It wasn’t much of a corner, he was already pretty much there, but yesterday, Donald J. Trump, pretender to the Presidency of the United States, threw in his lot with the “good people” of the fascist, white-supremacist, KKK-loving movement.
There is a lot of commentary out there about this. None of it surprises me, I and others have been pointing at this train wreck all along. But there is one new thing I’ll mention now. Listen to Trump’s tirade about the protestors. When he speaks of the past notables, including Jefferson and Washington, and the statues, he is plain and articulate, non-hesitant, and clear. He sounds like someone with an IQ. He even sounds thoughtful. That is Trump speaking articulately about that which he has often on his mind.
Donald Trump is not a clown who has served as a stooge for Steve Bannon. He is Steve Bannon’s mentor. Trump is not the accidental friend of the Klan and the Nazis. He is, following in his father’s footsteps, the Klan and the Nazis.
Of all the great segments ever done by Rachel Maddow, the following is one of the best; Watch every second of it, and you learn things and you will be afraid:
May I also recommend this also historical piece from a day earlier:
You can tell when Rachel Maddow is about to land a roundhouse punch, when she’s about to put the ball a few blocks down the street from the park, when she starts a segment with something like “Back in 1924.” She appreciates, almost exclusively among commenters and anchors, the importance of the historic context on one hand and the granularity and nuance on the other. Almost wants to make me pay for cable, that’s how good she is.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
“Can Brads be taught to exercise due diligence and honesty when corrected with references? Doubtful.”
Impossible. That would require it allow something else to be more authority than it is.
Ego refuses.
“Either you accept the evidentiary worthlessness of consensuses in science”
Either you accept the absolute necessity of consensus in science or you can blow it out your ass.
If it’s not in dispute that scientists don’t care about consensuses,
No one said that, Brad, that’s your risible self-deception from your compulsion to paraphrase at work. Scientists can care about consensus, and can care not for them.
then it can’t possibly be in dispute that Jeff Harvey (who openly admits he goes with the consensus every time on questions about the natural world) is a non-scientist, can it, Nick?
Sorry, you’ve lost yourself. You’ll never understand. Anyway, Jeff is still a scientist when he’s knocked off for the day.
(Did you see that idiot who recently insisted overweeningly-high self-esteem was a symptom of crushingly-low self-esteem?
No, but I’m reading the words of an idiot who still can’t figure out how that works. Possibly the first case of adult-onset autism. You.
[wading through your coquettry, we get to…]
Despite the inherent fraudulence of trying to pass a majority opinion (consensus) among scientists off as an argument (evidence) in favor of believing something about the natural world,
Nothing inherently fraudulent in that at all.
You have persuaded yourself something holds that simply doesn’t. These things can happen.
You’ll probably never get over it, given the vanity you’ve invested in it, but it matters little.
Medicine requires consensus. Relies on it. Every single medical study requires consensus as evidence of efficacy.
Yet another massive slice of evidence that the Walter Mitty claims of being a doctor are fake.
Note too that this thread was about Trump and yet has morphed into another egofest of bray. The Mann thread became entirely bray’s raucous noise about himself. When he was cordoned off in a jail thread, he demanded sole dominion and authority over someone else’s blog.
Everything is about how bray is important.
Because the knowledge he’s a meaningless insect terrifies and horrifies him.
His own blog is abandoned and ignored, hence he does not visit there. Nor post his questions he demands only the desired person respond to there, where he can in fact require that demand be upheld.
So he runs around other blogs trying to take them over and turn every conversation into how great bray is and how worthless everyone else is (in case the first is not taken as true).
The pathetic squeak of the miniscule rodent is repeated everywhere people gather, because the only reason for bray to exist is for the attention and adulation of others.
And therefore he denies AGW, for much the same reason Curry and Monckton does, for the unearned adulation accorded them for the mere fact of denying AGW. No other quality is required. None of them care about AGW to give a fig whether it is true or not. They only notice that this gets them the worship they need without actually having to work to earn it (and fail when their self esteem is too great for their capacity to assuage)
Look at bray’s desperate scrabble for anything, no matter how unsupported by reality, to use to drag anyone better than him (which is pretty much everyone) down.
His claims of partial sentences is based on a nonexistent rule that sentences must be five words or more. But it’s the best he has against me.
