Who is who on Climate-debate.com

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote:"I don't use Usenet." - Into the NightBut you had quite a reputation there when you did use Usenet, under the same stupid pseudonym, and using the same stupid style to make the same stupid arguments that you make here.

It would appear that someone is butt-hurt over having wasted a lifetime being irrelevant. You are seething with envy that my posts are cited far more frequently than your short stories to Nature magazine.

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote:"I don't use Usenet." - Into the NightBut you had quite a reputation there when you did use Usenet, under the same stupid pseudonym, and using the same stupid style to make the same stupid arguments that you make here.

It would appear that someone is butt-hurt over having wasted a lifetime being irrelevant. You are seething with envy that my posts are cited far more frequently than your short stories to Nature magazine.

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
Google is my attack dog!

Google inquiry: "Does the internet persona known as 'Into the Night' at climate discussion websites deny science?"

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
Turns out that Into the Night isn't really just a nothing and a nobody!

He has a reputation as a troll, and Google tracked him down.

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:

"Rather than engaging with modern empirical data, the persona typically relies on a distinct set of hyper-rigid rhetorical tactics to dismiss the global scientific consensus.

[b]Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
* The 'No Greenhouse Effect' Argument: The persona frequently claims that the greenhouse effect itself violates the Laws of Thermodynamics..

(Google goes on to summarize ITN's unique thermodenial brand of physics)

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
* Semantic Deflection: A primary tactic of this persona is to aggressively litigate definitions rather than data. They argue that "climate change" or "global warming" cannot be defined, and therefore cannot be measured, studied, or proven.

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
* Dismissal of Peer-reviewed Science: They routinely dismiss data.. blah blah.. as 'religion' 'propaganda' or 'hoaxes', while failing to provide any peer-reviewed scientific evidence to back up their claims.

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
In the context of climate discourse, someone who categorically denies basic atmospheric physics, rejects the fundamental mechanics of greenhouse gases, and invalidates all observational data is considered to be denying established science."[/b]

Im a BM and sealover and Patricio wrote:
Google is much more charitable than I would have been in characterizing the relentless pestering style used by this pHucking troll to discuss "science".

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote:"I don't use Usenet." - Into the NightBut you had quite a reputation there when you did use Usenet, under the same stupid pseudonym, and using the same stupid style to make the same stupid arguments that you make here.

It would appear that someone is butt-hurt over having wasted a lifetime being irrelevant. You are seething with envy that my posts are cited far more frequently than your short stories to Nature magazine.

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote:"I don't use Usenet." - Into the NightBut you had quite a reputation there when you did use Usenet, under the same stupid pseudonym, and using the same stupid style to make the same stupid arguments that you make here.

It would appear that someone is butt-hurt over having wasted a lifetime being irrelevant. You are seething with envy that my posts are cited far more frequently than your short stories to Nature magazine.

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:
I just learned a new term today for a particular style of internet trolling.

"Sealioning"

It's worth to effort to ask Google, "What is 'sealioning' in internet discussion forums?"

It is basically what trafn describes here.

Sealioning is when a troll pretends to have a good faith question with genuine interest in getting a meaningful answer. It is a ruse. The tar baby just sticks to you and won't come off after you engage it. So many questions! And never satisfied with the credibility of the source cited for any answer.

"..an inquisitive, seemingly friendly manner that is designed to engage you in further conversation" - trafn

"..repeatedly asking others to 'provide data' to back up what they're talking about..he repeatedly claims that your data is worthless and requests that you supply him with more data." - trafn

trafn wrote:
Who is Into the Night?

deleted spam

trafn posted this on November 1, 2015.

Into the Night has been defiling this site with his trolling for a LONG time!

-----------------------------------------------

Google offers some insight into Into the Night, our most prolific poster.

Google inquiry: "Climate discussion forum internet persona known as 'Into the Night' who insists that 'there is no such thing' as commonly accepted terms"

Google says: "Into the Night is a persistent poster on Usenet climate groups (like alt.global-warming) famous for relentless semantic nitpicking and rejecting standard scientific definitions."

So, he really is "recognized"! Google says Into the Night is "famous"!

Anyone who wants to learn more about Into the Night's internet reputation as a science denier can do the same Google search to read a couple of more paragraphs about the scientifically-illiterate troll who obnoxiously derails every attempt at rational discussion of the website topic.