A link to "The Schneider Quote" was lying in wait in our Site Meter stats today. Clicking on over to something called "ClimateSight" (above), we were delighted to see that the true denialists who project their own denialism onto us climate skeptics continue to deny at will (see below).
Reading the entrails of the Site Meter stats is the opiate of the dopamine-dependent blogger, who can never get enough. Yes, you, Robert Stacy McCain. Mainly you're looking for the instant rush of an Instalanche or at least a Malkin-lanche or precious links from that happy few, that band of sisters and brothers that fought with us upon Saint Fiskin's day. But once in awhile there's an eye-opening outlier that confirms what you've known all along, at least since July of 1990.
Today's find was the deletion of our "[Inflammatory]" comments from a ClimateSite post on "The Schneider Quote," a shameless bit of self-revelatory global-warming — that's what "climate change" was called in those halcyon days of AGW "scientific consensus" — scripture first published in 1988:
On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.
Rahm Emanuel would have been proud. We don't remember exactly what we said, but it was probably similar to the comments we left at one of Pharyngula's pro-Darwin, anti-Intelligent-Design posts last year, where the commenters were so unaccustomed to dissent that they mistook this Darwinian Libertarian for a "wingnut and creationist," as we blogged at the time:
"I just looked at Sissy Willis's blog. The person (I am still not clear what sex/gender the person is) does not seem to be sane," writes commenter Matt Penfold at PZ Myers's science blog Pharyngula in response to an admittedly provocative comment we had left there ourselves this afternoon. We are intrigued with Mr. Penfold's scientifically-challenged powers of research and analysis, not to mention his tenuous grasp of the language: "I also doubt they are calling themselves Sissy with any kind of ironic intent. Which also suggests their grasp of English is as bad as their understanding of climate change, or since they seem to consider the current Pope to be some kind of hero, their grasp of morality." They/themselves/their? Didn't you mean she or he, sir? Had Penfold delved a bit further, he might have been puzzled to learn that along with Pope Benedict XVI, Charles Darwin is one of our intellectual heroes. But then for him, the debate is over, the scientific consensus is in, and Sissy Willis is insane. Talk about parallel lives.