His claims of consensus is all he has against Jeff’s demonstrated ability.
His stupidity at whining about other people’s rudeness is nothing different from any other moron unable to get their own way, just another example of their fragility and snowflake personality.
The shitheads ensure they deserve every drop of invective and if they don’t get it they will persist until they do then whine the victim card forever on that.
Even if it requires making up the offence, as with that rightwing nutjob who cut themselves to blame “leftists” for stabbing him for having a nazi haircut.
And, as with every other rightwingnutjobbery, the whistle for the dogs of the rightwing pack works because this confirms what they “already knew” was the case, except the lying liberal media hides it, as said on Fox. There’s no need for reality when it is wanted to be believed.
All whinging by deniers, and this retard in particular, are the desperate straw clutching of the terminally incompetent trying to blame their insignificance on everyone else who doesn’t agree with their “obvious greatness”.
Nick,
Sheesh! James Lovelock is “no one” now?
I mean, Jim’s no Richard Feynman, that’s for sure… but NO ONE?
Even I wouldn’t go that far. You really don’t seem to like the author of The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning. Fair enough, but denying his humanhood isn’t going to magically undo the fact that he penned this admirable and overdue reflection (my emphasis for your ease of comprehension):
_______________
—Professor James Lovelock, PhD,
The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning
________
I know, Nick, I know:
Reeding Iz Hard.
Wow,
would you shut the fuck up please? The high-school graduates are talking.
[Greg, what is the rationale behind tolerating Wow? Are you some kind of fundamentalist Voltairean free-speech extremist terrorist radical bastard of the Enlightenment? That’s great (so am I), but I might be tempted to draw the line if my principles came at the expense of making my blog unreadable.]
Bradley, your worship at the Shrine of the Word of Lovelock is already noted, and is a matter of some amusement.
Try to move on, we live in an applied world.
Some of us, at least.
“NEVER WITH CERTAINTIES OR CONSENSUAL AGREEMENT.”
Science demands consensus, or there is no science at all.
As a non scientist you have no remit to ignore consensus or its meaning, nor make such brazenly incorrect claims about science.
You are a clueless idiot who does not comprehend the smallest idea of science.
James Lovelock:
James Lovelock
“The high-school graduates are talking.”
Yes, we are, but the puling idiocies of someone who failed pre-school keeps interrupting everyone. Please can it and let your betters talk.
“—Professor James Lovelock, PhD,”
Who if we agree with, creates a consensus, which means James must be wrong. Moreover James doesn’t want anyone to agree with them (if your asinine assertions were in any way connected with reality rather than your rectum, within which your head resides as a naturalised resident), since that would be consensus.
[Greg, I admire your apparent reluctance to censor one “side” of a debate, NO MATTER WHAT, but here’s the interesting twist:
Wow doesn’t represent any side of any question about anything.
The reason he’s ridiculed and hated in these fora bilaterally is that he never advances ANY idea. He’s apparently incapable of doing so, as everyone—on every “side” of every debate—who’s had the displeasure of trying to correct him has discovered.
I’m genuinely not sure if Voltaire’s famous dictum would have extended to people with a proven incompetence to argue ANYTHING.
(I suspect he’d have put Wow in the “I Don’t Even Disagree” category.)
Something to think about, anyway.]
And you should be ecstatic, bray, since nobody agrees with you, making yours the least consensus claim in the world!
“Greg, I admire your apparent reluctance to censor one “side” of a debate, NO MATTER WHAT”
Because it’s the only thing bray requires to turn your blog into the bray show.
Bray, your one-dimensional pseudo-thinking has no sides.
“The reason he’s ridiculed and hated in these fora bilaterally”
Is that you are two faced.
So having failed with his ejumacation attempt to shut down dissent of his assertion of his own greatness, bray tries to pretend legion and censorship.
As Voltiair once said “That Bradley character’s a fucking loon”.
“NO ONE?”
Yes, no one said it
“I know that such a word [“consensus”] has no place in the lexicon of science;”
Wrong.
I criticized James Lovelock:
But in reply to Nick’s denihilistic denigration of Lovelock’s human status, which even I thought was going too far, I chided:
Nick’s
responseabreaction?Ooookay then.
Who’s going to try to explain to Nick the difference between hallucinated and noted?
And between amusement and gelastic convulsions in the cell corner?
