Is the climate denial campaign running out of steam?

Yes Lord Mockingtone has been quite for a while he was quite obviously not invited to the recent NY heartland pretend climate conference (too many recent reference's to the Nazi's by him, may be the reason). As to deniers running out of steam and excuses, flossie provides the perfect answer with her sad little list of misinformation

1.2013 (sometimes 2014) is something flossie keeps raising, and each times she does she ignores requests to post any sort of link to back the claim, she post the usual 3 links that prove nothing, one a BBC link in fact states around 2040 as the most likely date, I gave up even answering this one from flossie she has no interest in real info.

2. "Which islands have been submerged" Again what ever dream world flossie lives in, this may mean something here in the real world nobody that I am aware of has suggested island would be submerged by 2011 or 2013 or 2014. It is a long term process deniers try various excuses from saying it isn't happening to blaming the locals for dynamiting reefs, I'm yet to see one denier explain how dynamiting a reef makes a king tide higher, as reefs offer some protection from wave erosion but can't alter sea level and the film images on "calm water" king tides flooding villages in places like Tuvalu show this denier lie for what it is, yet another badly thought out conspiracy theory.

3. I think I have (before I stopped bothering with flossie nonsense) provided her with several links on the numbers of those from the Carteret Is. that have indeed been moved to Bougainville we they will live in what is basically a mining town, given the bullet point it is info flossie continues to ignore.

4. "Polar bear population quadruoled since the 1950s" not sure what quadruoled means I think she means quadrupled, it is true PB numbers did rise from near extinction levels of ~5000 to about 20-25,000, but as is pretty standard with dishonest deniers, this is directly linked to the fact that they became protected and given that humans and other PB are about their only natural predator it is little wonder their numbers when up

5. Appears to be complete fiction, even deniers own claims on what the Himalayas are doing made much of the year listed in the last IPCC report as now being wrong, but read the actual reports from "Indian scientists" (that deniers used) and they only suggest it is melting slower than first thought which is quite different to flossie's statement that "glaciers not melting faster than replenishment" which is double speak for they are growing, they are not!

This reminds me of an absurd statement made by a denier here a few weeks ago trying to claim AGW was over because a glacier was growing, yet when you actually read the linked evidence the denier provided, what it actually said was that the glacier had shrunk by 2m instead of 3m, this is the sort of thing that passes for logic with deniers, something shrink a bit less than predicted and they try to call it recovery.

Mockingtone has actually been in Australia, but unlike previous trips he received little media attention this time, I think even some denier groups are sick of his childish nonsense and outlandish (even by denier standards) claims.

Not likely.

Never let facts get in the way of a good denial.

Denial is not about the real world, its about an alternative reality, where anything goes.

Real life, real events have no impact in the denialists' mind.

So you can be sure the denials will continue to the end and beyond, even when sea levels have increased noticeably and ecological mayhem is the norm, the denial will continue, and even become more strident. Because at that point to admit they were wrong is too big a disgrace to accept.

It is the business of the UN IPCC committe to consider, and investigate, possible theories relating to climate change.

I am not aware of any credible evidence that surface and atmospheric temperatures are not increasing. They have been doing so since the last ice-age and will continue to do so until causal conditions are reversed - as has happened in continuous cycles for at least as long as ice-cores have provided evidence (~700,000 years). All serious critics of IPCC are agreed on these things.

My own criticism of IPCC is that of failure of objectivity and apparent ignorance of the principles of scientific investigation. If you wish to consider the numerous criticisms, the US Senate Minority report is a good source - see the link below.

Try to get a grip on reality. When did you start believing that any melting of ice in the Arctic was necessarily catastrophic. Don't you know how asinine that sounds?

Arctic at record low levels? Don't you mean record high? What is it about ice hugging alarmists that cheer on glaciation? I frankly prefer a nice meadow and life to ice but that is just me.

So glad you asked this question.

1. The warmies deny they ever said there would be an ice-free Arctic by 2013

2. Which islands have been submerged (apart from riverine Bangladeshi ones which have been coming and going for ever)

3. How many people have had to move due to rising sea levels.

4. Polar bear population quadruoled since the 1950s.

5. Himalayan glaciers not melting faster than replenishment.

Need I go on?

No, I'd say the alarmunist movement is running out of steam. They're trotting out Algore for a 24 hour telethon soon. I might tune in to hear the sound of phones not ringing.

They've run out of logic and any semblance of honesty, so I guess so.

Certainly not (yet). With the lower house of the national legislature of the world's most powerful country having recently fallen into the hands of a political party almost all members of which are firmly committed to anti-science denial, it is clearly stronger than ever (even though the lying that is its core feature is also very often more virulent and idiotic than ever).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

http://www.newsweek.com/2007/08/13/the-truth-about...

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/on...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/opinion/republic...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/07/opinion/in-the-l...

What does this have to do with car insurance?