In 50 years we're all going to be living in sod huts and drinking our own urine. Be afraid. Do what you're told.
I think it says much more than they intended that CNN began their story Friday on the release of the IPCC's report on global warming with the words "the debate is over." To a large degree that sentence summarizes the history of global warming as a political issue, because the focus of global warming supporters has always been more on silencing debate than on proving their arguments. If no one dares speak out against you for fear of losing endowments and being pilloried in the press, the standard of proof for your theories suddenly becomes much easier to meet. Peer review no longer has the same meaning in a climate of fear and intimidation.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments376 - D'oh
When one does not know all the fact, one can only deal with what is in front of them. You do have to admit, if the shoes were on other feet, that the APPEARANCE of deleting incriminating evidence hurt your cause more than the incident itself ever could have done.
I am very glad that we appear to have adequately communicated in the matter.
the Tao of D'oh.
377 - moonraven
The fucking nerve!
Dave wrote: "Do you think that participation in this petty feud is the best contribution you can make to blogcritics?"
The sanctimonious hypocrite now attacks the victims who complained about his lies and abuse of power!
Just that behavior alone is enough to convince any fence-sitter that Dave should be bounced out of the editor's box on his ten gallon ego!
378 - D'oh
(just for troll - no trying to be any kind of "apologist" here...far from it, instead just a desire to understand...and to see how all this will be handled by the Powers-that-Be... with the evidence at hand, i still perceive a deliberate ethical breach...as I have stated, and thus adhere to accountability)
379 - Martin Lav
Who's blocking my comments?
Is there an editor around?
380 - Martin Lav
Once again Dave misses or dismisses the entire point. Your explanation is just not true and you won't admit even when presented with overwhelming evidence.
That's the shame Dave.
381 - Martin Lav
"Oh yeah "without motive, behavior is inexplicable"...I completely agree...but I ain't trying to EXPLAIN the behavior...merely accurately state WHAT the behavior was."
Theories abound:
1. Dave really thinks he looks like Robert Vaughn, but is too shy to admit it himself.
2. Clavos took the day off and therefore Dave needed another alter-ego to help with his arguments.
3. Dave really wanted to personally attack SHARK for relentlessly out-writing him and yet his association with BC and his own double-talking "style" was not being effect.
Take yer pick.....
382 - moonraven
Dave has now really torn it with the multiple identities--he has become that lying, sanctimonious shit in the Oval Office!
383 - SHARK
Schannon: "Dave can handle himself pretty well in a battle & if he were really going to create a separate character, would he be so clumsy to have it come from Vox & sign it Dave. He's also way too clever to get caught."
Schannon, really -- for you to see all the evidence I've produced and say this. YOU MUST BE FUCKING JOKING.
I can't imagine why you are bending over so far backwards in this. There really is NO DEBATE about what Nalle did. The only debate is apparently if the BC mgmt. wants to address it.
But BC Management apparently values Nalle as Editor more than they value the integrity of the site.
Their response: [sound of crickets chirping]
They figure it will just go away. And it will. Nalle will hang on to the keys to the site -- and future newcomers won't have any idea he's able to create multiple 'personalities' to boost his arguments, compliment his looks, add to his "data", insult others --- AND GO BACK AND ALTER COMMENTS he doesn't like.
And I'm not alone in this:
D'oh: "...how all this will be handled by the Powers-that-Be .. with the evidence at hand, i still perceive a deliberate ethical breach..."
Troll: "bunk. I'll have no truck with apologists."
=======
Dave Vox Populi Nalle: "...What you don't seem to get is that there was no 'coverup'. It was an attempt to set things right and it was done openly."
QUIT LYING, NALLE.
Nalle on Vox: "I've seen figures similar to the ones Vox quotes."
Vox defending Nalle's article: "The claim that this article is 'GOP spin' is an interesting one, since it seems to be based on reports direct from Iraqis inside Iraq if you follow the links."
Vox on Nalle: "Of the characters in The Magnificent Seven, the picture unquestionably looks most like the Robert Vaughn character."
384 - troll
*Not only that, but considering that I have access to 10 different IP addresses from my home office going through two completely different IP hierarchies, and can switch back and forth with a few key clicks*
I just knowed it...Lumpy is another of Dave's characters
(actually I still maintain that it's his mom or dad)
385 - moonraven
Lumpy is an obvious appendage for Dave. Allone has to do is watch the pattern of when he appears on a thread.
Clavos has been suspect for some time, too--I asked several months ago if he was an alter ego for Dave--or just a bed partner....
