Who is who on Climate-debate.com

MajorScammer wrote:
Gasguuzzler: What do you mean? No

MajorScammer wrote:
I am just a simple MajorScammer:
What do you think I am here for

MajorScammer wrote:
not to teach: that is for the people that can not do

MajorScammer wrote:
To learn? what have to offer that I don't already know?

MajorScammer wrote:
So being a MajorScammer -

MajorScammer wrote:
Maybe looking for people that want to talk with someone of equal value
Do you think anyone here is or has Equal value?

MajorScammer wrote:
This means open mine to possibilities

MajorScammer wrote:
If there is no such beings on this forum
Then there is no important reason to remain if you get my drift.

GasGuzzler wrote:
Equality is a grass roots movement grounded diversity. I don't know how you don't know this stuff. Capitalism is destroying equality.

GasGuzzler wrote:
I'm all for equality if you have more money than me. What's wrong with being an entitled little bitch?

GasGuzzler wrote:

MajorScammer wrote:not to teach: that is for the people that can not do

I know plenty of teachers that preform work and service at a high level of excellence.

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

MajorScammer wrote:not to teach: that is for the people that can not do

I know plenty of teachers that preform work and service at a high level of excellence.

In your haste you got this backwards. MajorScammer was pointing out that teaching is the only option for those who cannot do, not that those who can do are somehow prohibited from being teachers.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Our universities are magnets for losers who cannot. There, they accumulate until they squelch those who can.

GasGuzzler wrote:I do believe you are correct. I took it as all teachers teach, because none can "do".

GasGuzzler wrote:I immediately think of Into the Night. He teaches some college courses but his life is also filled with meaningful work.

IBdaMann wrote:
Because your errors are so rare and subtle, if I don't point them out, it is likely that the world would miss them entirely and you would be difficult to distinguish from me.

IBdaMann wrote:
Don't limit Into the Night's qualifier as a "teacher" to his credential as a university professor. He would be a teacher even if he were not associated with any university, just as you are a teacher every time you impart your knowledge and wisdom to others.

The point here is that we regrettably refer to university professors as "teachers" whether or not they impart any knowledge, and if they simply manage to remain alive and breathing while indoctrinating a classroom full of tuition-payers, we regrettably refer to that as teaching.

Nonetheless, this is the technical loophole that enables a Marxist loser to earn the credential "teacher".

IBdaMann wrote:
Being a teacher or being a lawyer are the only options available that allow one to be "successful" without being any good.

GasGuzzler wrote:I would call bullshit on you for this statement...however, this is PRECISELY what happened on YAP. I was accused of being your second "sock" account. Funny stuff and a badge of honor for me!
On a side note, I just checked in over there and I remain under a lifetime ban.

GasGuzzler wrote:1) Is one still a teacher even if the information he teaches is incorrect? I would say yes.

GasGuzzler wrote:2) How does one (say a GasGuzzler for a random example) call Into the Night a teacher without conflating him with a Swan? (another totally random example)

GasGuzzler wrote:I must take issue with you on this statement. Your glaring omission of meteorologist is rather concerning. We both know you just need to show a peek of cleavage and point out the Norwegian Jet Stream and you're good to go.

GasGuzzler wrote:
Equality is a grass roots movement grounded diversity. I don't know how you don't know this stuff.

GasGuzzler wrote:
Capitalism is destroying equality.

GasGuzzler wrote:
I'm all for equality if you have more money than me. What's wrong with being an entitled little bitch?

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

MajorScammer wrote:not to teach: that is for the people that can not do

I know plenty of teachers that preform work and service at a high level of excellence.

In your haste you got this backwards. MajorScammer was pointing out that teaching is the only option for those who cannot do, not that those who can do are somehow prohibited from being teachers.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Our universities are magnets for losers who cannot. There, they accumulate until they squelch those who can.

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

MajorScammer wrote:not to teach: that is for the people that can not do

I know plenty of teachers that preform work and service at a high level of excellence.

In your haste you got this backwards. MajorScammer was pointing out that teaching is the only option for those who cannot do, not that those who can do are somehow prohibited from being teachers.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Our universities are magnets for losers who cannot. There, they accumulate until they squelch those who can.

Incompetent teachers really can't squelch those that can do. Those that can do will do it. No teacher can stop that.

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the communists in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the [Marxists] in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the [Marxists] in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

The opiate of the masses, the purpose of the centralization of the means of all communication in the hands of the government, i.e. disinformation dissemination.