They don’t pay me enough for this shit.
“Bradley, your worship at the Shrine of the Word of Lovelock is already noted”
And weird.
In a creepy stalker way.
The problem for deniers is they’re almost invariably rightwingers or libertarians. The rightwingers are inherently authoritarian and all the authorities for climate say that it’s real and happening. So they have to wait for HI to manufacture fake doubt or pick out someone with a PhD and find some word they said that they can use for their own ends.
Lacking any brain themselves, they cannot actually work out why what that authority said is correct, so it’s only and entirely an appeal to authority.
James is wrong about consensus. Without it there is no science and we’d be stuck with whatever stick and grass fibre we could grab to make the simplest of technologies ourselves.
#326 ” As Voltiair once said “That Bradley character’s a fucking loon”.”
Classic.
“I criticized James Lovelock”
Nope.
If you’d said he was a moron, then you’d be criticising him.
“Classic.”
Cheers.
“But in reply to”
A claim you made up, you will make up some more shit.
“” Bradley, your worship at the Shrine of the Word of Lovelock is already noted, and is a matter of some amusement.”
Ooookay then.”
OK? What does “OK” mean?
“Who’s going to try to explain to Nick the difference between hallucinated and noted? ”
He already knows.
Hence his terminology. Just because you don’t like the truth doesn’t make it a hallucination.
“They don’t pay me enough for this shit.”
Why on earth would we care?
What inspired me to write this book was hearing in the autumn of 2007 that the IPCC had reached a consensus on future climate.
Perhaps, why not?
I know that such a word [“consensus”] has no place in the lexicon of science
But in the lexicon of an international panel on the science of climate change, tasked at the interface of observation of the natural world and human activity, it’s quite at home. And is there really no evidence for agreement among the alpha swots of science? Even the disagreement is consensually respected.
‘…it is a good and useful word but it belongs to the world of politics and the courtroom, where reaching a consensus is a way of solving human differences.
Brad would call this a ‘bromide of banality’ if he weren’t so intimidated by you, Jim. And solving human differences is very important…and don’t you recall how many times scientists have been castigated for their supposed detachment?
SCIENTISTS ARE CONCERNED WITH PROBABILITIES, NEVER WITH CERTAINTIES OR CONSENSUAL AGREEMENT.
Are you trying to bully Brad, Jim? You know how much he adores you…don’t take advantage of his trust.
And also…bullshit.
Sounds like Jim is trying to justify his finding too difficult and dull the challenge of the human condition in its writhing totality. He’s a bit of a loner. That’s OK, so why not try a little bluster, the punters like that stuff…
He did say at the time we had twenty years or so to whoop it up, be kind to one another etc before it got nasty….
in his humble opinion as an independent scientist.
Silly old bugger couldn’t stand it when a bunch of his peers got together and said precisely the same thing
Hypocrite.
#329
They don’t pay you at all, and what you produce is indeed shit.
If that Neville No-mates Jim Lovelock ever tries to pull one one you again, Bradley…remember what I taught you.
Nick, I would have called Lovelock’s affirmation of science’s contemptuous disregard for consensus a “bromide of banality” thirty years ago, when every primary-school graduate was perfectly aware of it.
These days, following a generation of dumbing-down that began with Naomi Oreskes’ rearing her #distractinglysexy head, I call it a welcome reminder (to the Ninety-Eight Percent you belong to) of an axiom the Two Percent have failed to communicate clearly enough.
Your (sarcastic? witty, in your mind?) inner dialogue between faux-worship and faux-ridicule of Lovelock was boring, so I skipped it.
In case you haven’t got the memo yet, I don’t regard Lovelock as the most-correct ecologist since Swiss cheese. He’s far, far, far from it (from the very little I know about his work).
But he is a scientist.
Which would place him in rather small company on this thread.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus
Li D,
Did Wow’s knuckles really mash out this turd:
Holy turd.
Classic Wow, indeed.
Voltiair!
Bikause Tiping Es Hard.
“Nick, I would have called Lovelock’s”
Blank assertion.
He’s wrong.
“Did Wow’s knuckles really mash out this masterpiece:
#326 ” As Voltiair once said “That Bradley character’s a fucking loon”.””
Yes, I did.
“These days, following a generation of education that began with Naomi Oreskes’ ”
You are left with trying to make her wrong by having a head of hair.
