New Posters beware!

Leafsdude wrote:Threads like this one and many others like it do a great disservice to anyone, on either side, looking to have an honest debate. No one should have their thoughtfully expressed ideas tossed aside unceremoniously, let alone without a reasonably similar thoughtful response, even if the content from either (or both) sides is flawed.

Tim the plumber wrote:You really don't do science do you? There is politeness and there is honesty. If one gets in the way of the other I go with honest.

branner wrote:
Please note that personal attacks are not welcome on Climate-Debate.com. I know that the forum has not been moderated so much lately, but users have been banned before, and that could easily happen again.

Therefore: Stop talking about mental illnesses or calling each other names. Surface Detail had a good advice, which I would like to copy: "Stay calm, ignore the abuse, and stick to the science."

Please send me a Private Message if something needs my immediate attention.

And to the new users: Welcome to Climate-Debate.com. I'm fully aware that this can be a tough place, but I hope you will help pushing it in a good direction. I still hope to get more time to moderate soon.

[b]Ceist wrote: The reason this forum won't be 'pushed in a good direction' and has become a complete joke, is that you've neglected it and allowed a narcissistic psychopathic sadistic troll to overrun it and make it his personal playground......2nd most active user is his little internet side-kick - Into the Night.

litesong wrote:

[b]Ceist wrote: The reason this forum won't be 'pushed in a good direction' and has become a complete joke, is that you've neglected it and allowed a narcissistic psychopathic sadistic troll to overrun it and make it his personal playground......2nd most active user is his little internet side-kick - Into the Night.

What he said.
Met "i b da no-sigh-ants mann" on another site. "i b da no-sigh-ants mann" calls me, a buddy & good friend because it has no body or good friend. Also, "i b da no-sigh-ants mann" has no science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. It has never explored science, can't do science or understand science.

Ceist wrote:

branner wrote:
Please note that personal attacks are not welcome on Climate-Debate.com. I know that the forum has not been moderated so much lately, but users have been banned before, and that could easily happen again.

Therefore: Stop talking about mental illnesses or calling each other names. Surface Detail had a good advice, which I would like to copy: "Stay calm, ignore the abuse, and stick to the science."

Please send me a Private Message if something needs my immediate attention.

And to the new users: Welcome to Climate-Debate.com. I'm fully aware that this can be a tough place, but I hope you will help pushing it in a good direction. I still hope to get more time to moderate soon.

Internet trolls are often narcissistic, psychopathic and sadistic:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists

The reason this forum won't be 'pushed in a good direction' and has become a complete joke, is that you've neglected it and allowed a narcissistic psychopathic sadistic troll to overrun it and make it his personal playground. Most visitors don't stay around for long -because of one particular poster.

Look at the most active user in the last year:

http://www.climate-debate.com/topusers.php

IBdaMann.

2nd most active user is his little internet side-kick - Into the Night.

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

Hank wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:
Why are you even having this stupid argument? IBdaMann is a wind-up merchant. That's what he does and that's what he loves. You obviously know your science, Hank, so stick to that. Let the lurkers decide what makes sense.

I've been here about two months Surface and I'm about through. I can see that it's basically just a few guys that barely understand any science and just need to prop themselves up with each other's posts. But I've actually learned a few things from you and a few others that actually understand science. And someone PM'd me with a suggestion on another site where they actually debate science. You know I assume it takes quite a bit of work for whoever started this site and it's a shame it doesn't attract that many that are interested in real science.

Anyway I'm not arguing with IBdaMann, I'm just pasting the same thing over and over to see how many times he is going to fall for it. It not costing me any time. Anyway it's been a pleasure reading your post and maybe I'll see you again somewhere.

sealover wrote:
But it is going to change soon

Your observations were quite correct.

I think that you identified the nature of the problem clearly.

What might be different this time is Jeppe B., the guy who owns the site.

I'm e mailing him and the response is encouraging.

Please come back to climate-debate.com and try again!

In a month or two, it will become what you hoped it would be.

"sealover", PhD and I am PROUD OF THAT PHD, SO IT BRAG ABOUT IT!

sealover wrote:
I'm proud of my publications too! And I'm proud of my peer-review peers!

sealover wrote:
I say this because apparently I'm just a "liar".

sealover wrote:
Please come back!

Make this website a WORLD CLASS DISCUSSION OF CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE

sealover wrote:
The trolls have nothing to be proud of so they just denigrate everyone else.

If they graduated from anywhere with anything, they would be bragging about it. If they published anything, they would be showing it off.

sealover wrote:
If they understood the meaning of any of the gibber babble buzzwords, they would surely try to use them in a sentence to make it sound like they understand science..

sealover wrote:
Hank, you CAN discuss science here now!

