Seal clubbed

Last updated on May 20th, 2017 at 07:25 am

Warmenist Mark Seal on an unexpected outcome:

When I launched the TalkClimateChange forums last year, I was initially worried as to where I would find people who didn’t believe in global warming. I had planned to create a furious debate, but in my experience global warming was such a universally accepted issue that I expected to have to dredge the slums of the internet in order to find a couple of deniers who could keep the argument thriving.

That prediction soon proved inaccurate:

The first few days were slow going, but following a brief write-up of my site by Junk Science I was swamped by climate skeptics who did a good job of frightening off the few brave Greens who slogged out the debate with. Whilst there was a lot of rubbish written, the truth was that they didn’t so much frighten the Greens away – they comprehensively demolished them with a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers … I didn’t believe a word of it, but I had to admit that these guys were good …

In short, and I am sorry to say it, anti-greens (Reds, as we call them) appear to be more willing to comment, more structured, more able to quote peer reviewed research, more apparently rational and apparently wider read and better informed.

(Via Garth Godsman)

Posted by Tim B. on 04/19/2008 at 06:56 AM
    1. This is cognitive dissonance par excellence.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2008 04 19 at 07:15 AM • permalink

 

    1. In short, and I am sorry to say it, anti-greens (Reds, as we call them) appear to be more willing to comment, more structured, more able to quote peer reviewed research, more apparently rational and apparently wider read and better informed.

      Or, in human-speak, “right.”

      Posted by Mr. Bingley on 2008 04 19 at 07:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. …more apparently rational

      And that is wrong, how?

      Posted by ann j on 2008 04 19 at 07:18 AM • permalink

 

    1. Mark Seal has been clubbed by a clubat and he still doesn’t get it.

      The problem, Mark, is that eniro-mentalists and their positions are irrational.

      Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 04 19 at 07:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. These guys were good, they used in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, logic, peer review research, and were able to quote informed sources in a structured and rational manner.
      I didn’t believe a word of it.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2008 04 19 at 07:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. Cluebat – the mouse ran away the the E

      Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 04 19 at 07:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. enviro-mentalists – sorry, early morning.

      Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 04 19 at 07:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. “You cannot reason someone out of a position that they did not reason themselves into in the first place.”

      Greenism is a religion.

      Posted by Rob Read on 2008 04 19 at 07:44 AM • permalink

 

    1. #1

      Cognitive idiocy.

      Has this man got any grey matter?

      Posted by kae on 2008 04 19 at 07:44 AM • permalink

 

    1. So he and his ilk only accept what they want to hear. They don’t realise how vulnerable that makes them.

      Very kraal like.

      Posted by mehaul on 2008 04 19 at 07:44 AM • permalink

 

    1. The anti-greens are called reds?

      Waiter! A couple dozen more cluebats for that man.

      Posted by Toiling Mass on 2008 04 19 at 07:58 AM • permalink

 

    1. Hehehehe. I love it when the cluebat hits.

      Now how long does it take for the truth to sink in?

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2008 04 19 at 07:58 AM • permalink

 

 

    1. anti-greens (Reds, as we call them)…

      Really? News to me. Greens have been Reds for at least two decades since The Specatator dubbed them watermelons.

      Posted by walterplinge on 2008 04 19 at 08:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. But see the greenies make excuses in his comments.

      Too tired,too busy,waste of time nah nah.

      In other words, guilty of exactly what
      they accuse others of.

      Closed minds.

      Posted by dver on 2008 04 19 at 08:07 AM • permalink

 

    1. Brave Greens

      Now there’s an oxymoron for you.

      Posted by Nic on 2008 04 19 at 08:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. they comprehensively demolished them with a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers … I didn’t believe a word of it

      I think we have the quote of the year.

      Posted by Nic on 2008 04 19 at 08:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. Wasn’t it Leonard Bernstein in Tom Wolfe’s Radical Chic who said (from memory), “Don’t bother me with your facts. I’ve got my theory.” ?

      Posted by Rittenhouse on 2008 04 19 at 08:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. Just want to give a hat tip to where I found that – http://www.climate-skeptic.com/

      http://www.climate-resistance.org/ is very good too and people might want to check out its most recent post “NO TO DEBATE! NO TO DEMOCRACY!”

      Posted by Garth on 2008 04 19 at 08:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. WOOHOO!!!!!

      I’m a RED!

