California Academy of Sciences pulls the plug on their climate change exhibit (2012-02-19). Anthony Watts provides the following deep analysis: if a science museum (“the über green California Academy of Sciences”) replaces a climate change exhibit in a space used for rotating exhibits, this proves that there is no Global Warming.
Also, if a climate change exhibit isn’t eye-catching it proves that the public doesn’t trust commie climatologizers.
This counts as victory in denial-land?
Wott's Up With That? 
Erm, he wrote:
“When the über green California Academy of Sciences pulls the plug, you know “climate change” is a dead issue with the public.”
Get it? “climate change is a dead issue with the planet”. This is not the same as writing “this proves that there is no Global Warming.”
He is saying that it shows that Climate Change is a dead issue with the public, not that it shows that there is no Global Warming. Although there has not been any global warming, as you know, for the last decade or so.
[So you buy Anthony’s attempt to equate a mundane exhibit change with political victory for denialism? That is such lame-ass cherry-picking. Is the ‘no warming in a decade’ thing some kind of Tourette’s? Or just a back-handed admission that you’re a clown. – Ben]
What I like about your site is that you do post comments even when they prove you to have been factually incorrect.
You do not deny that there has been no global warming for the past decade or so. Thanks for that admission.
How many more decades of “no warming” with increasing CO2 emissions would it take before you reject the AGW hypothesis? 2? 3? 5? 10? 20? Seriously, at what stage would you consider rejected the hypothesis? if you are a scientist then you will not mind answering the question.
[Are you so stupid that you think the climate debate boils down to a version of “Simon says”? I have to refute every fool thing you say or it gets declared true? What a waste of breath engaging with you. – Ben]
Wow, Ben, you have surpassed yourself in rudeness today. Congratulations.
[Hah! You didn’t refute my statement that you’re a clown! By your rules, you are thus forever labeled. – Ben]
In my day job I actually am a professional children’s entertainer. That is kind of like a Clown. So it was a great guess on you part Ben.
[YAUA – Yet Another Unsubstantiated Assertion. – Ben]
I’m confused. Anthony Watts himself mentioned not too long ago that:
“And, The Economist still doesn’t get it. The issue of “the world is warming” is not one that climate skeptics question, it is the magnitude and causes.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/20/the-berkeley-earth-surface-temperature-project-puts-pr-before-peer-review/
This stance seems to change week-by-week, though. There seems to be a rotating cycle of arguments ranging from it isn’t warming, to warming wouldn’t be bad, warming is occurring but due solely to various natural causes, etc. Notice the consistently negative political attitude towards those that propose solutions and the policies themselves. Notice the consistently negative pattern against the well-established evidence for warming caused by CO2 emissions. Notice that many of the hypotheses advertised on WUWT are in contradiction with one another, though this does not seem to matter so long as the hypotheses obscure the evidence for CO2 caused warming.
Notice that your opinions are in direct conflict with the evidence analyzed by the National Academy of Science in the USA and much of the developed world.
Click to access 06072005.pdf
Now, this may be a lot to process since your worldview likely doesn’t want to process it, but take a look at the NAS assessment. Have a good one.
“I’m confused. Anthony Watts himself mentioned not too long ago that:
Ha I was looking for that quote last time some skeptic told me off for daring to say what skeptics believed. I was told in no uncertain words that skeptics were all different and didn’t share a central set of beliefs.
Thank goodness Anthony Watts can still talk for all of them then.
As far as the article at hand, this is a pretty common tactic. I used to see it more on the schoolyard. Just tease the person for something, no matter how inconsequential, and claim victory.
Neener-neener-neener, you lost, hahaha.
“there has not been any global warming, as you know, for the last decade or so”
I love this – it’s such a useful shibboleth. Anyone who says anything like this immediately identifies themselves as weak minded and easily led. As everyone knows, or should know, the last decade was warmer than every decade preceding it, in every global temperature data set.
To start to get an idea of where he’s gone wrong, “Chris Smith” could have a look at this:
“There seems to be a rotating cycle of arguments…..”
Remember, it really is a merry-go-round. Good designers make sure that you can never be certain which gaudily decked out fantasy item will show up next. A prancing zebra, a flowery hippopotamus and a smiling kangaroo may be followed by an elaborate sled or …. another zebra but facing backwards this time!
But it goes round and round. And the money rolls in.