie, and get ready for my nap. Try it. It might do you some good. 🙂

      Good night 😉

      1. yonason

        I think there is no doubt that cosmic rays can influence cloud formation (it is mentioned in the IPCC report). It is also pretty clear that they are not driving climate change.

        They were against it before they were for it. He was mocked and marginalized for years. And that CERN quote shows they’re still not admitting the obvious, despite the evidence.
        https://phys.org/news/2016-08-solar-impact-earth-cloud.html

        Very fine people don’t associate with what can be seen in that vice report or would you disagree?

        Very fine people don’t associate with this scum, either,…
        https://orach24463.wordpress.com/2014/11/30/musings-from-the-leaders-of-the-climate-change-movement-seeking-to-save-the-earth-from-humanity/comment-page-1/

        Besides, I gave you the quote of how Trump answered the media, clearly not supporting them. Are you so blind you can’t see he clearly doesn’t support them? Or are you too dishonest to admit it?

        Human nature isn’t rational, and sometimes ignorant and foolish but otherwise good people mistakenly do associate with people they shouldn’t.

        Trump is NOT a racist, but his democrat accusers are (both dealt with in linked article).
        http://truthfeed.com/flashback-trump-and-rosa-parks-received-the-ellis-island-medal-of-honor-from-the-national-ethnic-coalition/21614/

        And he’s NOT a neo-Nazi anti-Semite.
        http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/wapo-liars-publish-horrible-fakenews-story-fred-trump-never-kkk-top-jewish-donor-supporter-new-york-city/
        But Democrats are.
        http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/228567
        As are leftists everywhere.
        http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/democratic-socialists-titillatedly-thinking-theyre-sticking-jewish-state-chant-israels-elimination-convention/

        Now, getting back to what the WUWT post was about, the extreme bias and deceit in the MSM. Yes, it’s clearly there. Ant that’s the point.

        1. SebastianH

          And that CERN quote shows they’re still not admitting the obvious, despite the evidence.

          That’s not obvious at all.

          Very fine people don’t associate with this scum, either,…

          What kind of defense is that? “But [the others] did it too”? That’s exactly how the twisted mind of Donald Trump works.

          It doesn’t really matter what Trump is or isn’t. It’s what he is saying and what kind of people he is enabling by doing that.

      2. yonason
      3. yonason

        Just one more comment on SebH’s claims that real data say Greenland is melting. No it does not.

        Tony Heller has just put this up.
        https://realclimatescience.com/2017/08/fake-greenland-news-from-fake-newspaper-by-fake-skeptic/

        And this excellent piece from just a day ago.
        https://news.uic.edu/study-finds-ice-isnt-being-lost-from-greenlands-interior

        Yes, they are lying about Greenland melting.

        1. SebastianH

          I see, so the measurements are fake? Is that your out here? Does Tony Heller know what those SMB graphs show? Do you know? Why are those graphs positive despite Greenland’s ice mass decreasing? And that despite both graphs coming from the same source?

      4. yonason

        Just found this well articulated defense of Trump and calling out the lying media, from John Ray in Oz.
        http://dissectleft.blogspot.com/2017/08/there-are-none-so-blind-as-those-who.html

        There are none so blind as those who will not see

        A typical bit of obtuseness from the Leftist media below. They refuse to see that Trump was commenting on the diverse makeup of the Charlotteville marchers and pretend that he was calling the extremist minority “good people”. There were among the marchers a small minority who displayed swastika and KKK symbols but the great majority did not. They were there simply to protest the escalating attack on historic statues. Trump has consistently commented on that mix but the media simply ignore it, misleading many Republicans as a result.

        And also this, from same source.

        President Trump Again makes himself perfectly clear

        He again defies the abusive and unproven media assertion that all the marchers were “white supremacists”. Sad that it takes the president to correct a crazed media

        But SebH sides with the Leftists every time.

        1. SebastianH

          Weak defense yonason. Can you show evidence (a video maybe) that there were “very fine people” (or “good people”) that marched there and clearly said that they don’t want to be associated with the scum that is chanting these racist bullshit lines you can hear in the Vice video?

          You are not “very fine” or “good” if you associate yourself with something like that. We have that problem in Germany too … and those “concerned citizens” aren’t very fine either.

  16. yonason

    This guy also has a firm grasp on reality.
    https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2017/06/17/easy-call/

  17. yonason