SPECIAL FEATURES:
Email
Climate hoax killer app
Finally ... an iPhone app that decodes the labyrinth of climate hoaxes and skeptic psuedo-science.
Wed, Feb 17 2010 at 7:52 PM
Related Topics:
Image: Skeptical Science
John Cook, the Australian physicist who runs the popular Skeptical Science website, has offered the relatives of climate skeptics and hoaxers (I call them climate-baggers) a wonderful gift — an app that debunks and decodes the tangle of lies and misrepresented scientific widely used to confuse the public on climate change.
The app provides a detailed yet concise rebuttal to more than 90 arguments used by climate denialists backed up by correlated scientific data, including the greatest hits:
"There is no consensus""Models are unreliable"
"It hasn't warmed since 1998"
"CO2 lags temperature"
"It's freaking cold!"
"CO2 is not a pollutant"
"It's the sun"
And many, many more. The carbon-baggers are already fuming about this app, according to a story by The Guardian, denialist and part-time weatherman Piers Corbyn has this to say:
WARNING! There is an iPhone app trying to put down what we have to say under the heading of 'Skeptical Science'. We need as many of you as possible to promote that this iPhone app is yet another attempt to discredit 'Climate Realists'.
This may just be the best iPhone app ever!
The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.
You might also like:
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
EDITORS' PICKS
Advertisement
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON
- 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
- What causes tornadoes?
- 10 false facts most people think are true
- When is tornado season?
- 9 habits that may do more harm than good
- 5 mind-bending facts about dreams
- Stone Age people may have battled against a zombie apocalypse
- Military dog comes home from Iraq traumatized
- Oregon man in possession of 13 million gallons of illicit rainwater sentenced to jail
- 6 unusual team-building activities
From our sponsor
NEWSLETTER
Advertisement
Ah, but who put the answers in.....either way. I love CO2. VAN
Scientific methodology requires publishing what the researcher starts with, what he does with it, the results, and his conclusions. The AGW crowd only publish the last two. It's not science unless they publish all four, where people they hate can take a look at it. The science will defend it's self if it is done right. If they don't publish the proof, their claims are not supported, and are not science. Don't like it? Tough. That's the way science works.
: let the machine think for you. No need to use your brain any more.
why is the hadley center cherry picking the russian temperature data to bias towards urban areas at the expense of rural ones? The Moscow Institute of Economic Analysis alleges. There seems to be a widespread pattern of messing unscientifically withdata and not make that data freely available . How do I answer this one ?
what arguement is there for phil jones recent acknowledgement of his sloppy science and need to hide or lose data when openess and good science is needed? He does seem to have been more honest in his recentviews