Skeptic Project

XD

"You said I called him a denialist"

Uhm, no I didn't Ed. You're imagining things again.

Ed hears one comment from the guy calling out the denialist and goes bonkers at the guy calling out the denialist over a comment he doesn't understand the context of, because he didn't watch the damn debate.

So what are you talking about here then?

I admit it is written pretty badly, so maybe I did misunderstand you.

Inside Job, relevance? And you know Im not, I already said so in the McDonalds thread.

All because Monbiot acknowledged that the CRU emails might show wrongdoing

Except he didn't say that though, since he seemed pretty damn sure that it does show wrong doing and dishonesty on the part of the people involved and he says he sees no defence for it. If he said what you said he said I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

At that point no one knew anything about the CRU emails,

And yet he seems so certain they do show dishonesty, which is my problem.

He was all too quick to accept them at face value and condemn the scientists involved without making sure they weren't actually taken out of context first. He doesn't even talk about the fact that they are not in context and so we must be careful in jumping to conclusions.

Because I didn't get that at all. But then again, I actually watched the debate.

Well I showed you the quotes on the previous page, he seems pretty damn certain to me. He certainly didnt say anything like what you said he said.

If he goes back on his previous stance on the emails in the rest of the debate, please tell me, because that would be a reason to continue watching. In which case your response should have initially been that he seems to change his mind later on and its worth watching. So is that the case?

btw here again he says that the scientists involved in the CRU email controversy WERE dishonest and unscientific in no uncertain terms:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VscBGa02ggE#t=9m26s

The FOI requests he is talking about was because they were being spammed by requests from skeptics they couldn't possibly fulfil and felt it was intentional.

In that video Monbiot says that Phil Jones of CRU should resign because what he asked people to do was suppress science and that it may even be criminal. That section starts at 10:22 seconds into the video I posted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VscBGa02ggE#t=10m22s

So that is what I have a problem with, he has already made up his mind about their conduct prematurely.