386 - Baronius
Moonraven, bad news. There are millions of people on the right, most far more conservative than Dave (a gay-rights activist who believes in global warming).
But this rant of yours pretty well parallels the Democratic Party's position on the last couple of elections. Their inability to believe that people disagree with them forces them to suspect inflated numbers. So go ahead and believe that I'm Dave, and that Gore won Florida. It's easier to win when your opponents underestimate you.
387 - Eric Olsen
I am pleased to see that, although there is disagreement still (shocking!), the heat has subsided from the conflagration. Thanks.
Short of hara kiri, I think Dave has probably self-flagellated enough now. If he says he did not try to deceive, then hasn't he put in enough of himself on this site to deserve the benefit of the doubt?
For those of you who refuse to give the benefit of the doubt, hasn't your point of view and evidence been given a fair hearing? It's all here should anyone choose to follow along.
388 - troll
I kinda like the idea of BC being your normal dysfunctional family with its identified naughties and secrets...but who will protect the political neophytes from Dirty Ol' Uncle Dave - ?
389 - nugget
what's wrong with building a foundation, or creating support??
390 - pamela
I love nugget's posts, breathtaking...
391 - hotchick
ditto.
392 - moonraven
Eric:
I believe we have a fundamental disagreement about Dave's behavior.
1. I have seen no self-flagellation from him. What I have read--and I do not believe that I am functionally illiterate--has been nothing but self-defense.
Or is his insistence that he did not mean to do anything wrong your idea of self-flagellation?
Here in Latin America, self-flagellation is the real deal--and blood is drawn.
2. His putting SO MUCH of himself--smearing it all over the site and shouting down everyone who disagrees with him or asks for evidence for his positions--is one of the most central COMPLAINTS about Dave.
Why should it now be offered as a reason to give him a break?
3. A fair hearing? Of course not. What hearing? Who has been listening but those of us who have complained?
Obviously not you; you are just hoping that if no serious response is made that it will all just go away.
393 - troll
hmmm...Dave - with the hubbub I never responded adequately to #114 in which you said - *Your attempt to focus on the semantics of how 'likely' is defined is a distraction from the real issue.*
actually - the point of focusing on semantics in #2 was to highlight the irony of the fact that in an article on how information about global warming is distorted for political ends you distort the information presented in the report for political ends
...a disingenuous approach typical of much of your work
394 - SHARK
Oh boy. Here we go.
Nugget, when you post retarded adolscent compliments to yourself, you might wanna separate them by more than a minute or two.
Email Nalle for help; he's an expert.
395 - SHARK
Dear Eric,
Just want to point out that what I've done, said, accumulated, etc. re the Nalle/Vox fraud -- had nothing to do with Dave's past performance as an editor (I have never complained about it, and assume he's done a swell job) -- or his POLITICAL stance on any issues.
And I believe I can speak for some/manywriters and participants on BC who have pursued this ONLY BECAUSE we value the integrity of the site and the integrity of those who 'operate' it. I would have done the same thing if some garrulous pedantic raving liberal leftist commie socialist anti-bush EDITOR had perpetrated the same series of frauds/lies against ANYONE.
I will respect your 'hands-off' management decision -- and as we all know, the attention span of the average reader will insure that it will quickly recede into the foggy, distant past. [who even remembers Mac-what's her name?? I don't! heh.]
But I can't shake the feeling that some strange, ethereal Pandora's Box has been opened hereabouts -- wherein every "new" name invites *suspicion -- and every statement by Nalle has an underlying slippery, sleazy air about it.
That's too bad.
But hey, it's your site.
*see "nugget" & "friends", "Driveby" et al... (ad infinitum after this)
xxoo <-- (sorta suckin' up
LEAD INVESTIGATOR/PROSECUTOR FOR "THE STATE" of BC
SHARK
PS: EO, long time, no see! How 'bout that Bush "war on terror" 'protect america better than the democrats' Iraq war thingy? That sure turned out swell, eh!?
And say hi to the Mrs. for me. Speakin' of which... I heard that Marilyn Monroe died in a Florida hotel room, right? Jeeesus! Buy Dawn a plane ticket and a PowerBook, quick!
396 - SHARK
Troll,
To parse the partisan bullshit in this entire Nalle/Vox essay would take some time, more than I'm willing to give it -- but as you've pointed out, one can drag about a hundred sentences outta this thing that directly contradict Nalle's limp, continual sleight-of-hand distractions that "he accepts global warming" -- but is only arguing that it's been politicized.