      <wipes tears of laughter from his streaming eyes… bemoans aching ribs>

      So funny when one of these latte-sipping circle-jerkers enters the foreign land of facts and rationality. Bet he ran screaming home to mum in hysterics.

      MarkL
      canberra

      Posted by MarkL on 2008 04 19 at 08:49 AM • permalink

 

    1. The other possibility is that we are all completely wrong and we’re deluded…
      Bing!
      We have a winner.
      As to his forlorn reasoning:
      Greens are less intelligent? Definitely nope.
      That might be your problem right there, warm-boy.

      Posted by lotocoti on 2008 04 19 at 08:59 AM • permalink

 

    1. ” anti-greens (Reds, as we call them)”

      Puts on new kommissar’s uniform, strikes proletarian pose, admires self in mirror

      Posted by paco on 2008 04 19 at 09:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. As OT as OT can be, from Insty:

      CNN personality Richard Quest was busted in Central Park early yesterday with some drugs in his pocket, a rope around his neck that was tied to his genitals, and a sex toy in his boot, law-enforcement sources said.

      Let me get this straight – he was apparently on an elaborate masturbatory mission, and his name is Dick Quest?

      Posted by Dave S. on 2008 04 19 at 09:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. Why would “a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers” ever outweigh FAITH?

      Posted by Latino on 2008 04 19 at 09:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. #22 Paco, shall we dance?

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2008 04 19 at 09:30 AM • permalink

 

    1. Mark Seal is as clueless as a human being can be.  That display of cognitive dissonance and religious fervor was simply awesome.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 04 19 at 09:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. A Web 2.0 convert, MBA Seal runs Green Options and enthuses about the power of the Internet to change the world. Most users online at any one time at Green Options? 266! Registered members? 175. And half of them are only there to use the cluebat on greens.

      I feel sorry for the guy. I really do.

      Posted by Hanyu on 2008 04 19 at 09:39 AM • permalink

 

    1. #22

      Erm..  Henchman Paco?

      Lord Rove is looking for his new VRWC ‘Dark Lord’s Walking Out outfit’. He is going to the Enoch Powell Memorial Dinner (10 years tomorrow since Enoch died). There is a celebratory clubbing of baby harp seals, a greenie flamethrower roasting competition and everything.

      You might want to quickly launder that uniform…. before he notices you wearing it. Um… he also has a flamethrower. Won the comp last year, 6 greenies per gallon.

      MarkL
      Minionmeister to the VRWC

      Posted by MarkL on 2008 04 19 at 09:48 AM • permalink

 

    1. the truth was that they didn’t so much frighten the Greens away – they comprehensively demolished them with a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers … I didn’t believe a word of it,

      Because they challenged his closely held and almost religious belief system, it was big of him to recognize the power of his opponents’ arguments and that last bit was an instinctive defensive mechanism. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if Mark abandons the AGW cult in the (near?) future.

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2008 04 19 at 09:49 AM • permalink

 

    1. I like the Warmingite in the comments who says, “Cranks are generally more talkative.” And then goes on for 350 more words.

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2008 04 19 at 09:52 AM • permalink

 

    1. #30

      I think he was just giving fair warning.

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2008 04 19 at 10:03 AM • permalink

 

    1. anti-greens (Reds, as we call them)

      Tell ya what, Mark Seal, make sure you’re never in the same room with me when you call me a Red.

      Posted by formerly Huck Foley on 2008 04 19 at 10:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. “Who are these Raaaaeeeeedddds anyway? Ever’time ya turn around someone’s calling somebody else a Red.”

      Henry Fonda in “The Grapes of Wrath”

      Posted by Merlin on 2008 04 19 at 10:34 AM • permalink

 

    1. In short, and I am sorry to say it, anti-greens (Reds, as we call them)

      i knew my name was an accurate reflection of me ;D

      Posted by missred on 2008 04 19 at 10:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. “A seal walked into a cluebat…”

      Posted by ErnieG on 2008 04 19 at 10:45 AM • permalink

 

    1. Red Green must be so conflicted!

      Posted by rinardman on 2008 04 19 at 10:49 AM • permalink

 

    1. #25 Nilknarf: Probably more along these lines.

      Posted by paco on 2008 04 19 at 11:02 AM • permalink

 

    1. #35 🙂
      “A seal walked into a club …”

      Posted by egg_ on 2008 04 19 at 11:10 AM • permalink

 

    1. they comprehensively demolished them with a more in depth understanding of the science

      It’s always hard to counter science with religion.

