Writing About Something Is Not An Endorsement

I wanted to address something, as brought up by Jeffrey, and felt it better to move it to a new post, rather than continue the conversation within that post, as it is a different subject. This comes from the post The Donald Schools A Clinton Compliant Media Hackette. After much back and forth, the goalposts were shifted, and then it went back to the original assertion, and got personal

Little Willy,

You typed:

Let me say right off the bat, I’m still not a Trump for president supporter or fan.

That is clearly a lie, as your actions count more than your words.

Similarly you claim to acknowledge that the Earth is warming, yet post article after article claiming that the Earth has stopped warming.

Actions speak more loudly than words.

This kind of “double thought” is diagnostic for the new conservative “mind”, such as it is. Since the new conservative is driven by ideology and not logic or evidence it seems natural to hold two diametrically opposed positions. Modern conservatives are incapable of recognizing their lies.

Writing about something in a positive manner does not make one a supporter. Does anyone think Ruth Marcus is a Trump supporter despite writing an op-ed entitled Trump is right: Bill Clinton’s sordid sexual history is fair game? If I write something nice about Obama, or agree with him on some subject, does that make me an Obama supporter? I’ve written in support of Obama expanding the Pacific marine reserve. I think he did it for the wrong reason (climate change, of course), but I support the decision. Consider

  • I very much support the recently passed federal ban on the use of microbeads, even though the legislation came from a Democrat. Doesn’t mean I support Frank Pallone (D-NJ), the primary author.
  • If I post something from Sarah Palin that makes sense, it in no way makes me a supporter. I’m not. If she ran for office, I would not endorse her, and I wouldn’t give a dime. She lost my support and respect back in 2011, to the point I even had a post with the phrase “Governor Half-term” in the title.
  • Just because I may slam Republicans on some issues, doesn’t mean I do not support the GOP.
  • I’ve slammed Bush on things, especially amnesty. Doesn’t mean I wasn’t a supporter.
  • I’ve said nice things about some Democrats, and even agreed with them on some issues. Doesn’t mean I support them.
  • I’ve met Hillary once, way back. She was very nice for the few minutes I talked to her. Doesn’t mean I support her.
  • If I slam the crazy rape culture nutters, doesn’t mean that I don’t think that rape is not a problem, nor that rape laws should be done away with.
  • Back when the Occupy Wall Street movement started, I actually wrote, can’t remember whether here or in someone’s comments, that they had some points, and there could be room for both OWS and the Tea Party to find common ground. Didn’t mean I supported OWS (especially when they went bat guano insane.

The list could go on, but, you get the point.

When it comes to climate change, acknowledging that the Earth has warmed post-Little Ice Age but has seen no statistically significant warming over almost 19 years is in no way a lie. There have been multiple periods during the current warm period where there were pauses in warming. There were periods during the Little Ice Age where the temps were going up. It was so hot during the summer of the Battle of Monmouth where more soldiers died from the heat than from battle wounds. This is not “double thought”, it’s acknowledging actual events. As opposed to Believing that tiny increases in CO2 will cause global temperatures to rise 3-6C and the seas to rise upwards of 50 feet by 2100.

Acknowledging that there should be some real world effective gun regulations doesn’t mean I don’t support the 2nd Amendment, nor, conversely, that I am a gun grabber.

There are several book authors that produce material I love/like, even though I know they are hardcore Progressives. Steve Alten has written some great books (especially The Loch), and, even though he wrote the idiotic and very political Shell Game, I still read some of his books afterwards. John Scalzi is a massive Social Justice Warrior, and I’ll side with Vox Day on the fight, but, I still enjoyed several of his books (most don’t interest me, just not my kind of story).

I do not support Trump. Yes, he says a few good things. He has a few good ideas. I like that he is willing to attack, especially in a manner that goes after his detractors twice as hard. I think he’d make a bad president, and would be entirely too Leftist for my beliefs set. I’d take him over Hillary if he gets the nod as the GOP candidate, a case of “bad over worse”. When the primaries hit NC, I will not be voting for him. It will be either Cruz or Rubio. I mostly agree with Jonah Goldberg, Trump is no Conservative. Donald made a big deal out of getting tough on illegals and completing the border fence. Great! Everyone forgets that he also supports amnesty. He’s great on ‘climate change’. But, he’s flipped around on other issues. And been incoherent on others. Some of his stances are Republican/Conservative, others are very Leftist. He said in 2000 that we must have universal health care. Now he’s against Obamacare. Which is it?

Could he convince me? Possibly. I don’t trust him right now. I don’t trust anyone who is seemingly telling me what I want to hear. Could his business acumen translate to a good economic president? Possibly. Convince me.