He's sneaky.
But he also thinks we're stupid.
Too much time teaching in Junior Colleges -- is my guess.
397 - troll
(for those of you site people who go with 'Dave isn't a liar.'...the implication is pretty close to saying I am one
so strap on your six shooters......ready - ?
you're a pack of dirty dogs - !
prove it - !
bang)
398 - SHARK
Troll, btw, THIS IS CLASSIC TROLL MATERIAL:
"...in an article on how information about global warming is distorted for political ends[,] you distort the information presented in the report for political ends..."
Sorta the "Power Sweep Right" from the Dave Vox Playbook.
399 - SHARK
Troll, because of Nalle Vox's massive ego, you know we'll eventually see an "essay" by Dave Nalle entitled, "IF I DID DO IT, HERE'S HOW I WOULD HAVE DONE IT."
400 - SHARKSPEARE
[Exit stage Right in a white Ford Bronco propelled exclusively by hot air]
401 - troll
SHARK - I tried to chum Nailed in so that you could rip him a new asshole - again - but I guess he's off doing something...like living his life (or maybe writing that essay)
402 - Driveby
GO FISHING SHARK IN THE REAL WATER. SPENDING TIME TYPING ALL YOUR BULL SHIT WILL ONLY ENLARGE YOUR LARD ASS. GROW FLOWERS, CATCH BUTTERFLYS AND RAISE KILLER BEE'S. [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
403 - nugget
lolerz at shark's stupidity!
perhaps I did that on purpose????
read the three posts again and I think you'll get it.
I still love ya.
404 - nugget
shark you really ARE an idiot. hahahahaha.
Dave nalle is probably pretty stupid for doing whatever he did if he actually did it but i'm sure he isn't stupid enough to realize my intentional back2back postings.... eh nevermind. You're probably looking up Dave Nalle's social security number right now.
I'll let you off the hook, detective shark! Go get 'em tiger!
hey! Tiger + Shark = Tigershark! get it??
405 - Lumpy
Moonmaiden and Emry. If you're really so paranoid u think I'm dave in disguise have someone geolocate my IP addy. I work as a db management consultant for a company in virginia and my IP will either show up as out of our office in fairfax or in tokyo.
As far as I can tell u two are the same person because I can't believe there would be two people who could be so inane in the same place and time.
And btw this is the dumbest argument i've witnessed in a decade online.
406 - Christopher Rose
#389. Nugget has
fans, no,groupies, no, clones!Funny, guy.
407 - SHARK
Wow. That didn't take long.
Abuse of power, implicit argument against Shark attacks, or just a FUCKING COINCIDENCE?
SOMEBODY... [I'm assuming it was our tainted Editor Mr. Nalle/Vox] put the new "Featured Book" on the FRONT PAGE of the BC Politics section -- and the blurb reads almost WORD FOR WORD like one of Nalle/Vox's recent speeches as he tried to defend his LIES about using the fraudulent name:
[The Thought Police] "An interesting look from a right-wing perspective at the ongoing hostility of the American left to any form of dissenting free speech and at the practices of personal attack which are used to silence anyone who voices an unauthorized thought."
Subtle, Nalle/Vox.
But we get it.
==========
Vox on Nalle: "Of the characters in The Magnificent Seven, the picture unquestionably looks most like the Robert Vaughn character."
Nalle on Vox: "I've seen figures similar to the ones Vox quotes."
Vox on links HE provided (as Nalle): "The claim that this article is 'GOP spin' is an interesting one, since it seems to be based on reports direct from Iraqis inside Iraq if you follow the links."
"Liars -- when they speak the truth -- are not believed." -- Aristotle
408 - troll
some would say that fabricating information and running cons are a couple of the more base forms of personal attacks
409 - Emry
Lumpy, condoning Vox Nalle's shitty little game makes some of the his muck stick to you.
Why you choose to be Vox Nalle's wiper upper is your business, but if you don't mind being associated with his stink go for it.
410 - Lumpy
Emily. I just don't care. As a user his actions have no effect on me or you for that matter. I respond to the content of the comments not to the name at the top. This whole argument is laughable.
411 - Emry
Limpy.
412 - Emry
"I respond to the content of the comments not to the name at the top."
I could see your point if the name at the top was honestly inserted as 'Dave Vox Populi Nalle aka ???'.
Is Vox Nalle paying you to wipe up his mess?