I hope there is some way to notify you if you don't get an e mail notice.

Hank, please come back to discuss science related to climate change.

You won't recognize this place by summer.

You will appreciate the difference.


sealover, an actual PhD biogeochemist with relevant knowledge to share.

Into the Night wrote:

sealover wrote:
Hank, you CAN discuss science here now!

I hope there is some way to notify you if you don't get an e mail notice.

Hank, please come back to discuss science related to climate change.

You won't recognize this place by summer.

You will appreciate the difference.


sealover, an actual PhD biogeochemist with relevant knowledge to share.

Spamming.

duncan61 wrote:
sealover, an actual PhD biogeochemist with relevant knowledge to share.

Biogeochemistry is a relatively new scientific discipline that explores the physical, chemical, biological, and geological processes and reactions that govern the composition of and changes to the natural environment.

What you do is real and I am curious as to why you believe the Earth is warming and why warming is bad.Could you be more specific.You are aware the entire Northern coast of Australia is mangrove swamps and wetlands.

You seem to spend all your time engaging ITN and IBDM.Fascinating as I am interested in what you do and they are not.I have been fighting with this pair for 3 years and they have different styles.IBDM will find one word or phrase and attack that and insult the crap out of you.ITN just puts up the shutters and denies everything.ITN claims no one knows where coal comes from yet I have met many people who do.To admit it is ancient plant growth means that the term fossil fuel is acceptable does in their faith.This pair feel the election was a fraud yet here we are.The list goes on.Answer my question please

duncan61 wrote:
sealover, an actual PhD biogeochemist with relevant knowledge to share.

Biogeochemistry is a relatively new scientific discipline that explores the physical, chemical, biological, and geological processes and reactions that govern the composition of and changes to the natural environment.

What you do is real and I am curious as to why you believe the Earth is warming and why warming is bad.Could you be more specific.You are aware the entire Northern coast of Australia is mangrove swamps and wetlands.

You seem to spend all your time engaging ITN and IBDM.Fascinating as I am interested in what you do and they are not.I have been fighting with this pair for 3 years and they have different styles.IBDM will find one word or phrase and attack that and insult the crap out of you.ITN just puts up the shutters and denies everything.ITN claims no one knows where coal comes from yet I have met many people who do.To admit it is ancient plant growth means that the term fossil fuel is acceptable does in their faith.This pair feel the election was a fraud yet here we are.The list goes on.Answer my question please

duncan61 wrote:
sealover, an actual PhD biogeochemist with relevant knowledge to share.

Biogeochemistry is a relatively new scientific discipline that explores the physical, chemical, biological, and geological processes and reactions that govern the composition of and changes to the natural environment.

duncan61 wrote:
What you do is real

duncan61 wrote:
and I am curious as to why you believe the Earth is warming and why warming is bad.Could you be more specific.You are aware the entire Northern coast of Australia is mangrove swamps and wetlands.

duncan61 wrote:
You seem to spend all your time engaging ITN and IBDM.Fascinating as I am interested in what you do and they are not.

duncan61 wrote:
I have been fighting with this pair for 3 years and they have different styles.IBDM will find one word or phrase and attack that and insult the crap out of you.ITN just puts up the shutters and denies everything.

duncan61 wrote:
ITN claims no one knows where coal comes from yet I have met many people who do.

duncan61 wrote:
To admit it is ancient plant growth

duncan61 wrote:
means that the term fossil fuel

duncan61 wrote:
is acceptable does in their faith.

duncan61 wrote:
This pair feel the election was a fraud yet here we are.

duncan61 wrote:
The list goes on. Answer my question please

sealover wrote:
I respect that you are respectful. Sincerely.

I have not known how to respond to your inquiries, but I have never once imagined that you were acting in bad faith, motivated by sadistic desire to hurl insults as a reflexive naysayer.

So, thank you for being respectful.

Yes, biogeochemistry is real. Thank you for acknowledging that.

sealover wrote:
I was not sure if your inquiries were completely genuine, and your questions seemed to include underlying assumptions that were complicating to answer.

Now, I see how you are indeed offering a whole different class of discourse.

I see your good faith and sincerity.

I will make no attempt in this post to connect my more intimate knowledge of biogeochemistry to broader questions of what scientific knowledge makes me a FULL BLOWN ALARMIST about anthropogenic global weirding.

sealover wrote:
I will just say that I intend to return the respect that you have displayed and I would LOVE to tell you why I believe what I believe, as an alarmed scientist.

sealover wrote:
I respect that you are respectful. Sincerely.

sealover wrote:
Mangrove biogeochemistry is awesome.

sealover wrote:
First, what about those fires?

sealover wrote:
Mangrove swamps provide some of the best evidence of the enormous magnitude of alkalinity generated in coastal wetlands as released into the sea as submarine groundwater discharge.

sealover wrote:
I would love to share what I know, second hand, of some studies close to home. Your home, that is.