Centralized propaganda and disinformation programs never occur by random chance.

gfm7175 wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the communists in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

... and as yet another example of this sort of thing, I open up an email and at the bottom of it, under the company name, I came across this rather interesting language:

"An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer"

Is this not a paradox?

[1] opportunity is equal for all applicants/employees.
[2] opportunity is higher or lower for particular applicants/employees.

Which is it?

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the [Marxists] in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

The opiate of the masses, the purpose of the centralization of the means of all communication in the hands of the government, i.e. disinformation dissemination.

Centralized propaganda and disinformation programs never occur by random chance.

...

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the [Marxists] in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

The opiate of the masses, the purpose of the centralization of the means of all communication in the hands of the government, i.e. disinformation dissemination.

Centralized propaganda and disinformation programs never occur by random chance.

...

40a.

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
Uniformity of thought is then called "diversity"

It's "almost as if" the [Marxists] in positions of power purposely make up deceptive labels of this sort in order to manipulate the intellectually lazy masses.

The opiate of the masses, the purpose of the centralization of the means of all communication in the hands of the government, i.e. disinformation dissemination.

Centralized propaganda and disinformation programs never occur by random chance.

...

40a.

...

trafn wrote:
Who is IBdaMann?

I am trafn, and I have been here posting on Climate-debate.com for many weeks now. I started this thread as a resource for new members so that they will have a better understanding of what to expect when they interact with other members here. To that end, I will give you my experienced impression of IBdaMann.

IBdaMann is a troll who is trying to prevent meaningful, adult-like discussion of climate change science from happening here on Climate-debate.com. He does so by using the following tactics:

1. When you first post here, he will respond in an inquisitive, seemingly friendly manner that is designed to engage you in further conversation.

2. His follow-up posts are dominated by repeatedly asking others to "define" what they are talking about, and when they do, he merely requests more definitions. He does this so as to create a state of confusion in the conversation and, thereby, he blocks meaningful discussion.

3. He likes to demand an impossible level of proof, commonly by citing Karl Poopers "Falsifiable Models,'' as to the existence of climate change science. Since this is still a relatively new field of study less than 50 years old, there is not enough data yet to provide such global, big-picture proof. Yet, he demands such proof only to obstruct meaningful discussion.

4. When people try to reason with him, he repeatedly insults them as either being religious-based in their ideas, Marxists, or he uses is favorite accusation and calls them a "warmazombie." If you'd like to get an idea of how often he does this, do a search on the word "warmazombie" (without the quotes, of course).

5. He likes to quote faith-based individuals as if they were recognized authorities within the scientific community. Most recently, he did this in two threads where he quoted Cliff Harris:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/understanding-albedo-d6-e781.php#post_4015

- and -

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/is-the-gulf-stream-slowing-down-d11-e725.php#post_2691

If you enjoy interacting with a troll, IBdaMann is probably the most experienced and most challenging troll currently posting on Climate-debate.com.

If you do not enjoy interacting with a troll, I strongly advise against responding to him, and that you support my initiative to ban trolls from this website which is at:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/why-is-climate-debate-com-so-messed-up-d15-e788.php#post_4318

trafn wrote:
Who is Into the Night?

I am trafn, and I have been here posting on Climate-debate.com for many weeks now. I started this thread as a resource for new members so that they will have a better understanding of what to expect when they interact with other members here. To that end, I will give you my experienced impression of Into the Night.

1. Just like IBdaMann, when you first post here, Into the Night will respond in an inquisitive, seemingly friendly manner that is designed to engage you in further conversation.

2. His follow-up posts are dominated by repeatedly asking others to "provide data" to back up what they are talking about, and when they do, he repeatedly claims that your data is worthless and requests that you supply him with more data. He has created a thread just for this purpose called The Data Mine. He does this so as to create a state of confusion in the conversation and, thereby, he blocks meaningful discussion.

3. He likes to claim that nearly every respected authority in the scientific community presents only "fudged" data with respect to climate change science. While there have been cases where this has happened in every field of science, he tends to globally apply this accusation to any data you provide him (example here).

4. He repeatedly accuses people of committing bulverism whenever another troll is under attack for quoting a religious-based website like
https://overpopulationisamyth.com as if it were a science-based one (example here).

If you enjoy interacting with a troll, Into the Night is probably one of the most experienced and most challenging trolls currently posting on Climate-debate.com, only second to IBdaMann.

If you do not enjoy interacting with a troll, I strongly advise against responding to him, and that you support my initiative to ban trolls from this website which is at:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/why-is-climate-debate-com-so-messed-up-d15-e788.php#post_4318

Im a BM wrote:

trafn wrote:
...