413 - D'oh
IN #287 Eric O says - "Short of hara kiri, I think Dave has probably self-flagellated enough now. If he says he did not try to deceive, then hasn't he put in enough of himself on this site to deserve the benefit of the doubt?"
no
Thank you for taking the time to state your position, Eric...VERY much appreciated.
It's your house, and thus very much your rules.
So in the end, Scooter Liddy doesn't need a pardon, he's never brought to trial for *plumbing*.
Tough to weep in despair and vomit in disgust at the same time.
414 - troll
interesting complexities and shadows flit around the edges of conscience...amoral or immoral - ?
how to deal in a universe of change
415 - D'oh
No troll...no longer interesting...sickening instead.
In flux, when change is the only constant, only self adhered to guidelines can be counted upon.
All taste of ashes, and even less permanence in ephemera than previously.
No jokes, Jests or bright side.
416 - troll
I guess
417 - Eric Olsen
I disagree with some of the interpretations of my interpretations: ultimately it all boils down to the intention to deceive, yes? My point is that only Dave knows if he "intended to deceive" or not, and I choose to believe him because I have no compelling reason to do otherwise
418 - Driveby
WHAT A BUNCH OF LONG HAIRED, MAGGOT INFESTED, DOPE-SMOKING, PEACE PANSIES WIENER WHINERS. MAY BIGFOOT AND THE LOCH NESS MONSTER GIVE YOU A GOOD OLD FUCKEN.
419 - D'oh
Eric, again your site, your rules.
But here's what I have seen, uncontrovertably.
1. DN states he used Vox by mistake, yet he did NOt sign the Vox comments (Dave) as he ALWAYS does hsi own, with the sole exception of the one troll busted him on.
2. on at least two occasions, as documented, DN referreed to either his own Name or Vox in the third person ("I have seen figures similar to those Vox..")
3. when he DID use the comment editing too (the only REAL violation, imo), his stated purpose was to go back and clarify, making certain that all statements were attributed to him...not a bad thing, EXCEPT that he used said editorial tool to REMOVE incriminating statements as well as change attributions.
Now, the comments editor, Christopher has been doing a fine job, when he makes an edit, he does not usually remove an entire comment, keeping the numbering chain intact, and he marks what he changed and signs his "name" to it, so that all will know who changed it and why...good policy which promotes accountability
The problem is the tool can be abused, and has in this instance...THAT is my ONLY problem here,and concern that such may happen again, harming overall credibility of the site if for no other reason than appearance of possible impropriety.
You site, your call...I've re-stated my own concerns for the record, since your last seem to be asking for clarification.
Thank you for listening.
420 - moonraven
He isn't listening.
And I see that lumpy is one of those posters whose employer is subsidizing his time posting here.
I am sure his employer would be appalled to see the low level of the commentary he has paid for.
421 - Martin Lav
"ultimately it all boils down to the intention to deceive, yes? My point is that only Dave knows if he "intended to deceive" or not, and I choose to believe him because I have no compelling reason to do otherwise"
Eric
You're right and you have been provided proof positive that Dave did intend to decieve. Shark, D'oh and others have provided this proof explicitly. YOU have apparenlty chosen to disregard it, because YOU have determined that Dave has no compelling reason to do it in the first place.
Either Dave is an idiot, which most would think he's not. Or he was playing a little game by using different identities to amuse himself.
Doesn't matter really, the fact remains the same that Dave's explanations to what took place do not make sense and therefore must be construed by the average intellect to be lies.
You being far more intelligent than the average person, must be overlooking the truth that is obvious to the average schmo like me.
It's your site and your loss, but if you feel good about it then that's all that matters to you obviously.
This whole sordid affair reminds me eerily of the case that BushCo. made for going to war in Iraq.
Against all proof, or lack thereof, of every single contention that was presented to the UN and World Community, they still say going to War was the absolutely right thing to do.
Dave is nothing more than preverted political advertisement disguised as POLTICAL EDITOR in a now less than respected publication.
Goody for you ol boy.
422 - D'oh
Martin - Bad form to tar everyone for what a single individual has done.
Draw what conclusion you want, your right to do so, of course. Just trying to maintain accurate analysis by keeping things straight.
423 - Lumpy
Emry #411:
you know, the 4 years of operations and spending my teens in a leg brace all seems so much sweeter a memory since some moron on the internet can have a little laugh and call me "limpy".
424 - moonraven
Poetic justice, in your case. Whiner.
425 - Clavos
Poetic justice, in your case. Whiner.
Your attitude is disgusting, moonraven.
But then we've known that for some time.