However, I remain confused by some of what you have written regarding underlying assumptions.

It would help me know how to communicate with you if you would tell me something first.

In the last few years, Australia has made headline news with wildfires.

sealover wrote:
Do you agree with the characterization in the media that these largest Australian wildfires in the last four years or so are "unprecedented"?

It would help me understand how you interpret objective evidence.

sealover wrote:
Mangrove biogeochemistry is awesome.

sealover wrote:
First, what about those fires?

duncan61 wrote:
sealover, an actual PhD biogeochemist with relevant knowledge to share.

Biogeochemistry is a relatively new scientific discipline that explores the physical, chemical, biological, and geological processes and reactions that govern the composition of and changes to the natural environment.

What you do is real and I am curious as to why you believe the Earth is warming and why warming is bad.Could you be more specific.You are aware the entire Northern coast of Australia is mangrove swamps and wetlands.

You seem to spend all your time engaging ITN and IBDM.Fascinating as I am interested in what you do and they are not.I have been fighting with this pair for 3 years and they have different styles.IBDM will find one word or phrase and attack that and insult the crap out of you.ITN just puts up the shutters and denies everything.ITN claims no one knows where coal comes from yet I have met many people who do.To admit it is ancient plant growth means that the term fossil fuel is acceptable does in their faith.This pair feel the election was a fraud yet here we are.The list goes on.Answer my question please

duncan61 wrote:
The bushfires are interesting as we now lose less land cover to bushfires than years previously.Before I start I need you to know I have been to Arnhem land in the remote north and the first thing I noticed was a lot of the land looked like satans backyard.There are two seasons in the tropics wet/dry at the end of the dry the grass is very dry.There are quartz patches everywhere and the late dry season sun shines on them at the right angle and a bit of breeze and a fire starts.Then the wet season starts and the place floods and all goes green again.The reason I was there is I did a buffalo safari.The operator likes to bring in locals for the last shoot off as we will help pack the camp and salt capes and stuff.We cull the bulls as they do a roundup after we have gone and one big bull will cause a ton of grief around the cows.They are introduced vermin and an operator in Darwin slaughters a heap and also exports some back to South East Asia where they are highly prized as domestic animals and their milk is very good.Morale of story these fires are very useful to the land and the original inhabitants used to deliberately light them in years gone by.Back to the South where all the people are.I will use bullet point as what I know
.There are more people that wish to live on a 5 acre block out of town and they do not do firebreaks and rake up leaf litter as they want to be in nature and then they burn.Its called a hippie BBQ
.Most of the fires that start are by arsonists.Some are trying to prove a point and some people who have been charged are actually firemen drawing attention to their situation.
.I have personally been involved in backburning with Yarloop volunteer fire service and it is stunning how much land you can clear with 5 teams of 5 working in tandem over a weekend.When the big fire went through the area later guess where it stopped.Where we had backburned of course that one was deliberately lit as well
.The local fire this year was started by a farmer using an angle grinder in a total fire ban.Poor bloke fessed up and helped but was still charged with attempted murder
.The data on bushfires shows that 12% of land mass in Australia in 1900 burned now it is under 5% but there are more people.
.The area that burned in NSW was scheduled to be backburned but protestors blocked it as they claim small birds and reptiles are harmed.Less than 9% was cleared.The fires 4 months later cooked alive millions of animals and displaced many people.I know not the death toll.The faces of the protestors were blanked out by facebook as someone may take it upon themselves to get revenge.I would
.Fires need fuel and air.Take away the fuel and there is no raging inferno
This format might work.You ask and I will share what I perceive to be true based on my personal observations.Regards Duncan

.

