[cite as: S. Stepanovich. 2010. Lambert-Monckton debate: we were wrong. Intl. J. Inact., 3:8]
As you may know by now, Deltoid blogger Tim Lambert had a debate on global warming with climate inactivist Christopher Monckton. Since Lambert accepted Monckton’s debate invitation unconditionally, and since the debate was widely publicized — for example, by the Australian Climate ‘Science’ Coalition and Joanne Nova’s blog — thus according to our global warming debate flowchart, inactivists should either proclaim victory for themselves, or throw a hissy fit and then proclaim victory for themselves. According to the flowchart, they might keep quiet about the outcome of a debate, but only if the debate wasn’t publicized widely in the first place.
However, we were wrong. Both the AC’S'C and Joanne Nova did keep quiet about the debate outcome, even though they’d widely announced the debate beforehand. We apologize for the error.
This is what you call “ignoring” the debate? JoNova details exactly where Lambert was wrong. Lambert replied, and then she demolished that too.
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/lamberts-pinker-tape-ambush-pr-stunt/
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/03/lambert-victim-of-his-own-spin/
If you’re always this sloppy with your fact checking, I can see why you
actually believe in anthropogenic global warming. BTW, Lamberts little
Deltoid gang is a joke. Just a bunch of global cooling deniers who keep
patting each other on the back and telling each other how right they are.
Frankly, it’s rather pathetic.
Comment by Mark E. Gillar — 2010/04/11 @ 09:22 |
Mark E. Gillar:
Great, so it looks like I don’t have to apologize after all — the inactivists did throw a hissy fit and then proclaim victory.
Why did Joanne emphasize the word “reenacted”? Of course the tape with Pinker speaking was prepared, and I’m sure everyone involved will admit that freely. I think someone’s trying to emphasize on that word as if… horrors… “to imply something important”! Sounds like yet another case of projection.
I’m not sure what that means. Does Joanne mean Monckton got pwned by Lambert, and therefore, in a fit of logic inversion, it means Lambert lost the debate?
Comment by stepanovich — 2010/04/11 @ 13:28 |