Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Should this kind of ’sabotage posting’ about Man-Made Global Warming really be allowed?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
The member ”jrad6515” have been massively trolling this thread with completely false nonsense for I don’t know how long:

Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

Here a post where he(?) commits a vicious personal attack on the sixteen year old teenage girl Greta Thunberg:

Do you have a "problem" with people with autism or on the autism spectrum? /...
No but I have a problem with cowardly adults sending out crippled teenagers to spread their socialist propaganda for them. You should be appalled but obviously you are not since the end justifies the means in your warped world.

You anti-science zealots can't refute any of the facts I post so you focus on this kind of nonsense. Not exactly a big surprise.
In my opinion his(?) behavior is way beyond what is dignified of this forum.

Suggestion: Ban him(?) from this subsection of the forum:

General Forum > Energy, Environment and Policy
 
Its not about stating opinion or questioning facts. The problem is that poster's constant ad hominem attacks and
concentrated effort to derail the thread with long debunked false-hoods. He is not only denying science, but also very simply verifiable facts such as the existence of a certain post in the thread.

See my latest "exchange" with him: Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

BTW, "free speech" has nothing to do with posting on a private message board!
It simply does not apply.
Free Speech in Online Communities: The Delusion of Entitlement - Steve Pavlina
 
I don't think @SwedishAdvocate is making the proper case for those who are out of the loop on the context. It's not that someone has a different opinion, or is wrong. I'm happy to engage with anyone who wants to discuss methodology, and I had an interaction with this individual to that effect early on. It became clear that he's not in this to discuss, though, and I believe nobody really acts this way, so I think it's an online persona.

It is the barrage of ad hominem attacks and clear trolling behavior that make the posts unfit for TMC. A small portion of his posts follow as examples. I've stayed out of this since I don't moderate in Energy, Environment, and Policy, and since I personally have had interactions with this person. But his post history should speak for itself. He's the only person to have made my ignore list in my years on this forum, because I'm quite certain this is just a trolling attempt.

So next time one of you AGW wankers wants to look at porn just remember you are destroying the planet!:p

These morons don’t understand basic atmospheric physics and they refuse to consider climate feedbacks unless they are positive which is a very rare occurrence in nature. Just the fact that CO2 was 10 times higher during ice ages seems to not register with them because of their incredible cognitive dissonance. It is all about promoting their socialist agenda, not promoting science.

The world was around before the Vostok ice cores in case you didn’t know. CO2 was 10 times higher than it is now and there was an ice age during during the Ordovician period, you idiot.

Ha ha – this from the same dumbass who had no clue whatsoever that there was an Ice Age with CO2 levels being 10 times what they are now. You are an absolute joke.

Lol, you are one sensitive snowflake!

I thought I had finally schooled you that there were things other than CO2 that cause “climate change“ but apparently you are too stupid to figure that out.

Man you really have gone moron here. You didn’t even have any clue that there was an Ice Age with CO2 at 4000 ppm did you? Dumbass.

As any idiot can see (other than you of course) CO2 leads temperature change by an average of 700-800 years, not the other way around. Chew on that for awhile, Einstein.

Congratulations - that makes you are a moron too!

That just shows you that the majority of the posters here are quasi-religious zealots who have no real interest in or knowledge of the scientific method.

Says the moron who had no clue that there was an Ice Age with CO2 levels 10 times higher than they are now and who thinks that temp lags CO2 changes in the Vostok ice record rather than vice versa. That alone proves you to be totally clueless and without credibility.

Add this to the growing list of places in the world that have actually cooled over the last century rather than warmed like some crazy wackos here believe.

you moron.

The video is from his YouTube account you moron. However I wouldn’t expect someone with your low level of intelligence to understand that.

I’m sure the useful idiots here in this alarmist echo chamber will come unglued and attacki the messenger

You truly are a freaking idiot.

But of course you thought that the earth didn’t exist before the Vostok ice record anyway, moron.

Yes - if you leftist morons are stupid enough to believe anything

all of you socialist nutcases

not that any of you science-denying zealots here in the anti-science echo chamber care.

You can't refute any of my data so would rather deflect with ad hominems, etc. Typical clueless alarmist.

You are pathetic.
 
So if someone states their own opinion as a fact then it should no longer be protected as free speech?
I think every news organization on the planet would fall under your ban if this were the case.
Nice way of trying to spin this! Really!

There are opinions news organizations do not publish. Holocaust denial is one such opinion.

As for the rest of your post, I second ZsoZso:
Its not about stating opinion or questioning facts. The problem is that poster's constant ad hominem attacks and
concentrated effort to derail the thread with long debunked false-hoods. He is not only denying science, but also very simply verifiable facts such as the existence of a certain post in the thread.