      Posted by rinardman on 2008 04 19 at 11:17 AM • permalink

 

    1. …cleverly thought out arguments…

      I hate to nitpick when the man is giving us right-wing devils our due, but this word usage is designed to delude the writer and mislead the reader.

      An argument can be clever. An argument can be well thought out. An argument can be clever and well thought out. But when Seal writes ‘cleverly thought out’ he shows a poor grasp of logic and the thought process.

      A well thought out argument is one where the thinker has considered his principles and can defend them. He has followed a disciplined process of fact-finding to build further layers of logic and reach a conclusion.

      Cleverness is a function of a mind that is quick but not necessarily deep. It’s one step better than glibness. A clever argument relies on linguistics, syntax, and maneuver. But cleverness is worthless or counterproductive to developing a well thought out argument.

      Seal half-admits that our arguments are better grounded and better reasoned. But like most leftists who lose an argument badly, he’d prefer to think he was outdone by trickery rather than logic.

      Posted by lyle on 2008 04 19 at 11:50 AM • permalink

 

    1. #40 Lyle: Very true. Seal seems to be saying that the climate skeptics are engaging in mere verbal legerdemain.

      Posted by paco on 2008 04 19 at 01:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. It galls a man to admit that he may be so comprehensively wrong, and then admit it. However, before jumping down his throat, consider the fact that he took the time to listen. Most don’t.

      Posted by CB on 2008 04 19 at 01:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. *sigh* I’m a red stater in mah heart, never mind no accidents of gee-ography.

      Now I find out I’m a red on the environment.

      Oh, hell…

      Rodina!
      Rodina!
      Dosvedanya, Rodina!

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2008 04 19 at 02:06 PM • permalink

 

    1. “The other possibility is that we are all completely wrong and we’re deluded – please tell me this isn’t so.”

      This is another classic. This guy thinks the human race is in severe danger of extinction by heat, floods and famine. And he WANTS it to be true.

      Posted by ThinAndBritish on 2008 04 19 at 02:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. ”…a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers … I didn’t believe a word of it…”

      It’s so much easier to debate with people who have no understanding of the science; who mindlessly recite falsehoods or facts they don’t understand in lieu of cleverly thought out arguments; and who only have really stupid answers.

      What a jackass.

      Posted by Mambo Bananapatch on 2008 04 19 at 03:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. #40

      You’re slipping, lyle, that didn’t rhyme at all.

      Posted by Mambo Bananapatch on 2008 04 19 at 05:29 PM • permalink

 

    1. Polar Birds completely melted off their ice in Ohio.

      Posted by rhhardin on 2008 04 19 at 08:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. I love how they call people names because they couldn’t argue against the counter points of the so called deniers.

      Posted by Old school on 2008 04 19 at 09:06 PM • permalink

 

    1. ”…a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers … I didn’t believe a word of it…”

      No wonder these guys ignore any threat from the radical Islamists, they think the same way.  No reasoning, just submit.  I can see that Pope Benedict XVI, in his calls for reasoning about faith, is Mr. Seal’s worst nightmare.

      Posted by Michael Lonie on 2008 04 19 at 09:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hmmmm.

      Good God!

      Get a load of this:

      “63 Mark @ TalkClimateChange

      A good argument doesn’t necessarily have to be valid.

      You might want to actually read TalkClimateChange.”

      Can you believe this??

      Posted by memomachine on 2008 04 19 at 11:00 PM • permalink

 

    1. I didn’t believe a word of it.”

      If Mark Seal ever has to serve on a jury, I’d feel sorry for the defendant.  Mark’s not going to let facts and a good argument sway his predetermined verdict.

      Posted by kcom on 2008 04 20 at 12:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. Far from feeling insulted by being called a Red, maybe it’s overdue to “take back” that colour from the commies and their associates? We’ve already got “red states” established as equivalent to “conservative” thanks to the TV networks’ flipping of the colours a few election cycles ago; let’s kill communism’s appeal once and for all by robbing it of its banner colour.

      (I’m only half-joking.)

      Posted by PW on 2008 04 20 at 12:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. #37 that’s about my level of dancing, Paco. Keep me away from the kids.

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2008 04 20 at 12:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. The other possibility is that we are all completely wrong and we’re deluded – please tell me this isn’t so.