Im a BM wrote:
By the time I encountered Into the Night, his style had shifted from what Trafn describes from five years ago.

He didn't come in friendly at first. He NEVER asked me to "provide data" for ANYTHING, and there were plenty of opportunities.

Im a BM wrote:
He had stopped pretending to present any scientific arguments by the time I met him.

Im a BM wrote:
All he ever had to say was, "NO, it's NOT!", "There is NO SUCH THING!", and "BUZZWORDS!"

Im a BM wrote:
For an image of Into the Night declaring something to be "meaningless buzzwords", picture a very young child with his eyes closed tight shut, his fingers plugging his ears, as he loudly repeats "la la la la la la la".

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

trafn wrote:
...

Stop spamming.

Im a BM wrote:
By the time I encountered Into the Night, his style had shifted from what Trafn describes from five years ago.

He didn't come in friendly at first. He NEVER asked me to "provide data" for ANYTHING, and there were plenty of opportunities.

You aren't trying to claim any data.

Im a BM wrote:
He had stopped pretending to present any scientific arguments by the time I met him.

Science is a set of falsifiable theories. You just ignore them.

Im a BM wrote:
All he ever had to say was, "NO, it's NOT!", "There is NO SUCH THING!", and "BUZZWORDS!"

Because buzzwords seem to be your style, other than spamming.

Im a BM wrote:
For an image of Into the Night declaring something to be "meaningless buzzwords", picture a very young child with his eyes closed tight shut, his fingers plugging his ears, as he loudly repeats "la la la la la la la".

Inversion fallacy. You are describing yourself again.

GasGuzzler wrote:

sealover wrote:
I wasn't planning to list my credentials.

But you fall back on them, desperately seeking credibility.

sealover wrote:
My very first posts got multiple response with the same message.

Could that possibly mean anything?

sealover wrote:
I was accused of being a liar, pretending to have knowledge of science.

I'll cut you a slice of slack. You were just preaching what you thought was science.

sealover wrote:
So many comments such as "Go learn some science."

Why do you refuse to learn from these guys? IBdaMann can be an A-hole. Big whoop. He knows his shit. Why not Into the Night? He lives for teaching. He's an outstanding teacher. I submit the reason you refuse to learn from them is that your ego was crushed when you realized you actually DON'T know it all. What Berkley A-hole told you that you did?

sealover wrote:
So, I went ahead and mentioned that I had already spent plenty of time learning science.

Yet, you never even learned what science is.

sealover wrote:
No apologies.

You won't get any. Your attitude of "holier than thou" deserved every sarcasm laced insult flung your way.

sealover wrote:
And the false accusations only become more absurd.

They only became more accurate.

sealover wrote:
And I guess lignin is a carbohydrate and you just cannot reduce sulfate and everything they taught me all those years was just wrong.

Did you never question a professor? Did you just BELIEVE everything they taught you? This is where the religion part of the conversation comes in. Do you understand that? Religions are based in FAITH. You have yet to even define your faith in climate change. Do you BELIEVE CO2 can raise the temperature of the earth? Do you KNOW it can? Please tell us how! This would be a very meaningful debate. Yet you refuse to define your terms or explain your position. Then you pivot around and accuse everyone else of running from debate. You are a spineless turd!

sealover wrote:
But I'm pretty sure this is almost the only thread I ever post on that I did not start myself.

That is because you would rather preach than discuss.

sealover wrote:
Looking at THIS thread, SEVEN YEARS AGO the same names that ruined the website then are still doing it. Very little traffic to this site any more. VERY little.

Then why are you here? You won't be able to attract your large audience with little traffic. Is it possible the majority have lost faith in climate change? No one is scared anymore because the relentless fear mongering falls on deaf ears? Notice how no oceanfront property is underwater? (aside from a storm, obviously)

sealover wrote:
It seems like the goal is to prevent ANY discussion from getting started.

No. The goal is to have a discussion from square one. That means if you make an assertion, DEFINE YOUR TERMS. Otherwise I'm talking venison and IBdaMann is spewing on about peanut butter chicken. We are arguing but unknowingly discussing two different things. Define your terms. Simple stuff.

sealover wrote:
It seems like the goal is just to insult people who care about the future

I care VERY much about the future. It's a HUGE reason why I am here.

sealover wrote:
I would have been happy to be left alone while I posted my gibber babble buzzwords that nobody anywhere was ever required to read.

I'm so terribly sorry you are so disappointed by the content of the free to use forum.

sealover wrote:
But I guess there isn't much else to read around here.

