Contrast the way we design, produce, and use things with an earlier age, perhaps termed the “craftsmanship” age. In that time, considerable care was put into making things so that they were durable, serviceable, and aesthetically pleasing (“useless ornamentation” is probably how it would be viewed by today’s manufacturing houses).

“Consumers” used those items, but didn’t “consume” them. Today, it’s buy, consume, throw away: the packaging, the item, etc. — then go buy another, leading to more senseless manufacturing of landfill items and more CO2.

http://www.upworthy.com/they-took-a-camera-to-a-remote-area-in-greenland-and-what-they-recorded-is-simply-terrifying?c=huf1

Really, just try. (On second thoughts, don’t. Try maybe looking and listening and understanding and researching properly from the perspective of actual climatologists and actual scientific observations instead please.)

As a non scientist, reading through these comments I am delighted that you are in fact ‘God’ in this – a God who does not mince his words and also able to properly judge inappropriate remarks and people. This has the effect of limiting the messages to the facts, taking away all of the nut elements. But more importantly it does not do away with the emotion, the constructive arguments and criticism. It is frightening to note the extent of madness in what is goes for rational humanity.

D Swann: You keep using this word, “ad hominem” but I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Goddard has nothing to contribute to the conversation. I am not suggesting he’s wrong because he is a creepy stalky jerk. His rhetoric on AGW is so abysmally bad and utterly made up that his arguments do not require further evaluation. He is, however, obnoxious and that is a simple statement of fact, not an argument about his arguments.

You, D Swann, are a sock puppet (often known as “corrector” but a few other names as well). Which puts you in the ban bin as well. Bye.

“A smarmy and obnoxious realty”? (Does he sell condos?)

Jeez, #18 – you provoked a few ad hominems there, dude.

Best just go back to analyzing the science of ‘warmness’, eh?

I am sure if 2014 is deemed the hottest year on record the deniers will just trot out that computer program they use to find zero trends in noisy monthly TLT temperature values, although it must be getting difficult to get even that trick to work.

Does Goddard go around trying to average raw/unhomogenized temp values? I have seen this attempted on Australian BOM temp values.