So if I understand you correctly holding an opinion that is counter to the skeptic CAGW position is dishonest denialist. which has been apparent for many years, pot/kettle surprised you even went there!

Works ok in unthreaded

Anyone else having problems posting tonight?

Pakistan and Queensland floods, will they become more regular events?
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/2050/pakistan_and_queensland_floods_will_they_become_more_regular_events

Proper science, investigate, collate data and confirm with boots on ground.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8535571/17-lost-pyramids-found-by-satellite.html

Steve Mcintyre responds to Bob Ward - who made a comment at Climate Etc (and Paul Nurse) at Climate Etc....

http://judithcurry.com/2011/05/25/freedom-of-information/#comment-70524

"Here’s a suggestion to Bob Ward. Write a public letter to the University of East Anglia asking them to forthwith provide me with the Yamal/Polar Urals regional chronology that I requested and the associated lists of sites.

This is a limited and reasonable request. Not providing it will have two bad consequences for the “community” that Ward purports to represent. Refusing to provide the data not only is evasive, but is perceived by the public as evasive. And each excuse used for the refusal will be probed, thus committing the university to far more work than simply releasing the requested data.

It’s important that people like Ward and Nurse move beyond pious platitudes urging scientists to be more open and transparent. Pious platitudes have been uttered for two decades.

On a related topic, Shub Niggurath has observed that IPCC has adopted policies to be even less open and transparent. For the last IPCC report, it was possible for me, as a reviewer, to request a copy of the review comments on the First Draft, for example. IPCC has changed its rules so that they will not be available to me or other reviewers until after the publication of the Report itself"

How is he going to get out of this one.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8536918/Chris-Huhnes-ex-wife-signs-confession-over-points-claim.html

The BBC is coming out of its shell again, on Breakfast news a piece on a new enclosure for Penguins saying some Penguin species are endangered by AGW and we must help by reducing carbon emmissions.

Aren't Penguins from the South where sea ice has increased.

Bob Ward chips in:

Bob Ward of the Grantham Research Institute at the London School of Economics said the intention of many of those making freedom of information requests was to trawl through scientists' work with the intention of trying to find problems and errors. "It's also quite true that these people do not care about the fact that it is causing a serious inconvenience," he said. "It is being used in an aggressive and organised way. When freedom of information legislation was first contemplated, it was not being considered that universities would be landed with this additional burden."

Evidence of the aggression first began to emerge when personal emails and documents were stolen from the University of East Anglia's (UEA) servers in November 2009 and leaked on to the internet. Climate sceptics seized on the contents as evidence that apparently showed scientists were colluding to keep errors in their research hidden and prevent rivals' research from being published at all.

(From the Nurse Guardian article)

Freedom of information laws are used to harass scientists, says Nobel laureate
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/25/freedom-information-laws-harass-scientists

Interested in the proximate origins of climate alarmism as a political weapon to achieve totalitarian ends?

I have just stumbled across this post: http://dradge.com/2010/07/where-the-global-warming-hoax-was-born/

Some of the useful idiots/malevolent schemers/irresponsible clowns involved include Margaret Mead, John Holdren, Stephen Schneider, James Lovelock and, a new one for me, a George Woodwell - introduced in the post as 'a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a Fellow of the Academy of Arts and Sciences, is a global warming fanatic whose stated beliefs indicate that he abhors human beings in general, and whose zealousness in this cause leads him to bend the truth.' It sounds like he would have aroused the interest of any headhunter acting for the Royal Society.

The piece ends on a curious note, citing the younger generation as a possible hope:

'Thirty-two years after this 1975 conference, the world’s population, its science and technology, and its industry are dangerously in the grasp of Margaret Mead’s minions, including those on the IPCC. A good part of the population is scared, as planned, by the potential effects of human-caused global warming. They are ready to react, as Mead demanded, to “warnings which will parallel the instincts of animals who flee before the hurricane,” and in the process tear down the very institutions and technologies that can obviate the perceived “limits to growth.”

In the intervening 32 years, most of our scientific institutions have been taken over by an anti-science ideology, typified by the views of a Stephen Schneider or a John Holdren. How can there be a science when the mind and its capacity for creativity is denied, when man is put equal to beast, and when man’s advancements are perceived as ruining the pristine confines of a limited world? Such pessimism is a formula for a “no future” world.

The question remains, will the reservoir of sanity, in particular in today’s youth, who did not live through the greenwashing of the 1970s and 1980s, be able to force reality—climate reality and financial reality—on the rest of the population? Will the Noösphere, man’s creative ability to change the Biosphere, prevail?'

Since the greenwashing has continued a fortiori in our schools and colleges in the 90s and 00s, I rather fancy that much of our hope for a 'reservoir of sanity' must mostly lie with far older people.