Rush Limbaugh: Mars Water Announcement Part of Leftist Plot

Limbaugh has flowing water on his brain. His synapses are clearly firing, but they’re being short circuited by some briny mixture inside his head. Thus, “flowing water on Mars, well that’s kind of cool, wonder what that means” becomes “NASA is making this up to somehow support a vast left-wing global warming conspiracy.”

It’s kooky. Even for him.

But, it does point to one of the problems with this whole conspiracy theory. NASA is a science agency. It reports the results of its scientific research. It’s the gold standard in planetary science. Nobody in the world does it better than they do.

Yet, some of the same folks who believe what NASA reports about other planets — Lamar Smith, for example, was thrilled by the Mars news — believe it has been hopelessly corrupted in what it reports about our own.

It’s the same agency. It’s the same Science Directorate. Similar methods are used to gather and analyze the data. It doesn’t make any sense. NASA’s science program either has integrity or it doesn’t. Otherwise, you’re simply picking and choosing what science results to believe based on per-conceived ideology.

  • windbourne

    nah. Even before reagan, there were plenty of decent political debates. Starting with reagan, it shifted from intelligent conversations to throwing dirt at others. Look at how trump without a single intelligent thing to say is leading the GOP.

  • DavidR2015

    Thanks for the reply.

  • tdperk

    Actually the fraud is well documented.
    Ignoring the numbers to bolster an ideology is what the left is doing WRT to AGW, and nothing but.
    No one who is saying it is a crisis is acting like it is a crisis.
    The invention of the “proof” of AGW will be regarded in alight far worse than the oil drop fiasco, because it was deliberate and deliberated.

  • tdperk

    None of which addresses the abject stupidity of you stating you were going to attempt the bulk liquefaction of propellant gasses by such a means.
    And for the record I think the timing of this announcement has nothing to AGW, but for the record I can see that AGW is a fraud entire, and does not exist as a statistically provable fact.

  • You just keep saying that over and over again, here and elsewhere, ok? You’ll go far with your conspiracy theories.

    I mean, look at Rush Limbaugh! Highly respected commentator.

  • tdperk

    You Malthusians are always wrong.

  • tdperk

    Dismissing it as a conspiracy theory is only works when there isn’t a conspiracy.

    What justification do you have for the “adjustments” to the temperature record which prevent the actual recorded temps being used to show what has actually happened to the climate, which is that is has slightly cooled over the last 10 years?

  • WUWT cites don’t count in my world. Maybe in your conspiratorial nutcase world it does, but not in mine.

    You’ve got nothing. You’re a flaming idiot. That makes me sure I’m on the right track with bismuth thermoelectricity.

  • I’m not a Malthusian and I don’t even know that that is. I’d be happy to be wrong about the future, but I’m not. You should be more thankful I’m even bothering myself with your problems. But you don’t have any problems, so you’re good.

  • tdperk

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/30/massive_global_cooling_factor_discovered_ahead_of_paris_climate_talks/
    Not one valid climate model which supports AGW exists. The people actually doing science about the climate are still discovering basic, foundational natural processes which affect the distribution of the retention of received solar energy. That’s why the AGW catastrophists need to “adjust” the data into agreeing with their theory.

  • tdperk

    “With soon to be 10 to 12 billion uber religious, delusional,
    conspiratorial and soon to be desperate nutjobs running around and
    tearing things up on the surface of a slowly depleting terrestrial
    planet”

    Yes, you are a Malthusian–you may not know what one is, but it is an outlook on the scarcity of resource vs. the increase in population. And you are a nutjob who thinks man is measurably affecting the temperature of the globe, even when evidence that AGW is a fraud is placed directly in front of you.

  • DavidR2015

    I put “Thanks for the reply”. I’ve tried hard to be polite when conversing with you. What more did you expect me to say? I’m really surprised you’re telling me I should be more thankful for your time; where I come from my response means that you have my sincere gratitude, maybe something has been “lost in translation”?

  • Gosh, I was hoping for a legitimate peer reviewed scientific article. But what I got was a British pulp tabloid article. Great. You’ll just have to excuse me when I ignore you.

  • tdperk

    “WUWT cites don’t count in my world.”