Writing about something positively doesn’t mean support.

If you want to piss me off, by all means, claim I lied and fail to offer a shred of proof.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

24 Responses to “Writing About Something Is Not An Endorsement”

  1. Zachriel says:

    William Teach: When it comes to climate change, acknowledging that the Earth has warmed post-Little Ice Age but has seen no statistically significant warming over almost 19 years is in no way a lie.

    Cherry-picking. Let’s look at the claim, which hinges on the word “significant”.

    HADCrut4 from 1997 through 2015 shows an increase of 0.093 ±0.099 °C/decade. That means there is about a 97% chance the temperature actually did rise, but a small chance it didn’t.

    HADCrut4 from 1996 through 2015 shows an increase of 0.123 ±0.095 °C/decade. That means there is a more than 99% chance the temperature actually did rise, but an even smaller chance it did not.

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    HADCrut4 from 1997 through 2015 shows an increase of 0.093 ±0.099 °C/decade. That means there is about a 97% chance the temperature actually did rise, but a small chance it didn’t.

    HADCrut4 from 1996 through 2015 shows an increase of 0.123 ±0.095 °C/decade. That means there is a more than 99% chance the temperature actually did rise, but an even smaller chance it did not.


    Shows an increase
    compared to what?

  3. Zachriel says:

    drowningpuppies: Shows an increase compared to what?

    The baseline is 1961-1990.
    https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

  4. drowningpuppies says:

    The baseline is 1961-1990.

    Oh, so much for that “cherry picking” thingy you mentioned.

  5. Zachriel says:

    drowningpuppies: Oh, so much for that “cherry picking” thingy you mentioned.

    The choice of baseline doesn’t change the trend.

  6. Cherry-picking. Let’s look at the claim, which hinges on the word “significant”.

    Well, first, this really has nothing to do with the point of the post itself, but, I hope I at least made my point. If you came out and said “I approve of this one thing Bush 43 did”, I wouldn’t infer that this meant you supported Bush 43.

    As for the significant part, that comes from Phil Jones, of climategate notoriety, who told the BBC that there had been no statistiaclly significant warming since 1995. This doesn’t mean there wasn’t warming. Nor does it mean that there hasn’t been a tiny bit since 95 (96, 97). What it means is that it really was tiny. Furthermore, what little warming there has been has been way below all the projections from the computer models.

    And, as I’ve stated many, many, many times, warming doesn’t equal anthropogenic causation. It just equals warming, as has happened many times during the Holocene, much less the rest of Earth’s 4 billion years of history. YOU have to prove it is mostly/solely caused by mankind this time.

  7. david7134 says:

    Zachriel,
    The mere fact that we can’t determine if there has been warming is indicative of the problem. The problem is that from day one this was a political issue. The reason is that the only solution for the left is destruction of the economy, increased tax burden and unification of centralized government not only here but world wide. And the end result will not change the temperature or climate one bit. This is not conspiracy as you will claim, but a discourse and a discourse that has been picked up by the left and used to manipulate mushy minds that support leftist idealization. Now, if you truly believe this junk, provide clear climate data that is free from manipulation, no grafts and stats, simple raw data. The times I have been directed to site that supposedly offer this have been a joke. The raw data is indecipherable and I am a scientist who looks at stuff like that daily. Then live the life, if your bunch truly believe that austerity will change the world, live it then show the rest of us how to do so (I have a big picture of Gore doing so). Then divorce the profit process from the whole equation so people like Gore will not benefit from the carbon trading. Then make sure that carbon trading will not be used to shape policy, as it already has. Then clearly show how CO2 in the quantum process that you claim it acts has caused any issue and then that CO2 clearly comes from man and not natural processes, which it does. Then show the science of gas diffusion that is causing the CO2 accumulation without causing distress at our levels (a small increase in CO2 causes significant effects on the human body, try going into the Great Pyramid to see what happens). The fact is that you can’t do any of this and none of your models work, none.

  8. david7134 says:

    Teach,
    Good comments. Though Jeff will call you names over it. As to Trump, he is a joke but we have just had the worst president ever and only Hillary can makes things any more horrible than they currently are.

  9. jl says:

    “You have to mostly/solely prove it’s caused by mankind this time.” Poor babies, they just can’t seem to do that. Like you said, they arbitrarily jump to the next step and say warming=CO2.

  10. Jeffery says:

    I respond to namecalling with namecalling, and I’m pretty good at it.

    Z:

    Cherry-picking. Let’s look at the claim, which hinges on the word “significant”.

    W:

    Well, first, this really has nothing to do with the point of the post itself

    Of course, William brought up warming in this context, and it’s his most fertile source of untruths.