“I call it a welcome reminder (to the Ninety-Eight Percent you belong to”
Hi to the less-than-one-percent from the majority!
“inner dialogue between faux-worship and faux-ridicule of Lovelock was boring,”
Yes it was really boring when you faux-ridiculed Lovelock here:
“Classic Wow, indeed.”
No worries. Voltair really did think you were a loon. You can’t prove it wrong.
“But he is a scientist”
And therefore does not want anyone agreeing with him?
“when every primary-school graduate was perfectly aware of it.”
Ah,that explains it.
You failed preschool. So you never got the chance.
“I don’t regard Lovelock as the most-correct ecologist”
But you insist he’s absolutely right about what he cannot know.
#341 Oh Brad , don’t be so fucking helpless all your life
Your (sarcastic? witty, in your mind?) inner dialogue between faux-worship and faux-ridicule of Lovelock was boring, so I skipped it.
You’re the putz who has been waving Lovelock’s got-a book-to sell glibness around as though it’s a sacred text for the last [feels like a] week!
Now you try and wriggle away from it….
Pffft.
You hate scientists, you idiot. You feel compelled to worship them [poor Jim’s the latest], and they always let you down…
“He’s far, far, far from it ”
Yet you insist he’s absolutely right.
In the course of verifying what I was sure must have been a misquote by Li D in an attempt to make Wow’s IQ sound even less than zero, I accidentally gazed upon an even classic-er Wowism:
“OK” IS THE MOST INTERNATIONALLY-RECOGNIZED WORD IN ANY WORLD LANGUAGE. YOU LITERALLY JUST ASKED THE MOST BEEFWITTED QUESTION HUMANLY POSSIBLE, WOW.
(Which reminds me: when was your last checkup for bovine spongiform encephalopathy, Wow? The test is minimally invasive, involving a pneumatic cattle reducer and a tiny prick. Apparently
victimspatients hardly feel a thing [source: No Country for Old Men].)Oh, and Wow: further denials of the blindingly-obvious fact that the Heartland Institute gives you rotting fish in exchange for spending every waking hour impersonating a climate believalist will be ignored. Like everything you type.
“But he is a scientist.”
So is Jeff.
“”OK” IS THE MOST INTERNATIONALLY-RECOGNIZED WORD IN ANY WORLD LANGUAGE.”
So is “Yes”. But it would still require an explanation of what it meant.
You continue to fail to explain what your OK means.
I take it you looked it up in a dictionary and thought to type it.
Misspelt, of course.
“Which reminds me: when was your last checkup ”
I am quite healthy, thank you.
Are your meds up to date?
“YOU LITERALLY”
You literally don’t know what literally means.
“In the course of verifying what I was sure”
Ah, so you know you’re prone to hallucinations.
“a tiny prick.”
Yet you’re still a huge dick.
But then again, being a prick is a state of mind. And your mind is, well, lets just say “underwhelming”. shall we?
“Wow’s IQ sound even less than zero”
Easily explained as the result of your rectal-cranial inversion. Everything is upside-down for you.
And strangely echoey.
Have you lost your love for lovelock again, bray?
I mean those quotes from him I posted probably scared you shitless, since oyu have never read anyting he said, just what denier blogrolls and fellow self-fellators on them claim about him. And they would not have read any of that other stuff recently.
Being so short on brainpower, you do not have the capacity to remember when you all called him an alarmist and entirely and utterly wrong.
Clearly those quotes from him I posted shocked you greatly.
[Wow’s] Nick[name],
” Now you try and wriggle away from it….”
NO, you cunt-brained mongoloid, I know reading is new to you but try really hard to PAY ATTENTION TO THE WURDZ.
I haven’t even read his book and I doubt I ever will. But I *wholeheartedly* continue to endorse Lovelock’s foreword—you know, the passages I quoted in the direction of your thermonuclear bunker of a skull in the vain hopes of infiltrating a payload of clue into your low-occupancy brain.
On second thought, you might as well fuck off now, you [scientifically and otherwise] illiterate peasant. Class dismissed. You’re wilfully ineducable. And I feel like the third-stupidest person here for imagining there was any hope for you.
#365
OK, your glass-jawness…
You just picked some Lovelock ‘wurdz’ you liked because they fit your really inexperienced world-view. Got no idea what else he ‘sez’, have you.
