My Guardian comment

The Guardian have an article “We must reclaim the climate change debate from the political extremes”. It has been very noticeable that almost no forum on the internet is not now dominated by sceptic views and that recently that the Guardian has upped the rhetoric with a whole string of vitriolic articles about “deniers”.
So I wrote the following comment, apparently so extreme that it was removed:
The Guardian is the political extreme. For years we sceptics have been the mainstream on this subject trying to encourage a sensible policy toward what is afterall only plant food.
But no. Political extremists and zealots at the Guardian and BBC have carried out a vindictive vitriolic attack on the ordinary scientists and engineers who have the expertise to look at the evidence and conclude it doesn’t support the argument to effectively destroy the western economy.
For 18 years we have watched as the temperature stubbornly failed to rise and during that time rather than becoming less certain as the evidence requires the “scientists” – for they are not scientist – kept INCREASING their certainty in what is clearly one of the biggest scientific delusions ever seen.
Anyone that understands control systems will know the climate must be stable just from a look at the ice-age cycle. But no we weren’t listened to be the numpties in papers like the Guardian who some how thought their arts degrees made them better judges than the scientists and engineers who are sceptics.
Now, the evidence has come in proving just what we have been saying. There are massive negative feedbacks and far from “runaway warming”, it will be difficult to get any warming at all.
So, now we expect an immediate full and frank apology from the Guardian and BBC. We consumers who have been wrongly charged hundreds if not thousands of pounds on our electricity bill demand our money back. And we sceptics deserve compensation to cover our time and expenses.
This entry was posted in Climate. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to My Guardian comment

  1. soarergtl says:

    Its OK to call them numpties, but bringing in facts and evidence?
    That’s not allowed.
    I upvoted your post before it went BTW. I expect some of mine to go too. Too many facts in them both.

    • Scottish-Sceptic says:

      Thanks, they are really extreme. They are ridiculous, I once got completely banned for saying that Phil Jones had broken the FOI act – when even the information commissioner said he had.
      But I notice a huge increase in sceptic comments recently to such an extent that they’ve stopped having comments on many climate articles now.

  2. soarergtl says:

    Agreed. But the number of comments from all sides is falling fast. It used to be that there would thousands posted very quickly – most saying the same nonsense.
    Not any more.

  3. Jack Savage says:

    As one banned from commenting at the Grun any more, but still being an occasional visitor, my take is that the skeptics all get banned eventually whilst all but the exceptionally fanatical catastrophists have ceased. Even they have tired of reading and commenting fearfully about a stream of catastrophes that are always being announced but always failing to arrive.
    Only 21 months before the diminishing credibility of the egregious Simms finally evaporates completely! What will his final post contain? A suicide note?

  4. emsnews says:

    Actually, many publications are eliminating comments altogether. Or if they have them, it is in super small script so it is barely readable or better still, hiding the comments so one has to locate the Super Secret Tiny Icon and then click on it to see anything.
    For example, the New York Times does both: no comments allowed on controversial articles or the few article that do allow this, the icon is this tiny number inside a blue dot that you click on if you know the secret.

Comments are closed.