howardcord

I first want to thank you for what you are doing and let you know it's not all for nothing. A few years ago your website convinced me that I was wrong about climate change. I use to be a "climate skeptic" and back then I would have assumed you were a paid shill and wouldn't trust anything anyone would say about climate change, except the deniers like Mr. Watts.

I can't remember exactly what changed my mind but I know it was because the methods you use on your website seemed less biased and the commenters were more friendly and willing to discuss the evidence with out personal attacks, especially in comparison to "Watts up with that?" Since then I've completed my degree in Environmental Engineering and work in air quality.

On to the question. How do you remain sane when dealing with and responding to the numerous deniers blogs out there? Isn't frustrating daily having to combat the same misinformation over and over again? How do you take the personal attacks? When do you just ignore them?

Thanks again, and keep up the good fight!

Couldn't it be just as likely that oil and coal companies are purposefully playing down the evidence of warming and using it to quite and hush a very present and scientifically proven scenario in order to justify their careers and large profits in a way that the average person in the street really has no reason to ever be concerned about?

If those in power in the government have such greedy motives of raising money for larger budgets certainly those working for oil and coal companies must too have motives to continue to see money rolling in at the same or higher rates.

Fair enough. But it sounds like you actually don't have the evidence to counter the OPs original peer reviewed paper. Maybe you are being down voted because of the lack of citing your source. Simply making an excuse of downvotes and being labeled a denialist doesn't free you from having to back up your claim if you want to be taken seriously. Unless you're just lazy or lying. Then it makes sense.

What a horrible way to increase their budgets though. It really is a long con that spans multiple administrations across multiple nations and 50 years of planting evidence of warming. All at the same time the same governments push for research into renewables that would decrease the tax money they would be making off carbon taxes.

Isn't there quicker and more productive ways of raising the budget than trying to convince the world that the temps are warming and fossil fuels are to blame? And if the scientists are right and CO2 is to blame, wouldn't a carbon tax be the fairest way to levy the companies and the people most responsible for the ongoing event?

My favorite part of this response was the lack of cited support for the claim and the personal attack.

Back yourself up or get the fuck out.