    Phil Jones made his truthful statement when global warming was statistically insignificant, but as the data accumulated since his statement, the warming is significant. We can debate whether William leaving out that detail is out of dishonesty or just ignorance. The Earth has warmed.

    what little warming there has been has been way below all the projections from the computer models

    Two misdirections in one sentence! Are they lies or just old-fashioned demagoguery?

    Little warming

    ?? 1 degree C is a lot of warming and exceeds the total low to high excursion of the Holocene! And it’s all compacted into a century.

    below all the projections from the computer models

    Nope. The dishonest Roy Spencer rigged a graph a while back and it spread through the deni-0-sphere like a Utah wildfire. The Earth is warming as predicted.

    warming, as has happened many times during the Holocene

    But not like now.

    much less the rest of Earth’s 4 billion years of history

    That’s a huge number!! But irrelevant. Arguably the “modern” Earth is at most a few million years old. That’s when all the continents reached there current positions, the overall Earth cooled and Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets dominated, the ocean currents reached contemporaneous patterns, primates evolved, the cyclic glaciations and interglacial patterns developed.

  11. gitarcarver says:

    I respond to namecalling with namecalling, and I’m pretty good at it.

    This is the equivalent to being good at “duck duck goose.”

    In short, you made a claim about Teach and Trump that you did not and cannot back up.

    No matter how many times you try and distract people from the issue, you got caught lying.

    And no matter how “good” you think you are at acting like a petulant child doesn’t change who you are, what you are, and the fact that you just got busted and exposed.

  12. Jeffery says:

    Phil Jones made his truthful statement when global warming was statistically insignificant post-1995, but as the data accumulated since his statement, the warming is significant. We can debate whether William leaving out that detail is out of dishonesty or just ignorance. The Earth has warmed.

    what little warming there has been has been way below all the projections from the computer models

    Two misdirections in one sentence! Are they lies or just old-fashioned demagoguery?

    little warming

    ?? 1 degree C is a lot of warming and exceeds the total low to high excursion of the Holocene (until now)! And it’s all compacted into a century.

    below all the projections from the computer models

    Nope. The dishonest Roy Spencer rigged a graph a while back and it spread through the deni-0-sphere like a Texas wildfire. The Earth is warming as predicted.

    warming, as has happened many times during the Holocene

    But not like now. Kudos – you used to claim it was much warmer many times previously than now.

    much less the rest of Earth’s 4 billion years of history

    That’s a huge number!! But irrelevant. Arguably the “modern” Earth is at most a few million years old. That’s when all the continents reached their current positions, the overall Earth cooled and Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets dominated, the ocean currents reached contemporaneous patterns, primates (including H. sapiens) evolved and the cyclic glaciations and interglacial patterns developed.

  13. Jeffery says:

    One note gitarcarver… you repeat this comment often… blah blah blah, caught lying, got busted, blah blah blah

    William lies, misleads, misinforms, disinforms in almost every post. He lied about not supporting Trump. I’ve point out his lies each time, but suddenly he gets his panties in a twist over Trump. I wonder why? It’s well known that Repub candidates pay bloggers and radio talkers to favor them. Is William receiving money from any candidate?

    Regarding namecalling – what I’ve found with the namecallers here is that responding in kind tends to shut them up.

  14. drowningpuppies says:

    More anal seepage from the little whiny bitch.

  15. gitarcarver says:

    He lied about not supporting Trump.

    And yet when you are asked to prove that statement, you shut up.

    Like the immature person you are, you think that repeating the same lie over and over somehow makes it true.

    It’s well known that Repub candidates pay bloggers and radio talkers to favor them.

    It is also well known that liberals communicate directly with campaigns of Democrats in order to get paid for favorable posts and even favorable press coverage. That is documented. Do you have any proof that Teach takes any money from a candidate?

    Any?

    We both know the answer is “no.”

    Regarding namecalling – what I’ve found with the namecallers here is that responding in kind tends to shut them up.

    No, people just know that responding in kind to your name calling and perceived “victimhood” won’t accomplish anything. It is called being an adult which you don’t seem to care about at all.

    I can go down the path of name calling with you if you want. It just isn’t productive.

    The funny thing is that while you sit behind a keyboard and act tough, you have also said that you would send your sons to fight with people. That’s real big talk for a little man such as yourself.

    You got caught in a lie and don’t have the guts to admit it.

    You once asked why you lacked morals? There it is right in front of your face.

  16. Jeffery says:

    gitar redux…

    I guess we could ask William if he gets paid by any candidate, but how could you trust his answer?

    ironic, suckingpuppies calling someone a “bitch”

    Do you guys and William really not recognize that William lies all the time? Fascinating.