duncan61 wrote:
My knowledge of the Amazon comes from 2 friends.One is from Chile and the other Brazil and their attitude is to clear more to create more farmland for the benefit of their respective countries but it is not allowed.I worked at Wagerup ALCOA in the construction phase 1980-1981 and knew then ALCOA had hired 13 botanists to recreate the areas due to be mined.I was involved in clearing native bushland in 1990s and we took out the mature redgums and jarrah trees for use as fencing and strainer posts.The little skinny ones went well as rails.I have been back recently and where it was prickly near impassible bush it is now all diverse forest that you can see through and wander about in without getting shredded with the odd wooden bench here and there to relax on.The birds are all chirping and all is well.Its not on fire either

duncan61 wrote:
I have to ask where you get your information.Have you flown over the Amazon recently.My local dive site is Mettams pool which is in the Marmion marine park and it is pristine.I did my PADI open dive course out of Townsville in 1984 and where we dove was amazing.Jennifer Marohasy and Tim ball are all up into the Barrier reef.Check their work.The people claiming the reef is in trouble are not even there.Coral can go through rapid water temp changes.They expel the zooxanthellae because they do it has no relationship to water temperature if the water temperature is actually changing.These are the realities I live with.I am not trying to gloss over and I receive no commision check from petrol/gas companies.At Busselton jetty there are corals that live 1000s of kms further North and the water temps are vastly different.Do we have a deal on not responding to the clowns on this thread?Can you tell me what has got you alarmed?

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

Ceist wrote:
.... it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

not sure what this pic has to do with anything
but it just seemed to fit here

sealover wrote:
Yes, you deserve a respectful reponse.

I may be misinterpreting what you are saying.

What I think I understand from this is that the fires of most recent years aren't really any different from those in the historic record.

What statistics about area burned don't tell you is about fire INTENSITY.

Did the fire result in black ash or white ash?

How many of the injured trees eventually recovered?

If what is happening in your own back yard isn't enough to alarm you, you won't be impressed by statistics of it happening everywhere else as well.

Massive wildfires from Siberia to the Amazon can be objectively quantified.

These kind of fires just didn't happen before during recorded human history.

sealover wrote:
If your own backyard burning like it never burned before doesn't alarm you.

sealover wrote:
I'll just stick to discussing the biogeochemistry of your mangroves.

sealover wrote:
You presented a respectful point for discussion.

I respect you for that.

duncan61 wrote:
Sealover.I would like to propose we keep this thread free from you know who and just respond to each other and any genuine interested parties on the state of the Planet we live on.Use all the other threads to go nuts on the weird but ignore anything that is not relevant on this thread.On other forums you can block posters flaming and you can see they have posted but not the content unless you wish to open it.I feel the need to know what you as a biogeochemist have discovered

sealover wrote:
This will not be a productive discussion.

sealover wrote:
I do not know how to post links.

sealover wrote:
Would a link really prove anything?

sealover wrote:
I know what I have spent decades studying.

sealover wrote:
At some point I will prepare something more formal.

sealover wrote:
It would not be productive use of my time or yours to argue about what is true or not true about rainforests burning, etc.

sealover wrote:
Frankly, I wish you were correct about the pristine state of the Amazon.

sealover wrote:
I wish it were true that coral reefs are not dying rapidly.

sealover wrote:
I wish we didn't have to think about replanting large swaths of forest area with more drought resistant tree varieties to fend off catastrophic wildfires.

sealover wrote:
Yes, we have a deal

sealover wrote:
I was told that I was a "liar" when I told a story about the coral reef where I saw the damage with my own eyes.

sealover wrote:
I was even shown photographic "proof" of my "lie".

sealover wrote:
I have worked closely with many other scientists. We can't ALL be stupid.

sealover wrote:
We can't be finding ourselves more ignorant as we gather more information.

sealover wrote:
I don't want to call anyone else a liar, but I have seen where large swaths of rainforest have been cleared. It's not imaginary.

sealover wrote:
There are a few success stories, but mostly it's just getting worse.

sealover wrote:
The president of Brazil basically INVITED squatters to go into indigenous land and clear the rainforest. NOBODY HAS PAID A FINE THERE IN YEARS.

sealover wrote:
I refuse to argue with someone who refuses to see any problem of any kind.

sealover wrote:
It is a waste of my time AND yours.

sealover wrote:
And, yes, we had a deal.

sealover wrote:
There is no need for me to interact directly with the trolls here any more.

sealover wrote:
I apologize if I come off as disrespectful, but there are plenty of people who don't need to be convinced that the problem is real.

sealover wrote:
Some of them even want to discuss SOLUTIONS.

I can tell you where I get most of my information - scientific journals.

sealover wrote:
I don't have time to provide a bunch of basic background references.

sealover wrote:
Especially since I know in advance anything I present will be rejected instantly.

sealover wrote:
I'd rather answer a question about biogeochemical mechanisms.

duncan61 wrote:
Be grateful I do not know how to post pictures as it gets a bit graphic.Greta lover is holding the camera.

GretaGroupie wrote:
Yes, I do love her Duncan. She is soooo wonderful!

Now the pic thing is easy.

GretaGroupie wrote:
Yes, I do love her Duncan. She is soooo wonderful!

Now the pic thing is easy.