      That’s a horse you hear, Mr. Seal, and not a zebra. I trust that you will continue to read the critics even if you disagree with them. But please read them unlike the mainstream Greens.

      Posted by andycanuck on 2008 04 20 at 12:49 AM • permalink

 

    1. This dude is amazingly enlightened and frighteningly honest.

      Posted by wreckage on 2008 04 20 at 06:42 AM • permalink

 

    1. So Mark Seal has now taken an important step, but it’s not clear in which direction.  He might start reinforcing his delusional bubble with tighter ear-clasping and louder LaLaLa-ing, or he might start actually thinking.  And it’s too early to tell.
      The acid test is whether or not he ever again attempts “to create a furious debate” about climate-doom, or just moves on to other stupid topics.  Give it at least a week for him to process this trauma.
      If I had to bet, I’d bet against actual learning taking place, because it looks from here as if he’s got himself surrounded by a chorus of delusion-reinforcing yes-drones.  But you know me, I could be wrong and often am.  Let’s hope so.

      Posted by formerly Huck Foley on 2008 04 20 at 01:21 PM • permalink

 

    1. The above, needless to say, it the more-considered reply I should have made yesterday instead of getting all clenchy about the peezy little douchebag’s “Reds”-baiting.  Still…

      Posted by formerly Huck Foley on 2008 04 20 at 01:22 PM • permalink

 

    1. Maybe Mark Seal needs to join the “reality-bashed community…’

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2008 04 20 at 02:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. “You can’t handle the truth.”

      Not sure where that came from. 😉

      Posted by Hucbald on 2008 04 20 at 10:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. Mr. Blair and all, if you get this far down in the comments,

      One of the fora resulted in a good discussion about nuclear power.  Rod Adams is a US Navy Commander, and a former chief engineer of a nuclear powered submarine.  That’s dedication!
      He’s also a proponent of small nuclear power plants, to the point of entrepeneaurship (sp? SP?). That’s also dedication, of a different but still important kind.

      In a matter of days, the discussion moved Mark Seall, from weenie, to fence sitter, to fellow proponent “for now.” Despite having called Rod Adams a “shill”, a “crackpot”, “thin-skinned,” etc.  Rod Adams engaged the guy anyway.  Eventually they discussed things in a podcast, #90 in a series I recommend to anyone wanting an edumacation in things nuclear.

      There’s hope with this guy.  Stop the clubbing.

      I don’t agree with their one premise that Goreball Worming will kill us all, but I do agree that fossil fuels and solar grown food can be better used.

      The podcast sounds like it’s hosted by an Australian company, can be found here:
      Atomic #90
      The debate Rod Adams and some weenie named Matt can be found at Mark Seall’s site at:
      greeen options

      Sorry, Frollicking Mole, if you read this.  I’d rather you dig up uranium than coal.

      Posted by reese on 2008 04 20 at 11:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. the discussion moved Mark Seall, from weenie, to fence sitter, to fellow proponent “for now.”

      ooo!  I like that!  How are his fellow warmenistas taking it?

      Posted by formerly Huck Foley on 2008 04 21 at 03:24 PM • permalink

 

    1. #61, FHF,

      I don’t know, as the comments were either welcomers to the nuclear power side of the fence or people continueing the discussion, mostly politely.  See here.

      Correction to #60 (me), It was a fellow named Andrew Feinberg at CapitolValley.net that called Rod Adams a crackpot and thin-skinned.  They had a somewhat nice and very interesting back and forth that resulted in Mr. Adams’ Atomic Show #89 on the subject of who benefits from anti-nuclear power activism.

      Sorry about my confusion– the Mark Seall conversion and crackpot controversy with Feinberg melded into a great big fun discussion.

      Posted by reese on 2008 04 21 at 08:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. Well, one way or another, it looks like some learning took place, so I’m happy.  Happy happy happy.  Do I not look happy?  Well I am!

      grumblemuttergripegrowl
      HAPPY, I said!

      Posted by formerly Huck Foley on 2008 04 22 at 07:55 PM • permalink

 

  1. Cheer up, FHF!  Nobody of any import (surely not me) is hearing the grumble.  Now, back up to “Nerf Day” for us all.

    Thanks, I’m glad SOMEONE saw my correction.  Happy happy.

    Posted by reese on 2008 04 22 at 11:23 PM • permalink