  17. Zachriel says:

    William Teach: I hope I at least made my point. If you came out and said “I approve of this one thing Bush 43 did”, I wouldn’t infer that this meant you supported Bush 43.

    Agreed.

    William Teach: What it means is that it really was tiny.

    That is incorrect. The margin of error means there is a small, but not negligible, chance it didn’t warm.

    William Teach: Furthermore, what little warming there has been has been way below all the projections from the computer models.

    Again, that is incorrect. It’s just as likely that the actual warming was greater than the mean value as less than the mean value.

    For HADCrut4 from 1997 through 2015, 0.093 ±0.099 °C/decade (2-sigma) means that there is a 95% chance that the result is between 0.192 and -0.006.

    For HADCrut4 from 1996 through 2015, 0.123 ±0.095 °C/decade (2-sigma) means that there is a 95% chance that the result is between .218 and .028.

    Notice that both periods show a probability of warming, but adding just a single year results in a “significant” result. That’s why the original statement is called cherry-picking.

    William Teach: And, as I’ve stated many, many, many times, warming doesn’t equal anthropogenic causation.

    Sure. However, models that include greenhouse warming, irradiance, albedo, and other physical factors can largely explain historical climate change. Greenhouse warming is required to explain both the historical record and the current warming trend. Furthermore, greenhouse warming also explains the cooling stratosphere.

    There is still wide error bars on climate sensitivity, though, 2-4ºC is the most likely value.

  18. gitarcarver says:

    I guess we could ask William if he gets paid by any candidate, but how could you trust his answer?

    So your suggestion is that someone prove that your unfounded accusation is not accurate?

    It is laughable that a rapist like you would even talk about trusting someone’s answer.

    Do you guys and William really not recognize that William lies all the time? Fascinating.

    You don’t acknowledge that you are the liar in this conversation. That isn’t “fascinating,” that is mere an indication of your pathetic existence.

    The bottom line is that you made the accusation that Teach supports Trump. When asked for proof, you ran away. Now you are moving onto another unproven accusation. Then you want to say other people are untrustworthy.

    By the way, what is it with you and sexual insults? First you accused people of being fluffers and other things. Now you are fascinated by the idea that a commenter is doing things with dogs?

    Project much? Is that what rapists do?

    Or is it just that liberals like you have sexual issues?

  19. Zachriel says:

    david7134: The mere fact that we can’t determine if there has been warming is indicative of the problem.

    Huh? HADCrut4 shows a 99% probability the Earth warmed from 1996 through 2005. It shows it to be virtually certain that temperatures have risen since 1950, and a 90% probability they have risen at least 0.1 °C/decade.

    david7134: Now, if you truly believe this junk, provide clear climate data that is free from manipulation, no grafts and stats, simple raw data.

    The raw data has to be analyzed as there are known discontinuities and other problems. The most common way to deal with the discontinuities is through homogenization. However, the Berkeley Earth Project works with the raw data directly to extract trends. You can find the raw surface data here:
    http://berkeleyearth.org/data/

    You might find this of interest:
    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadat/images/update_images/global_upper_air.png

    Notice that the lower troposphere and surface are warming, while the stratosphere is cooling — a signature of greenhouse warming.

    david7134: Then live the life, if your bunch truly believe that austerity will change the world, live it then show the rest of us how to do so

    You are confused. While individuals can certainly reduce their carbon footprint, any long term practical solution will require revamping the energy infrastructure. That isn’t something individuals can do on their own.

  20. Do you guys and William really not recognize that William lies all the time? Fascinating.

    Prove it. Put up or apologize.

  21. Jeffery says:

    I will not apologize for telling the truth. Perhaps you could put up by balancing your fawning coverage of Trump.

    Here’s a recent article about Trump that you missed.

    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/01/01/3735522/breaking-donald-trump-featured-in-new-terrorist-recruitment-video/

    Trump works for the jihadists now. Discuss.

  22. drowningpuppies says:

    Think Soros$$$ Progress.

    Only a little whiny bitch would click on that.

  23. Jeffery says:

    schlongsucker,

    Only a little whiny bitch would click on that.

    That’s exactly why I thought of you and William!

  24. How cute. Jeff cannot prove his assertions, yet demands I prove him wrong. This is what these far left wackos always do. I’ve seen it for decades, and especially in the Internet era. They want to deflect the conversation and put people on the defensive. If people are defending, they are able to prove their original point.

    This all just shows the moral failings and utter dishonesty of people like Jeffrey.

Bad Behavior has blocked 4421 access attempts in the last 7 days.