Was it something I said?
Yesterday, I posted about FiFi’s weak sauce tweet asking me to comment on an April article about computer models projecting doom and gloom for island nations in the pacific. He obviously read it because he went on a tweet storm which requires some fisking:
You asked me to respond and I did. Why you mad, bro?
I never mentioned Anthony Watts, but this is typical of the snowflake left to change the topic when facts get in the way. In my years of debate in both high school and college, this is a concession – point to me.
One comment left by Dr. Mike was to suggest fifi go to Watt’s website. Over the years, I have eaten a lot of popcorn watching the left become unhinged when Watts is mentioned and fifi didn’t disappoint.
Two tweets above, fifi made the claim that Watts had no credentials. However, in this tweet, he obviously forgot because now he shares that Watts has a published scientific paper! How does a washed up weatherman with no credentials manage to publish a paper in a scientific journal?
Now it’s getting hilarious. Fifi links to a 2011 article critical of Watts. Seven years later, Watts’ blog is still in existence. Watts Up With That is one of the most visited scientific blogs on the internet for Climate Change. Numerous credentialed and esteemed scientists and specialists write articles for his website. The scientific community engages in open discussion, something that doesn’t happen on religious climate alarmist sites.
And yet, this is bad?
Just so you know, Fifi’s quoting from Rational Wiki, a website run by leftists claiming to take on “pseudo science” and Watt’s biography is nothing more than links to articles critical of him from alarmists and often debunked websites.
In any event, it’s popcorn worthy. Remember the first tweet where he says everyone is stepping on their cranks? Does it still hurt when you repeatedly do it to yourself, Fifi? I’m guessing there is no feeling left.
Someone needs to go back and understand how to build an analogy. The stupid is strong with this one.
Here is an attempt to show how much he understands science. Now he is a sea ice expert.. or something.
Love that he grabs a 2016 image and then picks some moment in time. Yeah, it’s 2016 so it’s completely relevant.
Here is a more recent chart. The 2017 year is the black line. Notice those readings are higher than the 2016 line, since we’re picking time series. The 2018 line is coming in lower, but it’s still higher than the 2012 all time low line in the almost 40 years of satellite measurements.
Once again, he attributes things to me I never said. I’ve never made any statement that climate change is a hoax or is not that bad. Hilariously, he says I’ve never investigated climate change.
Funny. When it comes to showcasing the science to back up his work, he uses out of date material. My material is current and supports my arguments. Another point for me.
The mockery continues.
Sonoran Conservative 
MJ, you’re engaging in a battle of wit with an unarmed man.
LikeLiked by 7 people
Not a typo.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Didn’t think so.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I question the use of the word “man”.
LikeLiked by 8 people
Hey stupid Fifi did you look at that chart you posted? Because it sure as hell shows that 2016 was a normal year for sea ice. It shows winter freeze and summer melt.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Give Fifi a break, by the time of his tweet storm it was way past Bong-Thirty.
LikeLiked by 7 people
His bong is worse than his tripe
LikeLiked by 5 people
I wonder if FiFi could define the term “interglacial” and explain how it relates to the current global climate. If he could do those things, do you think he might figure out that a decline in sea ice in and of itself is not evidence for any particular cause of a decline in sea ice?
LikeLiked by 4 people
He can’t. All he can parrot are liberal talking points and he wouldn’t know how to defend them if he tried.
LikeLiked by 3 people
LikeLiked by 6 people
What about just being a dope?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Pfffft you know, pfffft, with each puff, pfffft, i gets smarter, pfffft
LikeLiked by 4 people
The “Party of Science”:
* “These computer programs that cannot replicate known events totally predict the future, and if you disagree, you’re an ignorant anti-science denier!”
* [Paper published that shows similar triggers for bulemia and gender dymorphism] “YOU CAN’T PUBLISH THAT!!! ERASE IT AND NEVER SPEAK ON THIS AGAIN!!!
Yeah, the “party of science”. If the scientist is a Lysenkoist and the “science” party approved.
LikeLiked by 4 people
This one is for Fifi :
LikeLiked by 5 people
Pingback: Bonus Team Kimberlin Post of the Day | hogewash
At least he is a stunning example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action. I are a “data scientist” in my real life (or was until a short while ago), and pinning *any* explanatory causal mechanism on those shoddy models is a big mistake. Under-specified by a lot, without actual defendable margin of error terms, not open to alternative explanations, and then they don’t predict well at all. Some have no shame or ethics.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Fifi should stick to his knowledge of cannery science.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What exactly are Fifi’s scientific credentials?
On another note, Elon Musk doesn’t have any sport of degree either, and he’s still going to space and back, plus smoking dope.
LikeLiked by 2 people