See my latest "exchange" with him: Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

BTW, "free speech" has nothing to do with posting on a private message board!
It simply does not apply.
Free Speech in Online Communities: The Delusion of Entitlement - Steve Pavlina
 
Nice way of trying to spin this! Really!
It seemed like a perfect example to me, I was not trying defend this person, just the right to their own opinion but as I can see here there are many people worked up over this persons posts, So no free speech on private message boards, Check, BTW your Model 3 wagon avatar is pretty cool, I would buy one in a heartbeat!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eclectic
I don't think @SwedishAdvocate is making the proper case for those who are out of the loop on the context. It's not that someone has a different opinion, or is wrong. I'm happy to engage with anyone who wants to discuss methodology, and I had an interaction with this individual to that effect early on. It became clear that he's not in this to discuss, though, and I believe nobody really acts this way, so I think it's an online persona.

It is the barrage of ad hominem attacks and clear trolling behavior that make the posts unfit for TMC. A small portion of his posts follow as examples. I've stayed out of this since I don't moderate in Energy, Environment, and Policy, and since I personally have had interactions with this person. But his post history should speak for itself. He's the only person to have made my ignore list in my years on this forum, because I'm quite certain this is just a trolling attempt.
It feels like a sincere Thank You! is in order... :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ohmman
It seemed like a perfect example to me, I was not trying defend this person, just the right to their own opinion but as I can see here there are many people worked up over this persons posts, So no free speech on private message boards, Check, BTW your Model 3 wagon avatar is pretty cool, I would buy one in a heartbeat!
Maybe I was too harsh... I don't really know your real intentions...

But:

I suggest that you reply to Ohmman's post instead (Post #9).
 
Ok. So I couldn't stop myself from 'revisiting' this:
It seemed like a perfect example to me, I was not trying defend this person, just the right to their own opinion but as I can see here there are many people worked up over this persons posts, [1] So no free speech on private message boards, Check, [My underline.] [2] BTW your Model 3 wagon avatar is pretty cool, I would buy one in a heartbeat!
1. IMO that is way to simplified...

But like I said above:

I suggest that you reply to Ohmman's post instead (Post #9)

(2. IKR... There's not one single electric station wagon available from anyone (!)... (I really, really do not like inefficient wasteful SUVs...) There's also not a single electric station wagon available from anyone with a factory option towbar, a nonbundled factory option black headliner, a nonbundled factory option for metal pedals, a nonbundled factory option for a dash decor that isn't brown wood or white something something... But that's another thread!...)
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: Eclectic
LOL – looks like I have the snowflakes upset again. I guess if you can’t prove your delusional AGW theories you have to try and silence those who throw cold hard facts in your face and upset the socialist, anti~science echo chamber you have here.

Here’s a novel thought for you:

Why don’t you try disputing any of the facts I have posted rather than claiming victimhood and going off on tangential rants all the time? You could shut me up real quick if you could just post a coherent proof of AGW but of course none of you can do that despite repeated challenges by me. So you would rather just cry about my posts that present facts contrary to your alarmist narrative. Obviously these facts are quite upsetting to you sensitive people. I’m afraid that I am causing quite a bit of “climate despair“ around here. :)

In order to have some sort of reasonable proof of AGW you need to either present empirical data proving human influence on the temperature record or a model that controls all of the natural variables and shows that we are outside of normal climate variability. Obviously neither of these exist so quit claiming “settled science“ when there is nothing of the sort when it comes to AGW. If you think otherwise then prove me wrong. I will be waiting anxiously!
 
You could shut me up real quick if you could just post a coherent proof of AGW

One which is shorter than both parts of a recent IPCC report?

And we're the ones in an "anti science echo chamber" (the one which ironically seems to have all the climate scientists that I personally know in it, I gather from your posts)?

I'd wager a guess: we could not shut you up real quick with a coherent appraisal of whether AGW is likely or not (should you have failed to note, science doesn't "prove" things -- math proves things. Science just builds models of reality that work better than things that you personally seem to pull out of a place I cannot even fathom).

If you think otherwise then prove me wrong.
If by now you can't gather the evidence yourself you're in denial, and no amount of reasoned debate will do that. The fact you seem to hurl insults at every corner and vent wild conspiracy theories is enough "evidence" of that.
 
Last edited:
One which is shorter than both parts of a recent IPCC report?

And we're the ones in an "anti science echo chamber" (the one which ironically seems to have all the climate scientists that I personally know in it, I gather from your posts)?

I'd wager a guess: we could not shut you up real quick with a coherent appraisal of whether AGW is likely or not (should you have failed to note, science doesn't "prove" things -- math proves things. Science just builds models of reality that work better than things that you personally seem to pull out of a place I cannot even fathom).


If by now you can't gather the evidence yourself you're in denial, and no amount of reasoned debate will do that. The fact you seem to hurl insults at every corner and vent wild conspiracy theories is enough "evidence" of that.

Yet another delusional alarmist who can’t produce any proof of AGW. I have gathered the evidence and it clearly shows that there is no significant human imprint on the climate. Obviously you have not done the work that I have done or else you would have a clue. I’m still waiting for one of you zealots to produce any proof of AGW. Obviously I know you can’t but it is fun to chide you for your inability to prove something that isn’t happening.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: SwedishAdvocate