None of those concerned about climate change have their answers hidden.
(And there are a couple that I miss, Dana in particular, they were very good.)
I don't look often, so if asked, I'd say that Sagebrush is the only one active.
Thus, at the moment, he wins by default.
That said, I particularly didn't like James E's postings.
In addition, I might point out that Kano picked one of my answers as best.
While he didn't agree with me, there were other anti-AGW answers that he could have picked.
Ottawa-Mike seems to be the best acquainted with the science.
He does edit it, selecting that which seems to support the denier point of view though.
Edit: Oops, Jim Z is here.
And, I think, worse than Sagebrush.
e) Sagebrush, hands down.
The man is a religious extremist who uses similar rhetoric Hitler used in his rise to power. Here are just four reasons why I am convinced of that.
1) He has publicly stated his god has his hand on the thermostat.
2) He advocates to execute those who vote for the "wrong" politician.
3) He frequently paraphrases Hitlers "Big lie" although wrongly attributes it to Goebbels.
He claims that "justice and equality are code words for communism" (Just like Hitler) Sagebrush's hate for communism and therefore justice and equality, should be familiar by now for all of the regulars here. He gets thumbs up and is awarded best answer for those comments so sadly it must mean that there are many other Nazi's (although they would dispute they are Nazi's) in this section.
He keeps repeating the same false quotes even after he has been corrected by others here, that means that he is either dyslexic (and copying and pasting his quotes blindly), stupid, or that he is lying. Since some of his posts seem to be original and some display an above average intelligence, I can only assume that he knows what he is doing and is lying by design. In addition to his repeating lying even after being corrected many times, I believe he must have a very low opinion of the intelligence of his followers.
Jim Z's mind is so far to the right that he even believes that Fox News is left of center. He is not lying, assuming he actually believes that nonsense, just a uninformed opinion. And to be fair there are many other right wing fruitcakes who believe that carbon trading (and even Obama/Romney care) is akin to Marxism. I don't think he is evil like Sagebrush though.
One observation I would like to share, the deniers are now trying to safe face by trying to shift the focus to catastrophic global warming and seem to have finally acknowledged that CO2 does cause average global temperatures to go up, rather then accepting idiotic claims like a god controls the thermostat. They now just claim it is not going to be a catastrophe. I can see where they are coming from, it just depends on what we consider a catastrophe. [1] For instance I have the means (skills, finances and passports) to move elsewhere if need be, so for me personally it is unlikely to be a catastrophe even if a disaster were to happen in my current location and in my life time. (I live 200 meters above sea level and I seriously doubt I will be around that long.) Yet for some people it already is and for many more it will be. [2] I agree that currently it cheaper to spend tax dollars on moving the villages then to change our source of energy and stop dumping CO2 into the atmosphere. It is even cheaper for the tax payer if we do not pay anything towards the cost of moving...
Among that group, I think only jim z and Sagebrush are active. I think jim z believes what he's saying, but his politics warp his views of everything else in the world, so he doesn't recognize that much of what he says is complete hogwash.
With Sagebrush, it's hard to figure out what goes on in his head. He knows that much of what he says is untrue, but he thinks it's funny so he says it anyway. He's more of a clown than anything else, as was Peter J.
I think there are other active deniers not on the top ten list that are bigger liars.
E is probably the one who is most frequently furthest from the truth, but he may genuinely be ignorant and/or confused. Willfully so, maybe, but I think he thinks he's actually telling the truth.
I'm not entirely familiar with the others, especially A (he may have been before my time). And when I tried to look at the pages for each of them, their activity was listed as private (or, in one case, "user not found"). I think B favors the "I don't know, so you don't either" approach. I seem to remember D being one of the more egregious tellers of bat-s*** crazy nonsense. And I can't recall C's approach at all.
So, I guess my vote is D for lies, and E for being wrong.
Global warming ended over a year ago. Everything is back to normal before Global warming in the 1970's as far as weather is concerned. Mike / Global Command
Who of the following is the biggest liar? Cast your votes from among the follow FIVE from the top TEN list (viewable in the box on the right-hand side whenever you click on Global warming):
(a) Dr. Jello (#3) 1710 "best" answers
(b) Jim Z (#4) 1276
(c) James E (#5) 1154
(d) Peter J (#6) 1059
(e) Sagebrush (#9) 847
Do NOT answer this question unless you are prepared to actually answer it by voting for one of (a) through (e). You may vote for any one of the five, even though only two are currently regularly active. You may make further comments as well, but your answer should also address the question: Which of the 5 is the most dishonest in his Qs and As here?
NOTE PLEASE:
1) "Liar" is meant here in the strict dictionary sense of involving "intent to deceive." This means that a poster who is completely ignorant of what he is talking about cannot be fully cognizant of deceiving in such talking.
2) Senile posters can be functionally ignorant even if they once upon a time DID know what they were talking about.
3) Non-senile posters who have demonstrably had something clearly explained to them multiple times cannot genuinely be completely ignorant of it, even if they pretend to be.
4) Regardless of explanation, the more posts, and the long the time period of them, the less likely it is that a poster is truly ignorant of some crucial aspect of climate science or policy.
5) Knowledge, and thereby the capacity to deceive concerning it, also depends on intelligence. Thus, in general (ceteris paribus) the less stupid the poster http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131214060545AAw0U9V the greater the capacity for lying.
6) "Most" honesty-challenged, can be understood either as "most frequently displaying" or as "most egregiously and arrogantly displaying."