    Because you live in a fantasy world where thermoelectrics are the cusp of replacing conventional refrigeration even in bulk cryogenic applications.

    “That makes me sure I’m on the right track with bismuth thermoelectricity.”

    And bismuth TECs are exactly the mature, conventional Peltier technology which is hopelessly, drastically energy inefficient at cooling and utterly hopeless for propellant cryogenic applications.

    When it comes to technology, I have yet to see you know whereof you speak.

  • But unfortunately you can’t give me any legitimate cites to this vast conspiratorial fraud, except nutty pulp conspiracy cites. Isoprene. That must be it! No wait, butterflies. That’s it!

  • tdperk

    From the article you didn’t read, probably because you have no intellectual honesty.

    ” The new research is published here courtesy of the learned journal Environmental Science and Technology, and as the Leibniz Institute notes: “Because of the great importance this paper will be open access” ”

    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.5b02388

    You are as much a fraud as the AGW catastrophists.

  • tdperk

    I just did.

    Meanwhile, citations from you that TECs are about to displace conventional refrigeration are still AWOL.

  • Actually that’s n- and p- doped bismuth telluride, which has a ZT ~ 1. I’m looking for ZT=4, which is a whole different game. And we now know that the lamella structure of these compounds is a result of mesoscopic phase separation and the interesting physics occurs at the boundaries of these charge rich and charge poor regions, the domain walls.

    So this is just starting to be investigated right now, Get it?

    AGW fraud will label you forever. I can understand your need of anonymity. Really, I do. You are a nutcase, sir.

  • Yes, isoprene. Total game changer. lol. Not.

  • Sorry, I responded to the wrong person. Me bad.

    I’m having a little entertainment with tdperk on his claim that planetary astrophysics of terrestrial planets is one big fraud.

    Sorry, I apologize. I clicked on the wrong reply button.

  • I unfortunately did not see one reference in the abstract that the authors felt that their result invalidated any global planetary energy imbalance or that it was even relevant to that subject.

    Keep digging, though. You never know what you might dig up.

  • tdperk

    “I’m looking for ZT=4, which is a whole different game.”

    “So this is just starting to be investigated right now, Get it”

    So you acknowledge no known or suspected TEC technology exists which can displace conventional refrigeration technology. Good, we’re making progress on tearing down you delusions.

    “AGW fraud will … a nutcase, sir.”

    My name is Thomas David Perkins, I have no need of anonymity. There is no evidence human released CO2 warming in the planet, let alone of catastrophic warming, except what the AGW fraudsters have created by cheery picking and adjusting the temperature record.

  • tdperk

    Dismissal of a fact confounding a theory does not change reality, and the theory remains contradicted.

  • tdperk

    “I’m having a little entertainment with tdperk on his claim that planetary astrophysics of terrestrial planets is one big fraud.”

    And here you lie again. That’s not what I said at all.

    I say and know for a fact that there is no statistically provable link to human released CO2, and any alterations in the global climate with respect to the average temperature of the planet.

    AGW is a fraud.

    If you were honest, you would respond to what I say, and not make things up.

  • Well Mr. Perkins, I wish you and all your nutty brethren over at Transterrestrial.com all the best in your search for deep dark shadowing conspiracies in science. Ben Carson.

    That’s your ticket.

  • By some isoprene in marine biosystems. I get that.

    Prepare for greatness! Your cult awaits your speech.

  • tdperk

    That you don’t like someone who is even only incidentally saying something true, is no counterargument to it being true.

  • tdperk

    And your cult would rather see the prompt deaths of hundreds of millions of people and the impoverishment of those who remain, for no better reason that not having to acknowledge that bogus science is what they have built their careers on.

  • I want to know what specific species of tree you are getting that bark tea from. That must be some powerful stuff.

  • What you are saying is not even vaguely true. You are a follower of Rush Limbaugh. You have Dunning Kruger on the brain,.

  • You said that already many times. I got it the first time.

  • tdperk

    I don’t care why you can’t draw the proper conclusion from what must follow from reducing our CO2 release rate to that of the 1900’s promptly enough to prevent what the AGW fraudsters claim will happen if we don’t.