Wait...wasn't it you that was marveling at 80,000 posts?

sealover wrote:
Maybe I should be flattered by the attention, but there is no doubt that insult has been the intention from the start.

You should not try flattery. I promise, it will not help your ego situation.

sealover wrote:
And am I being threatened with banishment for my troll like behavior?

Interesting....Branner send you a message?

sealover wrote:
When was the last time anyone got banned around here?

trafn was before my time, litesong a couple years ago. He was spamming multiple threads with identical "content".

sealover wrote:
I can't stop you from doing what you do.

I hope you don't get banned. Just wish you would define your terms so we could engage in a meaningful conversation.

sealover wrote:
What I truly hate you for is the targeting of your mean spirited attacks

Someone on the internet insulted you. Dude, get a grip.

sealover wrote:
people who want to try to make the world a better place.

Again, define your terms. What is "a better place"?
You have only left me to guess that you think a better world is one with no oil, gas, or any carbon energy. Your "better place" has crushing taxes to pay for government subsidized wind and solar farms (uglier than sin) and 45 minute charge electric cars with a range of 100 miles. You have no comprehension of how gas and oil are the lifeblood of the world as we know it.

I like the world as it was, as it is. I do NOT like where you want to take it. I also know, by way of science, that CO2 has no capability to warm the earth. It is not a powerful gas. It has NO power. None. Learn what heat is, then learn how it flows. It's rather eye opening.

You go drive your green car charged with green energy and save your own back yard. I don't take any issue with that. You don't have the right to tell me what to drive, what to do with my money, or what to do with my land. Step on my land spewing any of that shit and IBdaMann's insults will be a Saturday in the park.

sealover wrote:
Perhaps there is a special place in hell for trolls who ruin these kind of websites.

Perhaps there is a special place on the internet for you to start your own forum. Again, apologies for the disappointment in this forum. I don't get to speak for Branner, but I'd bet my last dollar he would be more than happy to refund any fees you have paid to be a part of this journey.

Im a BM wrote:
I hope this is the LAST time I ever bother addressing you directly.

Im a BM wrote:
"You aren't trying to claim any data." - Into the Night

Not any data that Into the Night is willing to look at!

Im a BM wrote:
For example, one of my first peer-reviewed scientific papers was a new method to measure dissolved organic nitrogen using persulfate oxidation (Yu, Northup, and Dahlgren, 1994).

Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night just insists that "there is no such thing as 'organic nitrogen'" and "persulfate is not a chemical.". Unwilling to even LOOK at the data. Unwilling to even LOOK at my published method for chemical analysis.

Im a BM wrote:
And we most certainly published the data to PROVE that we were measuring ORGANIC NITROGEN, using persulfate oxidation, even though someone might not construe "persulfate" to be a "chemical".

Im a BM wrote:
Actually, I couldn't get Into the Night to look at data from ANY of my published papers. I couldn't get him to look at the papers at all. "Science is not a paper"!

Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night makes ABSURD claims about lignin chemistry. I couldn't get him to look at the lignin data in any of my published papers. He insists that lignin is a "carbohydrate". He refused to look at my lignin DATA and extraction methodology.

Im a BM wrote:
Here is my most FAMOUS discovery regarding LIGNIN. In the 1995 paper, "Polyphenol control of nitrogen release from pine litter" (Nature, volume 377, pages 227-229). Old school ecologists thought that LIGNIN was the phenolic compound that regulated nitrogen release from pine litter. Old school extraction methodology couldn't distinguish lignin from condensed tannin. We did, and we showed ZERO correlation between % lignin and nitrogen mineralization, whereas there was a HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT correlation between CONDENSED TANNIN concentration and nitrogen mineralization.

Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night has NO INTEREST in having me show him my data.

Im a BM wrote:
It would shatter the security of his little world to learn what lignin actually IS and how they measure it.

Im a BM wrote:
I showed ITN references to a couple of NEW papers about lignin chemistry that cite my lignin research and validate my findings. Into the Night doesn't want to see THAT data either.

Im a BM wrote:
I wouldn't be at all surprised if he comes back with something genius clever like, "So, you still don't know what lignin is."

sea lover wrote:Greetings newcomers ... This website has a notorious history.

seal over wrote:So tragic.

seal over wrote:People wanted to discuss a matter of tremendous importance to humanity.

seal over wrote:What they got was a place where the unsuspecting were pounced upon by a team of sadists.

seal over wrote:As a real world troll, I find it particularly hilarious to pretend that my position has something to do with valid science.

seal over wrote:Frank and I ate these pies and I've only known him a few weeks.