I went through some of BinkyBoy’s posts on Clayton, and I didn’t see BB offering up justification for any of his accusations. Practice what you preach, dude. And immersing youself in vulgar ad hominem attacks isn’t a good way to get people to take you seriously. Except for vulgar and spiteful people who already agree with you.

You act as if these monitoring stations were the end all measurement and you ignore everything else. Temperature data by satellites is actually far more valuable. Vanishing ice caps, vanishing glaciers, increasing pools on arctic ice and changes in mean ocean temperatures causing shifts in weather patterns that carry moisture and cooler air to land masses. All of these things are documented and you ignore them instead going for easy points like the monitoring stations that are only a minor portion of data gathering.

It’s like you have the intelligence of a leech, unable to let go of something even though its slowly killing you.

It sounds like you haven’t actually read anything that I have written on my blog, then. I link to a great many articles, many of them in peer-reviewed journals, about the problems with the AGW claim.

If you actually read what I wrote, it wasn’t just one surface station too close to an air conditioner–it was one of many such reporting stations with severe problems–like being at the end of a jet runway! Next to a barbecue. A station whose temperature readings rose dramatically at the same time an apartment building was built next to it. A station next to a burning barrel. And there are lots of such situations.

The fact is that BinkyBoy can’t seem to read anything I write without having a tantrum.

Take for instance his recent statement:
“The problem is that the theory isn’t overwhelmingly accepted even by scientists who are working that field, and there is quite a bit of evidence that says the theory is at least overstated, and perhaps completely wrong.”

Well, name them. Now lets compare that to the list of Steve’s, or shall we overwhelmingly compare it to the list of climate scientists that have peer reviewed documentation proving the existence of global warming? Then we can just watch him ignore those facts and keep yelling about a measurement station too close to the sun’s cyclical bullshit.

As well, have any of you actually READ the article or are you too damn stupid and ready to attack anyone you believe to be liberal? Have you read Sadly, No!? Have you looked at their readership and their content? Same as mine, no difference. It’s all about style, and you may disagree with mine, but I really don’t care.

I go after liars. There is no discussion with them. Clayton happens to be one and he can continue to bear the brunt of my aggression until such time as he apologizes and stops being a damn fool.

I’m not suggesting that you be friends with Clayton, I’m suggesting that someone else coming along, who may be unfamiliar with your causes, will see that and be turned off to the whole message. If you disagree with Clayton, then engage him. If you just sit off and fling poo, how can you expect anyone to take your arguments seriously?

There are days that I wonder if BinkyBoy even lives in Idaho–where gun ownership is the norm, not the exception. A few years back, I suggested to one of my legislators that a drunk driving conviction should be a disqualifier for a concealed carry permit, at least for several years, because it shows a negligence about dangerous machinery–and my legislator refused to even consider adopting such a restrictive gun control measure.

“A man that thinks debunking scientific theories that are overwhelmingly accepted is fun and entertaining?”

The problem is that the theory isn’t overwhelmingly accepted even by scientists who are working that field, and there is quite a bit of evidence that says the theory is at least overstated, and perhaps completely wrong.