    Except we already haven’t of course reduced it of course, and the slight cooling trend continues in the actual as opposed to “adjusted” data.

  • tdperk

    “You said that … the first time.”

    No, you haven’t got it. You still think AGW is real.

    It is a fraud.

  • Well being a fairly well established theoretical physicist and rocket scientist it’s going to be quite difficult for a nut like you to convince me otherwise. I suggest you not try because I won’t be responding much to your nuttery here anymore, out of respect for Doug and his blog. Thanks for playing.

  • Who is we again? You? Or your entire conspiracy cult?

    Are you their designated spokesperson now?

  • LA Julian

    You don’t even understand Godwin’s Law, so don’t invoke it.

  • LA Julian

    Algebra. Astronomy. Clockwork. None of them invented by white men.

  • tdperk

    I have never listened to Rush Limbaugh. I may have heard a grand total of 30 minutes of him speaking in A/V clips on the internet, and have never sought out his radio show.

    Unlike people affected by Duning-Kruger, I remember the press is largely populated by poorly educated people of at best average intelligence, and predominately leftist ideology compared to center or right ideology to the tune of about 9 to 1. In the United States, they are Democrat operatives with bylines.

    You are coming unarmed to a debate about facts and even when confronted with proof of it, you dismiss rather than disprove what confounds you.

    AGW is like a religious faith with you.

  • tdperk

    “I suggest you not try because I won’t be responding much to your nuttery here anymore, out of respect for Doug and his blog.”

    Uhuh. Respect for Doug is why you can’t explain yourself.

  • tdperk

    Humanity is we. Our CO2 release has not as a species reduced, and yet the temperature globally very gradually falls, and what the AGW fraudsters claim is ongoing increase is instead the result of their adjustments to the actual measured temperatures.

  • tdperk

    Diophantus the Greek has as good a claim as Al-Khwarizmi to being the founder of Algebra as we know it, each contributed greatly to it. It is not a matter of controversy that each claim has its merits.

    Astronomy as a matter of observation has been invented by many cultures in many places, only with the Europeans’ Renaissance was it wedded to rigorous mathematics used to predict apparently unrelated phenomena and the fundamental nature of reality.

    Many societies have had many different means of timekeeping, the effective chronometer was invented by the Englishman John Harrison. The earliest known clockwork of any complexity is the Greek built Antikythera mechanism, with nothing like it being seen in commerce for what, a millennia hence?

    And in any case the comment was not that any particular culture or its antecedent invented something, but what was done and by whom.

    It may be a matter of happenstance–not that I believe it*–that it was Western European culture which unshackled humanity from spartan subsistence poverty and slavery to religious custom and kings, not to mention ending chattel slavery as an approved of mechanism for organizing labor, but even it it was happenstance, that doesn’t change what was done or by whom, or as morally trivial as it is, what was their skin color.

    *It may be happenstance that the Golden Rule as promulgated by Christ took it’s most firm root in what was the Roman West, but that is where it did. Respect for truth–science–and individual people–classical liberalism–flow from that religion, and the more so the more it is shorn of remaining stone age mysticism and subsequent embellishment by those trying to preserve a bit of Rome.

  • tdperk

    A good internet debate where both sides show up brings clicks and eyeballs. These bring revenue.

    You do Doug no favors.

  • tdperk

    “I unfortunately did not see one reference in the abstract that the
    authors felt that their result invalidated any global planetary energy
    imbalance or that it was even relevant to that subject.”

    They can hardly be expected to say that outright when people have had their careers ended for opposing the AGW cabal. That you cannot see such a basic mechanism for global cooling just being discovered–hence not yet accounted for in the climate models–shows you cannot make an inference when your ideology predisposes you against it.

  • tdperk

    “NASA’s science program either has integrity or it doesn’t.”

    If you insist for ideological reasons on an all or nothing assertion, then it doesn’t.

    NASA is a participant in the fraud of AGW.

    The reality is far more nuanced, because NASA doesn’t really exist, it is a corporate entity made up of individuals. Some of those individuals participate quite actively in the AGW fraud, others are uninformed fellow travelers, and some few I’m sure oppose it–covertly so they aren’t fired or driven from their jobs.