Monday, October 7, 2013

Global warming activist rendered speechless by... facts


Marc Morano of Climate Depot reduces Australian Youth Climate Coalition "spokesperson" Anna Rose to silence. She starts with the usual ad hominem tripe, and then when Marc provides the facts, she can't even debate him.

These global warming loons run from debate. They're are such frauds.

HT: The Right Scoop.


  1. Anna Rose's lame-ass cop-out is that she won't debate Mark Morano because he's not a reputable scientist.

    Wait a second. Is Anna Rose a reputable scientist? Guessing from her age, I would say no. So why should Mark Morano waste his time with this non-scientist? She's not an expert in anything.


    1. Ben: Credentials only matter when you're on our side of the debate. When you're on theirs, it doesn't matter.

      It's a darned good thing her countrymen just elected Tony Abbott as prime minister. He's not going to enslave Australia to a carbon credit system based on junk science. Three cheers for Australia!



    2. Ben,

      A little bit of background. The interview was part of a one hour television program on the ABC (a national taxpayer funded broadcaster) in which a 'warmist' (Anna Rose) and an AGW 'denier' ( ex-Senator Nick Minchin) took turns in selecting experts who'd give reasons why AGW is occurring. Or not, depending.

      Anna Rose isn't a climate scientist. Nor is Nick Minchin. Nick Minchin selected his 'expert' in Washington DC to be Marc Morano, and told Anna Rose his choice the day before.

      Marc Morano is no more informed concerning climate than Egnor. And he's no more likely to change anyone's opinion. Anna Rose made the mistake of meeting Morano. She should have done what Nick Minchin did in refusing to meet Jim Hansen, who is actually a scientist.

      The idea was to pick experts, not hacks like Morano. Nick Minchin did pick Richard Lindzen as one of his few real experts.

    3. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyOctober 7, 2013 at 8:42 AM

      backfield: "Marc Morano is no more informed concerning climate than Egnor"

      And neither are you, backfield, assuming your internet pathology persona is truthful. There is no more objective reason to listen to you than to Egnor. Surely you must see that.

      And why is climate "science" special, in the sense that professionals in government and academia (but not the private sector) are the only people "qualified" to comment? If anything, that's a very suspicious case of grantors and grantees scratching each other's back.

    4. Georgie,

      You really need to get out of your bathtub and stop playing with your toy plastic battleships in your delusional navy. Your brain is getting increasingly waterlogged.

      The difference between Egnor and me is that I have at least attempted to come to an understanding of climate science, to the extent of at least reading the Princeton Primers of Climate.

      The last one I read 'Paleoclimate' which discusses the causes of past climate change is very good.

      But anyway. If my opinion isn't worth anything, then neither is Marc Morano's. Nor yours or Egnor's. In which case we have to fall back on the people who do understand the physics of climate and greenhouse gases, not hacks such as Morano.

      My comment was explaining why the non-scientist Anna Rose refused to 'debate' the non-scientist Marc Morano. What wasn't shown was the non-scientist Nick Minchin refusing to 'debate' the scientist Jim Hansen.

      The program wasn't set up as a debate. The idea was that experts would be chosen by each non-scientist who'd provide arguments or evidence showing that AGW is occurring. Or not, depending.


    5. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyOctober 7, 2013 at 9:23 AM

      What I saw, backfield, was the sentence I quoted. And I am not impressed by your reading list. In fact, I am not impressed by people who swagger about talking about their reading lists.

      I watched the video, and Anna Rose was just being a silly twit. I suppose she showed up specifically for the purpose of giving her little ad hominem rant (just as you do, I might add). For Minchin to make his point about the petulance of climate loons, she was perfectly cast. I'll admit that better ones might have been David Suzuki (Canada) or that perennial climate moron, Al Gore.

      I certainly have no problem with non-"experts" opining. After all, it's non-experts who are going to be paying 99.99999% of the taxes to fund the fantasies of the climate lobby.

      But your opinion has no more weight that Egnor's (or mine), and far less than Morano's.

    6. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyOctober 7, 2013 at 9:37 AM

      Actually, I want to modify my last sentence. Assuming that traffic is a reasonable proxy for opinion influence, your opinion (and mine) has far less weight that Egnor's. I don't think Egnor's readers come here to read what either you or I say.

    7. Ben,

      Do you accept my explanation of the video? It was taken from a longer television program set up to be entertaining not informative? A 'warmist' attempting to convince an AGW 'denier' with experts providing arguments that AGW is happening? And vice versa.

      I'm not going to get a sensible comment from the waterlogged draft dodger self named admiral.

      The video shows Anna Rose refusing to 'debate' Marc Morano. It doesn't show Nick Minchin refusing to 'debate' Jim Hansen.

    8. Bachfiend, the context you provided does shed some light on the video. That's the short answer because dinner is almost ready and I'm hungry.


  2. "Marc Morano of Climate Depot reduces Australian Youth Climate Coalition "spokesperson" Anna Rose to silence. She starts with the usual ad hominem tripe"

    Typical Liberal

    We have too many of these dreadful people screwing up England too.