And now you’re wetting yourself, having made such a fool of yourself.
Work on that self-esteem, and take down those GIFs of Lewandowsky and Oreskes…the neighbours are starting to think you’re ranting at yourself. They’d be right of course.
And I feel like the third-stupidest person here for imagining there was any hope for you.
False humility and complete insincerity from you….that low self-esteem is a tough one.
“And now you’re wetting yourself, having made such a fool of yourself.”
Not so much that but having everyone see him making a fool of himself.
It stings.
#365
cunt-brained
…a misogynist as well Brad? Of course you are. Alt-right birthright.
Class dismissed
You’re wilfully ineducable
All the cliches of false confidence come tumbling out, don’t they.
“[Wow’s] Nick[name],”
BRay’s nerv[ous] t[i]ck.
Nick,
Sexist? Uh yeah, whatever you say.
It’s hilarious (in an ironic, at-you-not-with-you kind of way) that you pick out the epithet “cunt-brained” for confected outrage.
Your complete lack of objection to my use of “mongoloid” reveals your casual racism for all to see.
Fish. Barrel. Kabloom.
You people are too easy. Easier than a fattie on prom night.
BTW, unless ‘alt-right’ is a long-winded way of saying ‘left’ (my location on the political spectrum according to every values questionnaire I’ve ever taken, and I’ve taken a lot of them because they’re fun), then your aspersions on my ‘birthright’ missed the target by so many country-brained miles, you remind me of PanadolFactoryGate, one of Hands-on Clinton’s top
tentwentyhundred self-fuck-downs IIRC.PPPPS, I suggest you decide whether my humility is ‘false,’ my confidence ‘false,’ my self-esteem ‘high,’ or my self-esteem ‘low’ before you further beclown yourself in the jaws of the Law of the Excluded Middle, who is a mercilessly hard task-bitchstress.
“Nick,
Sexist? ”
Yes.
“Your complete lack of objection to my use of “mongoloid””
Means nothing.
But that’s the best you have. A big slice of nothingburger.
“Fish. Barrel. Kabloom. ”
Yes. Delusion. Both feet in the barrel.
“You people are too easy.”
Well if you’re insane enough, anything is easy.
Except facing reality.
Never had much truck with that, did you, bray.
“BTW, unless ‘alt-right’”
It doesn’t.
Sorry.
“my location on the political spectrum according to every values questionnaire I’ve ever taken”
Ah, more delusional proclamation.
“PPPPS”
All of them are possible and none of them are exclusive to any of the others.
Your dribbling moronic status notwithstanding.
“your aspersions on my ‘birthright’ ”
Obviously hit home.
“the jaws of the Law of the Excluded Middle”
Only if you don’t know what that law means.
#370
Brad,
I know I made it quite clear upthread that you are insincere, your humility is false and your self-esteem is low. You have a big muddy internet footprint that utterly confirms this.
But as you were waving about Jim Lovelock’s ear-worm book- promoting provocation as though it was the Gordian Knot of the science policy interface, it’s easy to see how were too busy genuflecting to notice.
I see a bit of Jim Lovelock in you: misanthropic with age, and self-centred…but, without any of the redeeming creativity, the similarity goes no further. The self-indulgence is the worst of it, and the stalker web site is your humiliation complete. Maybe Jim Lovelock’s Gimp…that’s you.
Do you really think you have anything else to say? Of course you do. Good night.
Nick,
Or in short:
quoting him.
BK was quoting him.
If that’s what you mean.
By the way, the Gordian Knot was the Kobayashi Maru of the ancient world; it symbolizes an insoluble problem.
Your attempt at an erudite-sounding simile falls on its face.
Apparently (to the extent I can put myself in the shoes of someone so fucking stupid), you think the Knot symbolizes more-or-less the opposite of its actual meaning.
So I should congratulate you on a good point, Nick. Or rather, the exact opposite.
Yeah, that’s not English.
I beg to differ. BK’s worst trait is his habit of indulging and encouraging ineducable ingrates like you. Feed The Trolls Poison, that’s my philosophy.
To no great surprise, two weeks later, you still haven’t told BK or anyone else how a website might manage to “stalk” someone.
Do you understand any field of science better than you understand How Teh Interwebs Works, by the way?
Which is to say: at all?
Just askin’.